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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claim(s) 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 § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 5 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yiu et al. (Yiu), U.S. Publication No. 2019/0387440.
Regarding Claim 1, Yiu discloses an apparatus comprised in a terminal device
(i.e., device 400; see figure 4) comprising at least one processor (i.e., application circuitry 405; see figure 4), and at least one memory (i.e., memory circuitry 420; see figure 4) including computer program code (see paragraph [0025]), wherein the at least one memory and the computer program code are configured, with the at least one processor, to cause the apparatus to:
receive an indication at the terminal device indicating one or more time windows,
during which a handover is allowed to be initiated (i.e., a validity timer may be associated with the CHO command by the source 011. In such embodiments, the UE 101/102 may start a timer at node 143 in response to receipt of the CHO command for a particular target cell/beam 112. ; see paragraph [0044]);
evaluate whether one or more conditions for the handover are fulfilled within the
one or more time windows (i.e., the UE 101/102 may periodically or otherwise continue to check the HO execution condition indicated by the CHO command (for example, by comparing the difference between the source 011 and target cell/beam 012 qualities to the X.sub.High) during a duration of the validity period.; see paragraph [0044]); and
initiate the handover during one of the one or more time windows, if the one or
more conditions are fulfilled (i.e., If the condition is satisfied before the timer expires, the UE 101/102 may execute the HO with the target cell/beam 112.; see paragraph [0044]).
Regarding Claim 2, Yiu discloses wherein the handover is delayed to be
initiated during the one of the one or more time windows, if the one or more conditions are fulfilled outside of the one or more time windows (see paragraph [0045]).
Regarding Claim 5, Yiu discloses wherein the periodicity is indicated as a
number of time windows per second (see paragraph [0046]).
Regarding Claim 11, Yiu discloses wherein the one or more time windows
comprise at least a first time window, a second time window and a third time window; wherein a first duration of the first time window is different than a second duration of the second time window (see paragraph [0045]), and/or wherein a first time interval between the first time window and the second time window is different than a second time interval between the second time window and the third time window.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yiu in view of Sabouri-Sichani et al. (Sabouri-Sichani), U.S. Publication No. 2021/0022057.
Regarding Claim 3, Yiu discloses the apparatus as described above.
Yiu fails to disclose wherein the initiating of the handover is delayed, if the one or more conditions are fulfilled while an uplink user plane data transmission is incomplete or a downlink user plane data reception is incomplete. Sabouri-Sichani discloses wherein the initiating of the handover is delayed, if the one or more conditions are fulfilled while an uplink user plane data transmission is incomplete or a downlink user plane data reception is incomplete (see paragraph [0097]). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to consider Sabouri-Sichani’s invention with Yiu’s invention for improving new mobility enhancement solutions as described throughout Sabouri-Sichani.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yiu in view of Center et al. (Center), U.S. Patent No. 6,453,156.
Regarding Claim 4, Yiu discloses the apparatus as described above.
Yiu further discloses wherein the one or more time windows are indicated with a periodicity (see figure 1C) and a duration (see figure 1C) of the one or more time windows. Yiu fails to disclose a phase offset. Center discloses a phase offset (see col. 6, lines 19-25). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to consider Center’s invention with Yiu’s invention for improving communication quality as described throughout Center.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yiu in view of Tacer et al. (Tacer), U.S. Patent No. 11,985,179.
Regarding Claim 6, Yiu discloses the apparatus as described above. Yiu fails to disclose wherein the number of time windows per second corresponds with a frames-per-second value associated with a service. Tacer discloses wherein the number of time windows per second corresponds with a frames-per-second value associated with a service (see figure 2D). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to consider Tacer’s invention with Yiu’s invention to improve a voice quality during a communication session as described in Tacer’s abstract.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yiu and Center in view of Alfarhan et al. (Alfarhan), U.S. Publication No. 2023/0097142.
Regarding Claim 7, Yiu and Center disclose the apparatus as described above. Yiu and Center fails to disclose wherein the periodicity and/or the duration is based on a subcarrier spacing of an active bandwidth part used by the apparatus. Alfarhan discloses wherein the periodicity and/or the duration is based on a subcarrier spacing (see paragraph [0388]) of an active bandwidth part used by the apparatus (see paragraphs [0086] and [0087]). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to consider Alfarhan’s invention with Yiu’s and Center’s invention for reporting reliable information as described throughout Alfarhan.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yiu in view of Kim et al. (Kim), U.S. Publication No. 2019/0268819.
Regarding Claim 10, Yiu discloses the apparatus as described above.
Yiu further discloses wherein the indication indicating the one or more time windows is received in a message, wherein the message further indicates the one or more conditions for the handover (see paragraph [0044] and [0045]). Yiu fails to disclose radio resource control reconfiguration message. Kim discloses radio resource control reconfiguration message (see paragraph [0365]). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to consider Kim’s invention with Yiu’s invention for developing an improved communication system meeting wireless data traffic demands (see paragraph [0005] of Kim).
Claim(s) 13-14 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yiu.
Regarding Claim 13, Yiu discloses an apparatus (i.e., infrastructure
equipment 300; see figure 3) comprising at least one processor (i.e., application circuitry 305; see figure 3), and at least one memory (i.e., memory circuitry 320; see figure 3) including computer program code (see paragraph [0025]), wherein the at least one memory and the computer program code are configured, with the at least one processor, to cause the apparatus to:
determine one or more time windows (in other words, a validity timer may be associated with the CHO command by the source 011 therefore, a time window is determined; see paragraph [0044]); and
indicate, to the terminal device, the one or more time windows during which the terminal device is allowed to initiate a handover (i.e., the UE 101/102 may start a timer at node 143 in response to receipt of the CHO command for a particular target cell/beam 112; see paragraph [0044]), if one or more conditions are fulfilled (i.e., If the condition is satisfied before the timer expires, the UE 101/102 may execute the HO with the target cell/beam 112.; see paragraph [0044]).
Although, Yiu does not specifically state during which no downlink user plane data is expected to be transmitted to a terminal device, and during which no uplink user plane data is expected to be received from the terminal device, Yiu does not teach against it. For example, paragraphs [0044]-[0045] do not teach or describe downlink user plane data as expected to be transmitted to a terminal device and uplink user plane data as expected to be received from the terminal device. Therefore, it can be considered as Yiu disclosing during which no downlink user plane data is expected to be transmitted to a terminal device, and during which no uplink user plane data is expected to be received from the terminal device. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to consider Yiu’s teaching to support stringent latency requirements and fast moving user equipment (UEs) as described in paragraph [0003] of Yiu.
Regarding Claim 14, Yiu discloses wherein the indicating causes the terminal device to initiate the handover during one of the one or more time windows (see paragraph [0044]).
Regarding Claim 16, Yiu discloses wherein the periodicity is indicated as a number of time windows per second (see paragraph [0046]).
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yiu in view of Center.
Regarding Claim 15, Yiu discloses the apparatus as described above.
Yiu further discloses wherein the one or more time windows are indicated with a periodicity (see figure 1C) and a duration (see figure 1C) of the one or more time windows. Yiu fails to disclose a phase offset. Center discloses a phase offset (see col. 6, lines 19-25). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to consider Center’s invention with Yiu’s invention for improving communication quality as described throughout Center.
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yiu in view of Tacer.
Regarding Claim 17, Yiu discloses the apparatus as described above. Yiu fails to disclose wherein the number of time windows per second corresponds with a frames-per-second value associated with a service. Tacer discloses wherein the number of time windows per second corresponds with a frames-per-second value associated with a service (see figure 2D). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to consider Tacer’s invention with Yiu’s invention to improve a voice quality during a communication session as described in Tacer’s abstract.
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yiu and Tacer in view of Hannu et al. (Hannu), U.S. Publication No. 2019/0268814.
Regarding Claim 18, Yiu and Tacer disclose the apparatus as described
above. Yiu and Tacer fail to disclose wherein the downlink user plane data and the uplink user plane data are associated with the service. Hannu discloses wherein the downlink user plane data and the uplink user plane data are associated with the service (see paragraph [0087]). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to consider Hannu’s invention with Yiu’s and Tacer’s invention for a more reliable connection as described throughout Hannu.
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yiu and Center in view of Alfarhan.
Regarding Claim 19, Yiu and Center disclose the apparatus as described above. Yiu and Center fails to disclose wherein the periodicity and/or the duration is based on a subcarrier spacing of an active bandwidth part used by the apparatus. Alfarhan discloses wherein the periodicity and/or the duration is based on a subcarrier spacing (see paragraph [0388]) of an active bandwidth part used by the apparatus (see paragraphs [0086] and [0087]). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to consider Alfarhan’s invention with Yiu’s and Center’s invention for reporting reliable information as described throughout Alfarhan.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-9 and 20-21 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kim et al., U.S. Publication No. 2020/0351725 discloses method and
apparatus for performing handover procedure in wireless communication system.
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 SHANTELL LAKETA HEIBER whose telephone number is (571)272-0886. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F from 9am to 5pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Anthony Addy, can be reached at telephone number (571)272-0886. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/SHANTELL L HEIBER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2645
September 22, 2026
Prosecution Insights