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 § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-5, 11-12, 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s) obtaining measurement data for at least one terminal device, filtering the measurement data and determining at least one communication parameter.
Re Claim 1, the claim recites a series of step or act. Thus, the claim is to a process, which is one of the statutory categories of invention.
The limitation of identifying indication signaling and determining a target cell of the cell handover from the at least one candidate target cell, as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of a terminal. That is, other than reciting “by a terminal”, nothing in the claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind. For example, but for the “by a terminal” language, “identifying” in the context of this claim encompasses the user manually locate or recognize indication signal. Similarly, the limitation of “determining” a target cell, as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of a terminal. For example, but for the “by a terminal” language, “determining” in the context of this claim encompasses the user manually select or decide a target cell from a list of candidate target cell. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim recites additional element – using a terminal to perform identifying and determining steps. Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial except, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea – see MPEP 2106.05(f). Accordingly, this additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly
more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to "by a terminal". Integral use of a machine to achieve performance of a method may integrate the recited judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more, in contrast to where the machine is merely an object on which the method operates, which does not integrate the exception into a practical application or provide significantly more. See CyberSource v. Retail Decisions, 654 F.3d 1366, 1370, 99 USPQ2d 1690, 1694 (Fed. Cir. 2011). As for integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of using a terminal to perform identifying and determining steps amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept.
Re Claims 2-5, 12, claims recite additional wherein clauses that are not integrated into a practical application and do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of determining steps amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept.
Re Claim 11, the limitation of identifying indication signaling and determining a target cell of the cell handover from the at least one candidate target cell, as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of a terminal. That is, other than reciting “a terminal comprising one or more processors and one or more memories for storing instructions executable by the one or more processors”, nothing in the claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind. For example, but for the “a terminal” language, “identifying” in the context of this claim encompasses the user manually locate or recognize indication signal. Similarly, the limitation of “determining” a target cell, as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of a terminal. For example, but for the “a terminal” language, “determining” in the context of this claim encompasses the user manually select or decide a target cell from a list of candidate target cell. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim recites additional element – using a terminal comprising processors and memories to perform identifying and determining steps. Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial except, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea – see MPEP 2106.05(f). Accordingly, this additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly
more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to “a terminal". Integral use of a machine to achieve performance of a method may integrate the recited judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more, in contrast to where the machine is merely an object on which the method operates, which does not integrate the exception into a practical application or provide significantly more. See CyberSource v. Retail Decisions, 654 F.3d 1366, 1370, 99 USPQ2d 1690, 1694 (Fed. Cir. 2011). As for integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of using a terminal to perform identifying and determining steps amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept.
Re Claims 17-20, claims recite additional wherein clauses that are not integrated into a practical application and do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of determining steps amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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) 1-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wu et al. (US 2020/0336957 A1) (Wu herein after).
Re Claim 1, Wu discloses a cell handover method, comprising:
identifying, by a terminal, indication signaling, wherein the indication signaling is configured to indicate at least one candidate target cell and a rule for the terminal performing a cell handover (receiving 702 a handover command involving multiple candidate cells [0085]); and
determining, by the terminal, based on the rule, a target cell of the cell handover from the at least one candidate target cell (selecting 704 a target cell of the multiple candidate cells in response to the target cell meeting a predetermined condition relative to other cells of the multiple candidate cells [0085]).
Re Claim 2, Wu discloses the cell handover method according to claim 1, wherein the indication signaling comprises conditional reconfiguration signaling and conditional re-adding module list signaling,
the conditional reconfiguration signaling is configured to indicate the at least one candidate target cell (UE 402 receives the RRCConnectionReconfiguration message with necessary parameters (e.g., new C-RNTI, target eNB 406 security algorithm identifiers, and optionally dedicated RACH preamble, target eNB 406 SIBs, etc.) and is commanded by the source eNB 404 to perform the handover [0065]; communication 432 from the target eNB 406 to the UE 402, thee target eNB 406 responds with UL allocation and timing advance [0068]), and
the conditional re-adding module list signaling is configured to indicate the rule for the terminal performing the cell handover (gNB 504 to the UE 502 may include the source gNB 504 sending a RRCconnectionreconfiguration message including mobilityControllnfo IE and a condition for handover configured by the source gNB 504 to the UE 502 [0073]).
Re Claim 3, Wu discloses the cell handover method according to claim 1, wherein the rule comprises at least one of: a handover priority based rule, or a signal quality strength based rule (UE 502 may select a candidate cell (out of multiple available candidate cells) with a best channel quality (e.g., highest RSRP) as the target cell if more than one candidate cell meets the condition [0075]).
Re Claim 4, Wu discloses the cell handover method according to claim 3, wherein determining, based on the rule, the target cell of the cell handover from the at least one candidate target cell comprises:
determining, based on a handover priority of each of the at least one candidate target cell, at least one preferential target cell with a highest handover priority from the at least one candidate target cell (UE 502 may select a candidate cell (out of multiple available candidate cells) with a best channel quality (e.g., highest RSRP) as the target cell if more than one candidate cell meets the condition [0075]);
determining one preferential target cell with the highest handover priority as the target cell, wherein the at least one preferential target cell with the highest handover priority comprises the one preferential target cell (UE 502 may select a candidate cell (out of multiple available candidate cells) with a best channel quality (e.g., highest RSRP) as the target cell if more than one candidate cell meets the condition [0075]); and
determining a preferential target cell with a highest signal quality strength as the target cell of the cell handover, based on a signal quality strength of each of a plurality of preferential target cells, wherein the at least one preferential target cell with the highest handover priority comprises the plurality of preferential target cells (UE 502 may select a candidate cell (out of multiple available candidate cells) with a best channel quality (e.g., highest RSRP) as the target cell if more than one candidate cell meets the condition [0075]).
Re Claim 5, Wu discloses the cell handover method according to claim 1, wherein the rule comprises a signal quality strength based rule; and
wherein determining, based on the rule, the target cell of the cell handover from the at least one candidate target cell comprises:
determining a signal quality strength of each of the at least one candidate target cell, and determining a candidate target cell of the at least one candidate target cell with a highest signal quality strength as the target cell (UE 502 may select a candidate cell (out of multiple available candidate cells) with a best channel quality (e.g., highest RSRP) as the target cell if more than one candidate cell meets the condition [0075]).
Re Claim 6, Wu discloses a cell handover method, comprising:
determining, by a network device, at least one candidate target cell and a rule, wherein the rule is used for a terminal to determine a target cell of a cell handover from the at least one candidate target cell (The UE 402 receives the RRCConnectionReconfiguration message with necessary parameters (e.g., new C-RNTI, target eNB 406 security algorithm identifiers, and optionally dedicated RACH preamble, target eNB 406 SIBs, etc.) and is commanded by the source eNB 404 to perform the handover [0065]; selecting 704 a target cell of the multiple candidate cells in response to the target cell meeting a predetermined condition relative to other cells of the multiple candidate cells [0085]); and
transmitting, by the network device, indication signaling, wherein the indication signaling is configured to indicate the at least one candidate target cell and the rule for the terminal performing the cell handover (gNB 504 to the UE 502 may include the source gNB 504 sending a RRCconnectionreconfiguration message including mobilityControllnfo IE and a condition for handover configured by the source gNB 504 to the UE 502 [0073]; receiving 702 a handover command involving multiple candidate cells [0085]).
Re Claim 7, Wu discloses the cell handover method according to claim 6, wherein the rule comprises at least one of: a handover priority based rule, or a signal quality strength based rule (UE 502 may select a candidate cell (out of multiple available candidate cells) with a best channel quality (e.g., highest RSRP) as the target cell if more than one candidate cell meets the condition [0075]).
Re Claim 8, Wu discloses the cell handover method according to claim 6, wherein the indication signaling comprises conditional reconfiguration signaling and conditional re-adding module list signaling,
the conditional reconfiguration signaling is configured to indicate the at least one candidate target cell (UE 402 receives the RRCConnectionReconfiguration message with necessary parameters (e.g., new C-RNTI, target eNB 406 security algorithm identifiers, and optionally dedicated RACH preamble, target eNB 406 SIBs, etc.) and is commanded by the source eNB 404 to perform the handover [0065]; communication 432 from the target eNB 406 to the UE 402, thee target eNB 406 responds with UL allocation and timing advance [0068]), and
the conditional re-adding module list signaling is configured to indicate the rule for the terminal performing the cell handover (gNB 504 to the UE 502 may include the source gNB 504 sending a RRCconnectionreconfiguration message including mobilityControllnfo IE and a condition for handover configured by the source gNB 504 to the UE 502 [0073]).
Re Claim 11, Wu discloses a terminal, comprising:
one or more processors (processor [0052]); and
one or more memories (memory [0052]) for storing instructions executable by the one or more processors;
wherein the one or more processors are configured to:
identify indication signaling, wherein the indication signaling is configured to indicate at least one candidate target cell and a rule for the terminal performing a cell handover (receiving 702 a handover command involving multiple candidate cells [0085]); and
determine, based on the rule, a target cell of the cell handover from the at least one candidate target cell (selecting 704 a target cell of the multiple candidate cells in response to the target cell meeting a predetermined condition relative to other cells of the multiple candidate cells [0085]).
Re Claim 12, Wu discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, wherein instructions in the storage medium, when executed by one or more processors of a terminal, enable the terminal to perform the cell handover method according to claim 1 (computer readable medium [0032]).
Re Claim 13, Wu discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, wherein instructions in the storage medium, when executed by one or more processors of a terminal, enable the terminal to perform the cell handover method according to claim 6 (computer readable medium [0032]).
Re Claim 14, Wu discloses the cell handover method according to claim 1, further comprising:
performing, by the terminal, a cell handover procedure according to a conditional handover (CHO) command (UE 402 receives the RRCConnectionReconfiguration message with necessary parameters (e.g., new C-RNTI, target eNB 406 security algorithm identifiers, and optionally dedicated RACH preamble, target eNB 406 SIBs, etc.) and is commanded by the source eNB 404 to perform the handover. [0065]); and
identifying the indication signaling comprises:
identifying the indication signaling in the cell handover procedure (communication 426 from the source eNB 408 to the UE 402, in response to the target eNB 406 generating an RRC message to perform the handover (e.g., RRCConnectionReconfiguration message including the mobilityControllnformation), the source eNB 404 transmits the RRC message to the UE 402 [0065]).
Re Claim 15, Wu discloses the cell handover method according to claim 6, wherein a cell handover procedure is performed by the terminal according to a conditional handover (CHO) command and the at least one candidate target cell and the rule are determined in the cell handover procedure (communication 426 from the source eNB 408 to the UE 402, in response to the target eNB 406 generating an RRC message to perform the handover (e.g., RRCConnectionReconfiguration message including the mobilityControllnformation), the source eNB 404 transmits the RRC message to the UE 402. The source eNB 404 performs the necessary integrity protection and ciphering of the message. The UE 402 receives the RRCConnectionReconfiguration message with necessary parameters (e.g., new C-RNTI, target eNB 406 security algorithm identifiers, and optionally dedicated RACH preamble, target eNB 406 SIBs, etc.) and is commanded by the source eNB 404 to perform the handover. [0065]).
Re Claim 16, Wu discloses the terminal according to claim 11, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: perform a cell handover procedure according to a conditional handover (CHO) command; and identify the indication signaling in the cell handover procedure (communication 426 from the source eNB 408 to the UE 402, in response to the target eNB 406 generating an RRC message to perform the handover (e.g., RRCConnectionReconfiguration message including the mobilityControllnformation), the source eNB 404 transmits the RRC message to the UE 402. The source eNB 404 performs the necessary integrity protection and ciphering of the message. The UE 402 receives the RRCConnectionReconfiguration message with necessary parameters (e.g., new C-RNTI, target eNB 406 security algorithm identifiers, and optionally dedicated RACH preamble, target eNB 406 SIBs, etc.) and is commanded by the source eNB 404 to perform the handover. [0065]).
Re Claim 17, Wu discloses the terminal according to claim 11, wherein the indication signaling comprises conditional reconfiguration signaling and conditional re-adding module list signaling,
the conditional reconfiguration signaling is configured to indicate the at least one candidate target cell (UE 402 receives the RRCConnectionReconfiguration message with necessary parameters (e.g., new C-RNTI, target eNB 406 security algorithm identifiers, and optionally dedicated RACH preamble, target eNB 406 SIBs, etc.) and is commanded by the source eNB 404 to perform the handover [0065]; communication 432 from the target eNB 406 to the UE 402, thee target eNB 406 responds with UL allocation and timing advance [0068]), and
the conditional re-adding module list signaling is configured to indicate the rule for the terminal performing the cell handover (gNB 504 to the UE 502 may include the source gNB 504 sending a RRCconnectionreconfiguration message including mobilityControllnfo IE and a condition for handover configured by the source gNB 504 to the UE 502 [0073]).
Re Claim 18, Wu discloses the terminal according to claim 11, wherein the rule comprises at least one of:
a handover priority based rule, or a signal quality strength based rule (out of multiple available candidate cells) with a best channel quality (e.g., highest RSRP) as the target cell if more than one candidate cell meets the condition [0075]).
Re Claim 19, Wu discloses the terminal according to claim 18, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to:
determine, based on a handover priority of each of the at least one candidate target cell, at least one preferential target cell with a highest handover priority from the at least one candidate target cell (UE 502 may select a candidate cell (out of multiple available candidate cells) with a best channel quality (e.g., highest RSRP) as the target cell if more than one candidate cell meets the condition [0075]);
determine one preferential target cell with the highest handover priority as the target cell, wherein the at least one preferential target cell with the highest handover priority comprises the one preferential target cell (UE 502 may select a candidate cell (out of multiple available candidate cells) with a best channel quality (e.g., highest RSRP) as the target cell if more than one candidate cell meets the condition [0075]); and
determine a preferential target cell with a highest signal quality strength as the target cell of the cell handover, based on a signal quality strength of each of a plurality of preferential target cells, wherein the at least one preferential target cell with the highest handover priority comprises the plurality of preferential target cells (UE 502 may select a candidate cell (out of multiple available candidate cells) with a best channel quality (e.g., highest RSRP) as the target cell if more than one candidate cell meets the condition [0075]).
Re Claim 20, Wu discloses the terminal according to claim 11, wherein the rule comprises a signal quality strength based rule; and the one or more processors are further configured to:
determine a signal quality strength of each of the at least one candidate target cell, and determine a candidate target cell of the at least one candidate target cell with a highest signal quality strength as the target cell (UE 502 may select a candidate cell (out of multiple available candidate cells) with a best channel quality (e.g., highest RSRP) as the target cell if more than one candidate cell meets the condition [0075]).
Re Claim 21, Wu discloses a network device, comprising:
one or more processors (processor [0059]); and
one or more memories (memory [0059]) for storing instructions executable by the one or more processors;
wherein the one or more processors are configured to perform the cell handover method according to claim 6.
Re Claim 22, Wu discloses the network device according to claim 21, wherein a cell handover procedure is performed by the terminal according to a conditional handover (CHO) command and the at least one candidate target cell and the rule are determined in the cell handover procedure (communication 426 from the source eNB 408 to the UE 402, in response to the target eNB 406 generating an RRC message to perform the handover (e.g., RRCConnectionReconfiguration message including the mobilityControllnformation), the source eNB 404 transmits the RRC message to the UE 402. The source eNB 404 performs the necessary integrity protection and ciphering of the message. The UE 402 receives the RRCConnectionReconfiguration message with necessary parameters (e.g., new C-RNTI, target eNB 406 security algorithm identifiers, and optionally dedicated RACH preamble, target eNB 406 SIBs, etc.) and is commanded by the source eNB 404 to perform the handover. [0065]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Da Silva et al. (US 2022/0322174 A1) – conditional handover in handover command
Ishii (US 2023/0164658 A1) – enhanced conditional handover procedures in IAB networks
Rugeland et al. (US 12471180 B2) – CHO in DC (dual connectivity)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KENNETH T LAM whose telephone number is (571)270-1862. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:00 PM.
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, Hannah S. Wang can be reached at (571) 272-9018. 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.
/KENNETH T LAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2631