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 Amendment
Receipt is acknowledged of the preliminary amendment field 12/19/2023. Claims 9 and 10 have been amended. Claims 11 and 12 have been added. No claims have been canceled. Claims 1-12 are pending and an action on the merits is as follows.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1, 9 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MITSUI et al. US 2017/0105158 (hereinafter MITSUI), in view of KANG et al. US 2021/0168684 (hereinafter KANG) and Hu et al. US 2015/0271783 (hereinafter Hu).
Regarding claim 1, MITSUI teaches a method for determining a coverage layer cell,
([MITSUI, Fig. 8 Step S105, ¶92-¶93] A method of determining a coverage cell is shown in Fig. 8 wherein the measurement report indicates the coverage cell C)
PNG
media_image1.png
608
470
media_image1.png
Greyscale
comprising:
sending a cell measurement instruction to terminal(s) connected to a target cell;
([MITSUI, Figs. 7 and 8 Step S102] Measurement Setting Information show in step S102 is sent to the UE 100 which is connected to the target cell 250-1 which is also shown in Fig. 7 of MITSUI, but it is noted that the Measurement Setting Information of Fig. 8 is shown as the Measurement Configuration (MEASUREMENT CONFIG) transmitted to the UE 100)
PNG
media_image2.png
320
717
media_image2.png
Greyscale
receiving measurement report(s) reported by the terminal(s), and determining a neighboring cell set at least partially overlapping a coverage layer of the target cell according to all the reported measurement report(s);
([MITSUI, Figs. 7-8, Steps S104-S105, ¶91-¶94] The Measurement Reports of the UE are received at Step S104 and analyzed to determine a neighboring cell set (of the Cells 250-2, 250-3 and 250-4) which all have a corresponding measured value of their signal strength which represents at least partially overlapping a coverage area of the target cell 250-1 because the UE is still connected to the Cell 250-1 while receiving measurable signals from the at least one other cell(s).)
determining hit cells in the neighboring cell set according to cell types and all the measurement reports; and
([MITSUI, Fig. 7, ¶94 and ¶35-¶36 the eNB is the cell type] The claimed hit cell(s), referred to by MITSUI as the C cell, in the neighboring cell set, which is shown as cell 250-4 of cells 250-2, 250-3 and 250-4 in Fig. 7, is determined based on the received being a cell type (disclosed by MITSUI as being the cell managed by eNB [MITSUI, ¶35-¶36] that either a neighboring cells [MITSUI, ¶78] or a serving cells [MITSUI, ¶34]) and the measurement reports indicating the cell having the smallest difference with respect to highest measured value of signal strength from all the measurement reports. It is noted that there may be more than one determined C cell which will result in the determination of several C cells (hit cells) according to ¶94 of MITSUI.)
sending a first coverage layer acknowledge request to all the hit cells.
([MITSUI, ¶96 and also see ¶95 and ¶97-¶98] The C cell(s) are sent a resource securing notification by the cell 250-1 for starting a handover preparation procedure with respect to the C cell(s). Wherein the resource securing notification is interpreted as claimed first coverage layer acknowledge request.)
But it does not teach that there is more than one terminal to perform these actions of being sent measurement instructions and reporting measurement reports to be received by the cell, wherein the cell measurement instruction comprises a plurality of measurement frequency points. Nor does it teach determining, in response to a first coverage layer acknowledge response fed back by any one hit cell of all the hit cells, the hit cell as the coverage layer cell.
However, KANG teaches that there is more than one terminal to perform these actions of being sent measurement instructions and reporting measurement reports to be received by the cell, wherein the cell measurement instruction comprises a plurality of measurement frequency points.
([KANG, ¶14 and ¶70] One or more UEs (noted by the “at least one UE” disclosure of KANG) sends respective measurement reports to the base station based on received and measured signals having a power of at least a preset level. The UEs are configured to perform these actions based on the measurement configuration received by the respective UEs. [KANG, ¶104] Wherein the measurement configuration (interpreted as the claimed measurement instructions) comprises a number or a channel to be measured for the cells the UE has to measure (interpreted as the claimed plurality of measurement frequency points).)
Also, KANG teaches determining, in response to a first coverage layer acknowledge response fed back by any one hit cell of all the hit cells, the hit cell as the coverage layer cell.
([KANG, ¶69] accepting of the handover request message (Handover preparation information message) by the determined handover destination base station (interpreted as the claimed hit cell of all the hit cells) results in the handover destination base station sending a handover request acknowledgement back to the base station that sent the handover request.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of MITSUI, indicating the ability send UE instructions for gathering measurement reports to determine a hit cell as the coverage layer cell to which handover preparation procedure is performed to send a resource securing notification to request a handover of the UE to the hit cell, with the teachings of KANG, indicating that the accepting of the handover request message for the handover preparation procedure by the determined handover destination base station results in the handover destination base station sending a handover request acknowledgement back to the base station that sent the handover request. The resulting benefit of the combination would have been the ability to increase handover reliability when a UE transitions from a first cell to a destination cell as the destination cell will have been notified of the desired UE handover and given the opportunity to prepare and secure resources which will be utilized for completing the UE handover.
While MITSUI is relied upon to teach the determining hit cells in the neighboring cell set according to cell types and all the measurement reports, wherein the cell types correspond to neighboring eNB cells or serving eNB cells [See the rejection claim limitation above]; neither MITSUI nor KANG teaches wherein these cell types (neighboring or serving eNB cell types) are preset.
However, Hu teaches wherein the cell type information (interpreted as the claimed cell types) may be preconfigured, interpreted as the claimed preset cell type [Hu, ¶144].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of MITSUI, in view of KANG, indicating the ability determine hit cells in the neighboring cell set according to cell types and all the measurement reports, wherein the different cell types are further disclosed by MITSUI as comprising serving eNB cells and neighboring eNB cells, with the teachings of Hu, indicating that the cell types may be preset cell types. The resulting benefit of the combination would have been the ability to ensure corresponding cell types are consistent with identified cells that are supported by the UE [Hu, ¶144-¶145].
Regarding claim 9, the combination of MITSUI, in view of KANG and Hu teaches an electronic device, ([MITSUI, Fig. 2, ¶44-¶47 and ¶75-¶98] eNB 200 also shown as eNB 200-1)
comprising:
one or more processors; and [MITSUI, Fig. 3, Processor 240]
a memory configured to store one or more programs; [MITSUI, Fig. 3, Memory 230 and Programs of MITSUI ¶47]
wherein, when the one or more programs are executed by the one or more processors, the one or more processors perform the method for determining the coverage layer cell of claim 1.
([MITSUI, Fig. 7 and also note the rejection of claim 1 above] The eNB operates according to the disclosure provided by MITSUI, in combination with KANG and Hu which combined teachings disclose the method of claim 1 performed by the eNB.)
Regarding claim 10, the combination of MITSUI, in view of KANG and Hu teaches a non-transitory computer-readable medium having a computer program stored thereon, wherein, when the computer program is executed by a processor, [MITSUI, Fig. 3, Processor 240, Memory 230 and Programs of MITSUI ¶47 executed by the processor.]
the processor is caused to perform the method for determining the coverage layer cell according to claim 1.
([MITSUI, Fig. 7 and also note the rejection of claim 1 above] The eNB operates according to the disclosure provided by MITSUI, in combination with KANG and Hu which combined teachings disclose the method of claim 1 performed by the eNB.)
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MITSUI, in view of KANG and Hu as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Narashimha et al. US 2011/0039552 (NARA).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of MITSUI, in view of KANG and Hu teaches the method for determining the coverage layer cell of claim 1 (see the rejection of claim 1 above), but it does not teach further comprising: in response to a case where any one hit cell of all the hit cells is a coverage layer cell of a co-station cell sharing a radio frequency device with the target cell, determining the any one hit cell as the coverage layer cell of the target cell; and/or in response to a case where it is monitored that the co-station cell receives a second coverage layer acknowledgement response fed back by the any one hit cell of all the hit cells, determining the any one of all the hit cells as the coverage layer cell of the target cell, wherein the second coverage layer acknowledge response is an acknowledge response fed back in response to a second coverage layer acknowledge request sent by the co-station cell.
However, NARA teaches further comprising: in response to a case where any one hit cell of all the hit cells is a coverage layer cell of a co-station cell sharing a radio frequency device with the target cell, determining the any one hit cell as the coverage layer cell of the target cell; and/or
in response to a case where it is monitored that the co-station cell receives a second coverage layer acknowledgement response fed back by the any one hit cell of all the hit cells, determining the any one of all the hit cells as the coverage layer cell of the target cell, wherein the second coverage layer acknowledge response is an acknowledge response fed back in response to a second coverage layer acknowledge request sent by the co-station cell.
([NARA, Figs. 1 and 5, Handover request ACK 535, ¶40-¶42] In response to the case where it is observed that the co-station cell 135/130 receives a second coverage layer acknowledgement response (Handover request ACK 535) fed back by the any one of the eNBs 155/cell 150 (hit cell) of all the hit cells (the eNBs 145 & 155 and their respective cells 140 & 150 as shown in Fig 1), determining cell 150 of eNB 155 (the claimed any one of all the hit cells) as the handover destination cell (the claimed coverage layer cell of the target cell), wherein the handover request ACK 535 is an acknowledge response fed back in response to a handover request sent by the co-station cell 135)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of MITSUI, in view of KANG and Hu, indicating the ability to collect measurement reports from UEs corresponding to the measurement instructions received by the UEs which are used to determine a destination handover cell of the neighboring cells to which the current cell will transmit a notification requesting the securing of resources so as to carryout handover preparation procedures in advance of performing the handover to the destination handover cell, with the teachings of NARA, indicating that a handover request ack will be sent by the handover destination cell as a response to a handover request received from a co-station cell. The resulting benefit of the combination would have been the ability for the exchange of target cell system information to ensure that handover procedures are more successful with improved speed of recovery in the event of radio link failure [NARA, ¶8-¶9].
PNG
media_image3.png
564
500
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
790
508
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-7 and 11-12 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.
The Examiner has conducted a prior art search of the available Patent and Non-Patent Literature and was unable to find any prior art which teaches the recited claim limitations of claims 2 which recites “… selecting measurement reports comprising measurement results corresponding to all the measurement frequency points, and determining the neighboring cell set according to the selected measurement reports” in combination with all the other claim limitations of claim 1, the recited claim limitations of claim 5 which recites “… dividing the neighboring cell set into a plurality of cell subsets according to the cell types and frequency points corresponding to cells; and determining a hit cell in each of the cell subsets according to all the measurement reports” in combination with all the other claim limitations of claim 1, and the recited claim limitations of claim 7 reciting “… wherein the target cell is an energy saving cell which is turned off periodically or is turned off by triggering an event, sending the cell measurement instruction to the terminals connected to the target cell comprises: in response to a case where it is determined that the target cell enables an energy saving function, enabling a frequency measurement function of the target cell within a preset time period for sending the cell measurement instruction; and determining the hit cells in the neighboring cell set according to the preset cell types and all the measurement reports comprises: excluding the energy saving cell from the neighboring cell set, and determining the hit cells in the neighboring cell set obtained after the excluding is completed” in combination with all the other claim limitations of claim 1.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LONNIE V SWEET whose telephone number is (571)270-3622. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday.
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, Hassan Phillips can be reached at 571-272-3940. 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.
/LONNIE V SWEET/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2467