CTFR 18/547,766 CTFR 100812 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Information Disclosure Statement 06-52 The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 08/24/2023. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Response to Amendment The Amendment filed 01/15/2026 has been entered. Claims 1, 4, 5, 8, 9, 13, 16, 17, 21, and 24 have been amended. Claims 27 and 28 are canceled. Claims 31 and 32 are adding in this application. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments/amendments with respect to the rejection to Double Patenting have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. Applicant’s arguments/amendments with respect to the rejection to 35 USC § 103 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 07-20-aia AIA The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. 07-103 AIA The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. Claim(s) 1-4, 7, 9-12, 15, 17-20, 23-26, and 30-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Choi (US 20210120471 A1), hereinafter Choi in view of, hereinafter Dhanapal (US20220286921A1), herein after Dhanapal in view of Ramachandra (US 20210367876 A1), herein after Ramachandra . Regarding to claim 1, Choi teaches a method of wireless communication performed by a user equipment (UE), comprising: receiving a first signal associated with a first radio access technology (RAT) and a second signal associated with a second RAT; determining that first signal measurements associated with the first signal satisfy a first condition and second signal measurements associated with the second signal satisfy a second condition (fig. 4 and [0064] whether to perform a handover between the first RAT and the second RAT under a condition of a specific event; [0074] the terminal may measure a first quality of a first signal of the first RAT and a second quality of a second signal of the second RAT… The terminal may measure a quality of the signal, based on parameters related to measurement). Choi does not explicitly teach dropping the first signal measurements and the second signal measurements from a measurement report based at least in part on the first condition and the second condition being satisfied; and transmitting the measurement report to a first base station associated with the first RAT. Dhanapal teaches dropping the first signal measurements and the second signal measurements from a measurement report based at least in part on the first condition and the second condition being satisfied (Fig. 1 “ASM” (124), and “BBU” (128) ) and (Fig. 10 ) and ([0114] UE 104 detecting an SDM trigger... [0117] ASM 124 detects the SDM trigger, the ASM 124 may institute a process to prune these configured measurements. Pruning these configured measurements may involve not performing, ... deleting any existing..., or not transmitting measurement reports based on the measurements). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teaching of Dhanapal to the teaching of Choi. The motivation for such an addition would be to enhance power saving ([0002] Dhanapal). Choi and Dhanapal do not explicitly teach transmitting the measurement report to a first base station associated with the first RAT. Ramachandra teaches transmitting the measurement report to a first base station associated with the first RAT ([0071] reduction in size of the measurement report... UE 10 otherwise would include in the measurement report based on the measurement configuration, is excluded from the measurement report. ... the UE 10 then only includes information for a subset of those cells, e.g. only for the best cell). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teaching of Ramachandra to the teaching of Choi and Dhanapal. The motivation for such an addition would be to handle signal measurement in wireless communication network ([0001] Ramachandra). Regarding to claim 2, Choi and Dhanapal and Ramachandra teach the method of claim 1, Choi further teaches wherein the first RAT is associated with a Long Term Evolution network and the second RAT is associated with a New Radio network , and wherein the first signal is associated with a Long Term Evolution cell and the second signal is associated with a New Radio cell ([0050] the wireless communication unit 310 may transmit and receive a signal on the cellular network (e.g., an LTE network) and fig. 4 and [0064] whether to perform a handover between the first RAT and the second RAT under a condition of a specific event; [0074] the terminal may measure a first quality of a first signal of the first RAT and a second quality of a second signal of the second RAT… The terminal may measure a quality of the signal, based on parameters related to measurement)). Choi does not explicitly teach a New Radio network. Dhanapal teaches a New Radio network ([0045] The amount of platform resources required to monitor a cell while in the RRC idle state may be based on the type of monitored cell (for example, an NR cell or an LTE cell)). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teaching of Dhanapal to the teaching of Choi and Ramachandra. The motivation for such an addition would be to enhance power saving ([0002] Dhanapal). Regarding to claim 3, Choi and Dhanapal and Ramachandra teach the method of claim 1, Choi and Dhanapal do not explicitly teach wherein the first RAT is associated with a serving cell and the second RAT is associated with a neighbor cell. Ramachandra teaches wherein the first RAT is associated with a serving cell and the second RAT is associated with a neighbor cell ([0069] conditions that trigger the UE 10 to send the measurement report with restricted content may be based on the difference in radio quality between the serving cell and one or more neighbour cell(s) that are to be included in the measurement report). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teaching of Ramachandra to the teaching of Choi and Dhanapal. The motivation for such an addition would be to handle signal measurement in wireless communication network ([0001] Ramachandra). Regarding to claim 4, Choi and Dhanapal and Ramachandra teach the method of claim 1, Choi further teaches wherein the first condition is satisfied when a reference signal received power (RSRP) associated with the first RAT satisfies a first threshold value and when a signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) associated with the first RAT satisfies a second threshold value ([0060] Trigger parameter ...reference signal received power (RSRP) ... signal to noise ratio (SNR) .... [0066-0073] A threshold value used to determine whether a condition is satisfied in a specific event, and may include a different threshold value for each condition. ... some events may require only an upper or lower limit threshold value in a conditional expression ...the measurement value means, for example, RSRP). Regarding to claim 7, Choi and Dhanapal and Ramachandra teach the method of claim 1, Choi further teaches wherein the UE is not handed over or redirected to a second base station associated with the second RAT based at least in part on the first signal measurements and the second signal measurements ([0013] configuration information from a first network node for a first radio access technology (RAT), measure a first quality for a first signal of the first RAT and a second quality for a second signal of a second RAT, based on the received configuration information, and determine whether to perform a handover to a second network node for the second RAT, based on the measured first quality or the measured second quality, and the configuration information may include parameters for the handover between the first RAT and the second RAT). Regarding to claim 31, Choi and Dhanapal and Ramachandra teach the method of claim 4, Choi further teaches wherein the RSRP associated with the first RAT satisfies the first threshold value when the RSRP is greater than an RSRP threshold associated with the first threshold value, and the SNR associated with the first RAT satisfies a threshold value when the SNR is greater than an SNR threshold associated with the second threshold value ([0060] Trigger parameter ...reference signal received power (RSRP) ... signal to noise ratio (SNR) .... [0066-0073] A threshold value used to determine whether a condition is satisfied in a specific event, and may include a different threshold value for each condition. ... some events may require only an upper or lower limit threshold value in a conditional expression ...the measurement value means, for example, RSRP). Claim(s) [9-12, and 15], [17-20, and 23], and [24-26, and 30] (apparatus , non-transitory computer-readable, and apparatus) is/are rejected under the same reasoning as claim(s) [1-4, and 7] method , where Choi teaches apparatus, non-transitory computer-readable, and apparatus ([0123-0124]). Claim(s) 5 , 13, 21, and 32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Choi and Dhanapal and Ramachandra and further in view of Hor-Lao (US 10708863 B1) Hor-Lao. Regarding to claim 5, Choi and Dhanapal and Ramachandra teach the method of claim 1, Choi and Dhanapal and Ramachandra do not explicitly teach wherein the second condition is satisfied when a reference signal received quality (RSRQ) associated with the second RAT does not satisfy a third threshold value and when a signal-to-interference-plus-noise ratio (SINR) associated with the second RAT does not satisfy a fourth threshold value. Hor-Lao teaches wherein the second condition is satisfied when a reference signal received quality (RSRQ) associated with the second RAT does not satisfy a third threshold value and when a signal-to-interference-plus-noise ratio (SINR) associated with the second RAT does not satisfy a fourth threshold value (column 8, row 15-37, A poor or weak signal quality can be determined using any of a variety of different signal strength indicators from the modem 116 for a RAT, such as any one or more of the RSSI, RSRP, RSRQ, RSCP, SINR, and EC/IO indicators discussed above. If the obtained value for a signal strength indicator does not satisfy a threshold value (e.g., is less than the threshold value), then the device poor service area detection module 124 determines that the device implementing system 200 is in an area with no cell coverage). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teaching of Hor-Lao to the teaching of Choi and Dhanapal and Ramachandra. The motivation for such an addition would be to determine whether the device is in a fringe area (columns 8, row 7-15, Hor-Lao). Regarding to claim 32, Choi and Dhanapal and Ramachandra and Hor-Lao teaches the method of claim 5, Choi and Dhanapal and Ramachandra do not explicitly teach wherein the RSRQ associated with the second RAT does not satisfy the third threshold value when the RSRQ is less than an RSRQ threshold associated with the third threshold value, and the SINR associated with the second RAT does not satisfy a fourth threshold value when the SINK is less than an SINR threshold associated with the fourth threshold value. Hor-Lao further teaches wherein the RSRQ associated with the second RAT does not satisfy the third threshold value when the RSRQ is less than an RSRQ threshold associated with the third threshold value, and the SINR associated with the second RAT does not satisfy a fourth threshold value when the SINK is less than an SINR threshold associated with the fourth threshold value (column 8, row 15-37, A poor or weak signal quality can be determined using any of a variety of different signal strength indicators from the modem 116 for a RAT, such as any one or more of the RSSI, RSRP, RSRQ, RSCP, SINR, and EC/IO indicators discussed above. If the obtained value for a signal strength indicator does not satisfy a threshold value (e.g., is less than the threshold value), then the device poor service area detection module 124 determines that the device implementing system 200 is in an area with no cell coverage). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teaching of Hor-Lao to the teaching of Choi and Dhanapal and Ramachandra. The motivation for such an addition would be to determine whether the device is in a fringe area (columns 8, row 7-15, Hor-Lao). Claim(s) 13 and 21 (apparatus and non-transitory computer-readable ) are rejected under the same reasoning as claim(s) 5 method , where Choi teaches apparatus, non-transitory computer-readable, and apparatus ([0123-0124]). Claim(s) 6, 14, 22, and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Choi and Dhanapal and Ramachandra and further in view of Sundararajan (US 9622134 B2), hereinafter Sundararajan . Regarding to claim 6, Choi and Dhanapal and Ramachandra teach the method of claim 1, Choi and Dhanapal and Ramachandra do not explicitly teach further comprising: receiving, from the first base station, an event configuration associated with a first event and a second event, wherein the first event and the second event are satisfied based at least in part on the first signal and the second signal. Sundararajan teaches further comprising: receiving, from the first base station, an event configuration associated with a first event and a second event, wherein the first event and the second event are satisfied based at least in part on the first signal and the second signal (column 2 ; row 30 – 50, predetermined criterion may include a determination that network equipment associated with a target of the handover event at the first RAT and the target of the handover event at the second RAT supports the coupling of the first RAT and the second RAT … and column 13 row 1-5, handover satisfies at least one predetermined criterion). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teaching of Sundararajan to the teaching of Choi and Dhanapal and Ramachandra. The motivation for such an addition would be to modify a set of measurement events triggering the UE to obtain channel measurements or provide measurement reports to the network equipment (column 6, row 30-36, Sundararajan). Claim(s) 14, 22, and 29 (apparatus , non-transitory computer-readable, and apparatus) are rejected under the same reasoning as claim(s) 6 method , where Choi teaches apparatus, non-transitory computer-readable, and apparatus ([0123-0124]). Claim(s) 8 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Choi and Dhanapal and Ramachandra and further in view of Shi (US 20200112892 A1), hereinafter Shi . Regarding to claim 8, Choi and Dhanapal and Ramachandra teach the method of claim 1, Choi and Dhanapal and Ramachandra do not explicitly teach wherein the first signal measurements and the second signal measurements are associated with a first RAT-to-second RAT report that is dropped from the measurement report. Shi teaches wherein the first signal measurements and the second signal measurements are associated with a first RAT-to-second RAT report that is dropped from the measurement report ([0066] based on the NR-to-LTE voice fallback indicator... may exclude the gNB from being selected during the cell selection or re-selection procedure and may search for a cell that is suitable to handle the voice call). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teaching of Shi to the teaching of Choi and Dhanapal and Ramachandra. The motivation for such an addition would be to improve communications between access points and stations in a wireless network ([0007] Shi). Claim(s) 16 apparatus, is rejected under the same reasoning as claim(s) 6 method , where Choi teaches apparatus, non-transitory computer-readable, and apparatus ([0123-0124]). Conclusion 07-40 AIA Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL . See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VAN T NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-6178. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 AM - 5:00 PM (EST). Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ayman A Abaza can be reached at (571) 270-0422. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /VAN TA NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 2465 /AYMAN A ABAZA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2465 Application/Control Number: 18/547,766 Page 2 Art Unit: 2465 Application/Control Number: 18/547,766 Page 3 Art Unit: 2465 Application/Control Number: 18/547,766 Page 4 Art Unit: 2465 Application/Control Number: 18/547,766 Page 5 Art Unit: 2465 Application/Control Number: 18/547,766 Page 6 Art Unit: 2465 Application/Control Number: 18/547,766 Page 7 Art Unit: 2465 Application/Control Number: 18/547,766 Page 8 Art Unit: 2465 Application/Control Number: 18/547,766 Page 9 Art Unit: 2465 Application/Control Number: 18/547,766 Page 10 Art Unit: 2465 Application/Control Number: 18/547,766 Page 11 Art Unit: 2465 Application/Control Number: 18/547,766 Page 12 Art Unit: 2465
Prosecution Insights