DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
1. Claims 1, 15-16 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1 found in IDS 3/24/2025 and used in the EP option for EP 21940104 (3GfPP TSG-RAN WG2 Meeting #114, VIVO: “UE behavior when SCG is deactivated, publicly available 5/11/2021 at 3GPP.org) in view of Min (2024/0147543) or Min (2024/0214842).
Regarding claims 1, 16 and 20. D1 teaches a program and a method performed by a user equipment (UE) connected to a network, comprising: a processor; and a memory coupled with the processor, the processor configured to cause the UE to:
receive first configuration information from a network (section 2.6 – PSCell addition with SCG deactivation, section 2.7 – PSCell change with SCG deactivation .. When the SCG is in deactivated state, the UE f(e.g., comprising processor and memory) can receive an SCG RRCReconfiguration message embedded in an MCG RRC Reconfiguration message on SRB1, like when the SCG is activated), wherein the first configuration information is associated with a primary secondary cell (PSCell) addition procedure or a PSCell change procedure for a secondary cell group (SCG) (section 2.6 – PSCell addition with SCG deactivation, section 2.7 – PSCell change with SCG deactivation. When the SCG is in deactivated state, the UE f(e.g., comprising processor and memory) can receive an SCG RRCReconfiguration message embedded in an MCG RRC Reconfiguration message on SRB1, like when the SCG is activated);
determine whether the PSCell addition procedure or the PSCell change procedure is successfully completed when the SCG is in a deactivated state (.7 – PSCell change with SCG deactivation .. When the SCG is in deactivated state, the UE (e.g., comprising processor and memory) can receive an SCG RRCReconfiguration message embedded in an MCG RRC Reconfiguration message on SRB1, like when the SCG is activated, and then the UE processes the SCG RRCReconfiguration message according to Rel 15/16 procedure (FFS if any restriction/difference) and UE sends a SCG RRCReconfigurationComplete message … according to Rel-15/16. Conditional PSCell change (CPC) has been specified in Rel. 16 when SCG is deactivated. If at least one CPC candidate PSCell satisfies the corresponding CPC execution condition, the UE detaches from the source PSCell, applies the stored corresponding configuration for the selected candidate PSCell and synchronizes to the candidate PSCell. The UE completes the CPC execution procedure by sending an RRCReconfigurationComplete message to the new PScell); and
D1 does not teach in response to determining that the PSCell addition procedure or the PSCell change procedure has failed, transmit failure information to the network.
Min ‘543 teaches UE comprises memory and processor (figure 3, 0019, 0058-0059) and provides a UE and radio communication method capable of efficiently utilizing resources for RACH even when adding or changing PSCell in a deactivated SCG (abstract, 0010, 0110 – each operation example assumes a case in which the state of SCG is configured to “deactivated” at the time of PSCell addition/change). Figure 7, 0124-0125 – UE executes the RA procedure with the target PSCell, but maintains the state of the SCG at deactivated (S220) thereafter, and determines whether or not the timer T 304 has expired (S230). The UE may release the dedicated RACH resource if the timer T 304 expires (S240). The UE executes the SCG failure information process (S250). Here, the UE may configure the failure cause to “SCGFailureWithDeactivatedState” and report the cell quality and/or beam quality of the deactivated SCG (PSCell) (0126).
Min ‘842 teaches UE comprising memory and processor (figure 3, 0013, 0048) and transmits a failure message “SCGFailureInformation” when failure occurs when SCG is in an inactive state (0058-0059, 0065, 0072). When the UE detects a radio link failures in the PSCell in the deactivated SCG state, it may transmit SCGFailureInformation, a RRC layer message, to the MN (figure 4, 0088-000095) wherein the contents of the SCGFailureInformation is depicted in figure 5 (0096-0106).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify D1 to transmit a CGFailureWithDeactivatedState message as taught by Min ‘543 or SCGFailureInformation” as taught by Min ‘842 when failure occurs when SCG is in an inactive/deactivate state thereby enabling the network to modify the conditional PSCell addition/change configurations based on the reported failure.
Regarding claim 15. D1 teaches a network device, comprising: a processor; and a memory coupled with the processor, a wireless transceiver coupled to the processor, wherein-the processor is configured to cause the network device to:
transmit, via the wireless transceiver, configuration information to a user equipment (UE) (section 2.6 – PSCell addition with SCG deactivation, section 2.7 – PSCell change with SCG deactivation .. When the SCG is in deactivated state, the UE can receive (e.g., from a network device comprising memory and processor) an SCG RRCReconfiguration message embedded in an MCG RRC Reconfiguration message on SRB1, like when the SCG is activated), wherein the configuration information is associated with a primary secondary cell (PSCell) addition procedure or the PSCell change procedure for a secondary cell group (SCG) section 2.6 – PSCell addition with SCG deactivation, section 2.7 – PSCell change with SCG deactivation. When the SCG is in deactivated state, the UE f(e.g., comprising processor and memory) can receive an SCG RRCReconfiguration message embedded in an MCG RRC Reconfiguration message on SRB1, like when the SCG is activated); and
D1 does not teach in response to receiving, via the wireless transceiver, failure information from the UE when the SCG is in a deactivated state, determine that the PSCell addition procedure or the PSCell change procedure has failed.
Min ‘543 teaches UE comprises memory and processor (figure 3, 0019, 0058-0059) and network device (figure 2, 0018, 0044 – eNB having processor and memory) and provides a UE and radio communication method capable of efficiently utilizing resources for RACH even when adding or changing PSCell in a deactivated SCG (abstract, 0010, 0110 – each operation example assumes a case in which the state of SCG is configured to “deactivated” at the time of PSCell addition/change). Figure 7, 0124-0125 – UE executes the RA procedure with the target PSCell, but maintains the state of the SCG at deactivated (S220) thereafter, and determines whether or not the timer T 304 has expired (S230). The UE may release the dedicated RACH resource if the timer T 304 expires (S240). The UE executes the SCG failure information process (S250). Here, the UE may configure the failure cause to “SCGFailureWithDeactivatedState” and report the cell quality and/or beam quality of the deactivated SCG (PSCell) (0126).
Min ‘842 teaches UE comprising memory and processor (figure 3, 0013, 0048) and a network device (figure 2, 0018, 0044 comprising memory and processor) and the UE transmits a failure message “SCGFailureInformation” when failure occurs when SCG is in an inactive state (0058-0059, 0065, 0072). When the UE detects a radio link failures in the PSCell in the deactivated SCG state, it may transmit SCGFailureInformation, a RRC layer message, to the MN (figure 4, 0088-000095) wherein the contents of the SCGFailureInformation is depicted in figure 5 (0096-0106).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify D1 to transmit, to a network device, a failure message as taught by Min ‘543 or SCGFailureInformation” as taught by Min ‘842 when failure occurs when SCG is in an inactive/deactivate state thereby enabling the network device to modify the conditional PSCell addition/change configurations based on the reported failure.
2. Claims 2-5, 17, and 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1 in view of Min (2024/0147543) or Min (2024/0214842) further in view of Wang et al (2023/0232494).
Regarding claims 2, 17 and 21. D1 in view or Min ‘543 or Min ‘842 do not teach wherein: in response to the PSCell change procedure being a conditional PSCell change procedure, the first configuration information includes a list of candidate PSCells; and wherein the processor is further configured to cause the UE to select a target PSCell of the PSCell addition procedure or the PSCell change procedure from the list of candidate PSCells, wherein the SCG is associated with the target PSCell.
Wang teaches SCG in deactivated state and UE transmits a failure message when PSCell add or change configuration is failed (0010, 0100, 0103). The network provides the UE with a list of PSCell(s) with execution conditions enabling the UE to evaluate PSCell(s) and conditions even when SCG is deactivated (0129, 0131,0135, 0146-0148, 0151).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify D1 in view of Min ‘543 or Min ‘842 to provide the UE with a list of PSCell(s) with execution conditions as taught by Wang enabling the UE to evaluate PSCell(s) and conditions even when SCG is deactivated.
Regarding claims 3 and 22. D1 in view or Min ‘543 or Min ‘842 do not teach, wherein the processor is further configured to cause the UE to select the target PSCell by selecting the target PSCell from one or more candidate PSCells within the list of candidate PSCells, and wherein each candidate PSCell in the one or more candidate PSCells fulfills an execution condition of the conditional PSCell change procedure.
Wang teaches SCG in deactivated state and UE transmits a failure message when PSCell add or change configuration is failed (0010, 0100, 0103). The network provides the UE with a list of PSCell(s) with execution conditions enabling the UE to evaluate PSCell(s) and conditions even when SCG is deactivated (0129, 0131,0135, 0146-0148, 0151).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify D1 in view of Min ‘543 or Min ‘842 to provide the UE with a list of PSCell(s) with execution conditions as taught by Wang enabling the UE to evaluate PSCell(s) and conditions even when SCG is deactivated.
Regarding claim 4. D1 in view or Min ‘543 or Min ‘842 do not teach wherein the processor is further configured to cause the UE to selecting select the target PSCell from the one or more candidate PSCells by considering a current state of a SCG associated with each candidate PSCell in the one or more candidate PSCells.
Wang teaches SCG in deactivated state and UE transmits a failure message when PSCell add or change configuration is failed (0010, 0100, 0103). The network provides the UE with a list of PSCell(s) with execution conditions enabling the UE to evaluate PSCell(s) and conditions even when SCG is deactivated (0129, 0131,0135, 0146-0148, 0151).
Wang further teaches the MN and SNs exchange activity state (such as activation or deactivation) information (0059, 0069, 0085, 0090) and based on the actual/current state (activation/deactivation) of the SCG, the network performs reasonable subsequent processing based on the actual activity state of the SCG. For example, the network makes decision on whether to configure the SCG in the UE or change to another SN (0080).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify D1 in view of Min ‘543 or Min ‘842 to consider the SCG state(s) as taught by Wang in order to provide the UE with a list of PSCell(s) with execution conditions that match the SCG state (activation/deactivation) as taught by Wang enabling the UE to evaluate PSCell(s) and conditions even when SCG is deactivated.
Regarding claim 5. D1 in view or Min ‘543 or Min ‘842 do not teach wherein the processor is configured to cause the UE to selecting select the target PSCell from the one or more candidate PSCells by: determining a current state of a SCG associated with a source PSCell of the UE; and selecting a candidate PSCell from the one or more candidate PSCells as the target PSCell, wherein a state of a SCG associated with the selected target PSCell is the same as the current state of the SCG associated with the source PSCell of the UE.
Wang teaches SCG in deactivated state and UE transmits a failure message when PSCell add or change configuration is failed (0010, 0100, 0103). The network provides the UE with a list of PSCell(s) with execution conditions enabling the UE to evaluate PSCell(s) and conditions even when SCG is deactivated (0129, 0131,0135, 0146-0148, 0151).
Wang further teaches the MN and SNs exchange activity state (such as activation or deactivation) information (0059, 0069, 0085, 0090) and based on the actual/current state (activation/deactivation) of the SCG, the network performs reasonable subsequent processing based on the actual activity state of the SCG. For example, the network makes decision on whether to configure the SCG in the UE or change to another SN (0080).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify D1 in view of Min ‘543 or Min ‘842 to consider the SCG state(s) as taught by Wang in order to provide the UE with a list of PSCell(s) with execution conditions that match the SCG state (activation/deactivation) as taught by Wang enabling the UE to evaluate PSCell(s) and conditions even when SCG is deactivated.
3. Claims 6, 9, 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1 in view of Min (2024/0147543) or Min (2024/0214842) further in view of Zhang et al (2024/0032136).
Regarding claims 6 and 18. D1 in view or Min ‘543 or Min ‘842 do not teach wherein the processor is further configured to cause the UE to: in response to triggering the PSCell addition procedure or the PSCell change procedure to a target PSCell, starting-start a handover timer, wherein the SCG is associated with the target PSCell of the PSCell addition procedure or the PSCell change procedure; and in response to successfully completing a random access (RA) operation to the target PSCell, stopping stop the handover timer.
Zhang teaches performing, by the UE, different PSCell change operations according to different states of the target SCG or target PSCell (0010) and the UE starts timer T304 with respect to SCG and target PSCell and stops Timer when RA to the target PSCell is completed successfully (0011-0013, 0083, 0087) thereby reducing UE power consumption (0004).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify D1 in view of Min ‘543 or Min ‘842 to start/stop Timer T304 relating to SCG and target PSCell states as taught by Zhang.
Regarding claims 9 and 19. D1 in view or Min ‘543 or Min ‘842 do not teach wherein the processor is further configured to cause the UE to further comprising:
in response to triggering the PSCell addition procedure or the PSCell change procedure and in response to the SCG is in the deactivated state, not starting start a handover timer, wherein the SCG is associated with a target PSCell of the PSCell addition procedure or the PSCell change procedure.
Zhang teaches performing, by the UE, different PSCell change operations according to different states of the target SCG or target PSCell (0010) and the UE starts timer T304 with respect to SCG and target PSCell and stops Timer when RA to the target PSCell is completed successfully (0011-0013 – if is indicated in the reconfiguration information that the state of the target PSCell or the target SCG is a deactivated state, the UE does not start the timer T304, 0083, 0087) thereby reducing UE power consumption (0004).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify D1 in view of Min ‘543 or Min ‘842 to start/stop Timer T304 relating to SCG and target PSCell states as taught by Zhang.
4. Claims 10 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1 in view of Min (2024/0147543) or Min (2024/0214842) and Zhang further in view of Kim et al (2022/0022067).
Regarding claim 10. D1 in view or Min ‘543 or Min ‘842 and Zhang do not teach wherein the processor is further configured to cause the UE to further comprising: in response to not starting the handover timer, starting start a second timer, wherein the second timer is different from the handover timer.
Kim teaches using a first, second or third timer to perform different operations
according to the SCG in an active state, deactivated state, suspend, and/or resume
(0752) wherein first timer for determining whether SCG was successfully added,
resumed or activated, the second timer for determining whether a radio link with a cell
group (MCG or SCG) or a cell (Pcell) or PSCell is valid and a third timer is an auxiliary
timer for determining whether a radio link with a cell group (MCG or SCG) or Pcell or
PSCell is valid.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify D1 in view or Min ‘543 or Min ‘842 and Zhang to use a first, second and/or third timer as taught by Kim for determining whether a PSCell was successfully added.
Regarding claim 12. D1 does not teach wherein the processor is further configured to cause the UE to further comprising: in response to an expiry of the second timer, determining determine that the PSCell addition procedure or the PSCell change procedure has failed.
Min ‘543 teaches determining PSCell change failure based upon Timer T304 expiring (0126).
Min ‘842 teaches PSCell failure based upon timer T310/T312 (0059).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify D1 to transmit, to a network device, a failure message upon a timer expiration as taught by Min ‘543 or SCGFailureInformation” upon a timer expiration as taught by Min ‘842 when failure occurs when SCG is in an inactive/deactivate state thereby enabling the network device to modify the conditional PSCell addition/change configurations based on the reported failure.
Allowable Subject Matter
5. Claims 7-8 and 11 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
6. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter. D1 in view of Min ‘543 or Min ‘842 determining whether the PScell addition procedure or the PSCell chang procedure is successfully completed when the SCG is in a deactivated state and in response to determining that the PSCell addition procedure or the PSCell change procedure has failed, transmit failure information to the network. D1 in view of Min ‘543 and Min ‘842 further teach in response to triggering the PSCell addition procedure or the PSCell change procedure, start a HO timer, wherein the SCG is associated with the target PSCell of the PSCell addition procedure or the PSCell change procedure and in response to successfully completing a random access operation to the target PSCell, stop the HO timer. However, D1 in view of Min ‘543 or Min ‘842 fail to teach or fairly suggest the recited limitations of dependent claim 7 or 8 or 11.
Response to Arguments
7. Applicant's arguments filed 7/28/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
a) Applicant generally argues D1 does not teach determining that the PSCell procedure has failed when the SCG is in a deactivate state, of starting or monitoring any timer such as T304 in that context, of detecting failure conditions such as T304 expiry, random access failure on the target PSCell, or radio link failure on the target PSCell (top of page 9).
The Examiner notes the independent claims are extremely vague and do not require starting or monitoring any timer, detecting failure conditions such as T304 expiry, random access failure on the target PSCell or RLF on the target PSCell.
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., starting or monitoring any timer, detecting failure conditions such as T304 expiry, random access failure on the target PSCell or RLF on the target PSCell) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
b) Applicant again argue both Min ‘543 or Min ‘842 do not teach determining success or failure of a PSCell addition or change procedure itself when the SCG is deactivated, nor does it teach transmitting failure information as part of the specific determination. The problem solved by the subject matter of claims 1, 16 and 20 is of handling of failure of the PSCell procedure when the SCG is deactivated so that the network can adjust conditional configurations.
The Examiner notes again that independent claims do not require adjusting conditional configurations. The Examiner notes that dependent claim 2 deals with conditional HO and the Examiner used a different reference (e.g., Wang) for rejecting dependent claim 2.
The Examiner notes Min ‘543 teaches UE comprises memory and processor (figure 3, 0019, 0058-0059) and provides a UE and radio communication method capable of efficiently utilizing resources for RACH even when adding or changing PSCell in a deactivated SCG (abstract, 0010, 0110 – each operation example assumes a case in which the state of SCG is configured to “deactivated” at the time of PSCell addition/change). Figure 7, 0124-0125 – UE executes the RA procedure with the target PSCell, but maintains the state of the SCG at deactivated (S220) thereafter, and determines whether or not the timer T 304 has expired (S230). The UE may release the dedicated RACH resource if the timer T 304 expires (S240). The UE executes the SCG failure information process (S250). Here, the UE may configure the failure cause to “SCGFailureWithDeactivatedState” and report the cell quality and/or beam quality of the deactivated SCG (PSCell) (0126).
Min ‘842 teaches UE comprising memory and processor (figure 3, 0013, 0048) and transmits a failure message “SCGFailureInformation” when failure occurs when SCG is in an inactive state (0058-0059, 0065, 0072). When the UE detects a radio link failures in the PSCell in the deactivated SCG state, it may transmit SCGFailureInformation, a RRC layer message, to the MN (figure 4, 0088-000095) wherein the contents of the SCGFailureInformation is depicted in figure 5 (0096-0106).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify D1 to transmit a CGFailureWithDeactivatedState message as taught by Min ‘543 or SCGFailureInformation” as taught by Min ‘842 when failure occurs when SCG is in an inactive/deactivate state thereby enabling the network to modify the conditional PSCell addition/change configurations based on the reported failure.
c) Applicant skips the rejection for the remaining dependent claims (page 10 – page 11).
Conclusion
8. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
---(2022/0338089) Kim et al teaches a method and apparatus for a secondary cell group (SCG) failure handling with a conditional primary secondary cell (PSCell) configuration in wherein the UE evaluates a condition cell change of the PSCell based on a mobility command for the conditional change of the PSCell. Upon detecting a failure on a secondary cell group (SCG), the UE stops evaluating the conditional change of the PSCell, and transmits, information on the failure on the SCG (abstract).
---(2021/0258852) Selvaganapathy et al teaches UE sending a PSCell failure message (0100).
9. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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.
10. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BARRY W TAYLOR whose telephone number is (571)272-7509. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday: 7-5.
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, Matthew Anderson can be reached at 571-272-4177. 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.
/BARRY W TAYLOR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2646
