DETAILED ACTION
I. This office action is in response to the correspondence filed on January 18, 2024. Claims 1-6, 15-22, 24-29, 31-32, and 34-35 are pending and being examined.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
II. 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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
III. Claims 1-6 and 15-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites “determining a dependency between the first UE first UE and the second UE; determining RRM settings for the second UE; determining RRM settings for the first UE first UE” in lines 6-9. It is unclear whether the term “first UE first UE” refers to the first user equipment in line 4 or a group of user equipment. The limitation renders the claim indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor regards as the invention.
For purposes of examination the examiner will treat the following quotation from claim 1 “determining a dependency between the first UE first UE and the second UE; determining RRM settings for the second UE; determining RRM settings for the first UE first UE” as
“determining a dependency between the first UE and the second UE; determining RRM settings for the second UE; determining RRM settings for the first UE”.
Claims 2-6 and 15-22 are dependent on claim 1 and are rejected for indefiniteness under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) for the same reasons given above regarding claim 1.
Claim 17 recites “the method of claim 15, wherein the mobility measurements are based on the capability data regarding the first UE and the capability data regarding the second UE” in lines 1-4. It is unclear what “the capability data regarding the first UE and the capability data regarding the second UE” refers to because neither claim 17 nor claim 15 recite capability data regarding the first UE and the capability data regarding the second UE. The limitation renders the claim indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor regards as the invention.
For purposes of examination the examiner will treat the following quotation from claim 1 “the method of claim 15, wherein the mobility measurements are based on the capability data regarding the first UE and the capability data regarding the second UE” as
“the method of claim 16, wherein mobility measurements are based on the capability data regarding the first UE and the capability data regarding the second UE”.
The following prior art rejection is made based upon the best possible interpretation of the claim language in light of the above rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
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.
IV. Claims 1, 24-28, 31-32, and 34-35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)as being anticipated by Venugopal et al. (US 2021/0014763 A1).
Regarding claim 1 Venugopal teaches a method for radio resource management (RRM) in a network comprising a first user equipment (UE), a second UE, and a network node (see paragraphs [0021] & [0026] – [0028] and Fig. 1, A first and second UE in a wireless communication systems can change or adjust the communication quality of communications between the two devices. The communication systems include a first and second UE and various network nodes. This reads on a method for radio resource management (RRM) in a network comprising a first user equipment (UE), a second UE, and a network node), the method comprising: determining a dependency between the first and the second UE (see paragraph [0070] and Fig. 5, A UE 502 is camped on LTE and a UE 504 is camped on NR. A call is initiated between the UE 502 and the UE 504. This reads on determining a dependency between the first UE and the second UE); determining RRM settings for the second UE (see paragraph [0070], The UE 504 is camped on NR and determined to be on NR when the call was initiated. The UE 502 and UE 504 agree on a lowest video quality (low bit rate) for the call. This reads on determining RRM settings for the second UE); determining RRM settings for the first UE based on the RRM settings for the second UE (see paragraph [0070], The UE 502 is camped on LTE and determined to be on LTE when the call was initiated. The UE 502 and UE 504 agree on a lowest video quality (low bit rate) for the call. This reads on determining RRM settings for the first UE based on the RRM settings for the second UE); updating an RRM configuration of the second UE based on the determined RRM settings for the second UE (see paragraphs [0073] – [0074] and Fig. 5, When the UE 502 hands over to NR, the UEs can adjust the video quality to 5G NR. The UE 504 decides on a suitable call resolution based on its own radio frequency and the RF of UE 502. The UE 504 triggers an update to increase the resolution level (bit rate) of the call to that supported by NR. The UE 504 then communications the call using the higher resolution provided by NR. This reads on updating an RRM configuration of the second UE based on the determined RRM settings for the second UE); and updating an RRM configuration of the first UE based on the determined RRM settings for the second UE (see paragraphs [0073] – [0074] and Fig. 5, When the UE 502 hands over to NR, the UEs can adjust the video quality to 5G NR. The UE 504 decides on a suitable call resolution based on its own radio frequency and the RF of UE 502. The UE 504 triggers an update to increase the resolution level (bit rate) of the call to that supported by NR. The UE 502 then communicates the call using the higher resolution provided by NR. This reads on updating an RRM configuration of the first UE based on the determined RRM settings for the second UE).
Regarding claim 24 Venugopal teaches a network arranged for radio resource management (RRM), the network comprising: a first user equipment (UE), a second UE; and a network node (see paragraphs [0021] & [0026] – [0028] and Fig. 1, A first and second UE in a wireless communication systems can change or adjust the communication quality of communications between the two devices. The communication systems include a first and second UE and various network nodes. This reads on a network arranged for radio resource management (RRM), the network comprising: a first user equipment (UE), a second UE; and a network node), wherein the network is arranged to: determine a dependency between the first UE and the second UE (see paragraph [0070] and Fig. 5, A UE 502 is camped on LTE and a UE 504 is camped on NR. A call is initiated between the UE 502 and the UE 504. This reads on determine a dependency between the first UE and the second UE); determine RRM settings for the second UE (see paragraph [0070], The UE 504 is camped on NR and determined to be on NR when the call was initiated. The UE 502 and UE 504 agree on a lowest video quality (low bit rate) for the call. This reads on determine RRM settings for the second UE); determine RRM settings for the first UE based on the RRM settings for the second UE (see paragraph [0070], The UE 502 is camped on LTE and determined to be on LTE when the call was initiated. The UE 502 and UE 504 agree on a lowest video quality (low bit rate) for the call. This reads on determine RRM settings for the first UE based on the RRM settings for the second UE); update an RRM configuration of the second UE based on the determined RRM settings for the second UE (see paragraphs [0073] – [0074] and Fig. 5, When the UE 502 hands over to NR, the UEs can adjust the video quality to 5G NR. The UE 504 decides on a suitable call resolution based on its own radio frequency and the RF of UE 502. The UE 504 triggers an update to increase the resolution level (bit rate) of the call to that supported by NR. The UE 504 then communications the call using the higher resolution provided by NR. This reads on update an RRM configuration of the second UE based on the determined RRM settings for the second UE); and update an RRM configuration of the first UE based on the determined RRM settings for the second UE (see paragraphs [0073] – [0074] and Fig. 5, When the UE 502 hands over to NR, the UEs can adjust the video quality to 5G NR. The UE 504 decides on a suitable call resolution based on its own radio frequency and the RF of UE 502. The UE 504 triggers an update to increase the resolution level (bit rate) of the call to that supported by NR. The UE 502 then communicates the call using the higher resolution provided by NR. This reads on update an RRM configuration of the first UE based on the determined RRM settings for the second UE).
Regarding claim 25 Venugopal teaches the second UE is configured to determine the dependency between the first UE first UE and the second UE (see paragraph [0070] and Fig. 5, A UE 502 is camped on LTE and a UE 504 is camped on NR. A call is initiated between the UE 502 and the UE 504. This reads on the second UE is configured to determine the dependency between the first UE and the second UE because the first UE, the second UE, and the network node are capable of determining that the call is established between the first UE and the second UE).
Regarding claim 26 Venugopal teaches the network node is configured to determine the dependency between the first UE first UE and the second UE (see paragraph [0070] and Fig. 5, A UE 502 is camped on LTE and a UE 504 is camped on NR. A call is initiated between the UE 502 and the UE 504. This reads on the network node is configured to determine the dependency between the first UE and the second UE because the first UE, the second UE, and the network node are capable of determining that the call is established between the first UE and the second UE).
Regarding claim 27 Venugopal teaches a remote device (e.g. 102, Fig. 1), wherein the remote device is configured to determine the dependency between the first UE first UE and the second UE (see paragraphs [0028] & [0070] and Fig. 5, A UE 502 is camped on LTE and a UE 504 is camped on NR. A call is initiated between the UE 502 and the UE 504. This reads on the network node is configured to determine the dependency between the first UE and the second UE because the first UE, the second UE, remote devices and the network nodes are capable of determining that the call is established between the first UE and the second UE).
Regarding claim 28 Venugopal teaches wherein the second UE is configured to determine RRM settings for the UE (see paragraphs [0073] – [0074] and Fig. 5, When the UE 502 hands over to NR, the UEs can adjust the video quality to 5G NR. The UE 504 decides on a suitable call resolution based on its own radio frequency and the RF of UE 502. The UE 504 triggers an update to increase the resolution level (bit rate) of the call to that supported by NR. The UE 504 then communications the call using the higher resolution provided by NR. This reads on wherein the second UE is configured to determine RRM settings for the UE).
Regarding claim 31 Venugopal teaches a method performed by a second UE, the method comprising: obtaining a dependency between a first UE first UE and the second UE (see paragraph [0070] and Fig. 5, A UE 502 is camped on LTE and a UE 504 is camped on NR. A call is initiated between the UE 502 and the UE 504. This reads on obtaining a dependency between a first UE and the second UE); determining RRM settings for the second UE (see paragraph [0070], The UE 504 is camped on NR and determined to be on NR when the call was initiated. The UE 502 and UE 504 agree on a lowest video quality (low bit rate) for the call. This reads on determining RRM settings for the second UE); determining RRM settings for the first UE based on the RRM settings for the second UE (see paragraph [0070], The UE 502 is camped on LTE and determined to be on LTE when the call was initiated. The UE 502 and UE 504 agree on a lowest video quality (low bit rate) for the call. This reads on determining RRM settings for the first UE based on the RRM settings for the second UE); updating an RRM configuration of the second UE based on the determined RRM settings for the second UE (see paragraphs [0073] – [0074] and Fig. 5, When the UE 502 hands over to NR, the UEs can adjust the video quality to 5G NR. The UE 504 decides on a suitable call resolution based on its own radio frequency and the RF of UE 502. The UE 504 triggers an update to increase the resolution level (bit rate) of the call to that supported by NR. The UE 504 then communications the call using the higher resolution provided by NR. This reads on updating an RRM configuration of the second UE based on the determined RRM settings for the second UE); and updating an RRM configuration of the first UE based on the determined RRM settings for the second UE (see paragraphs [0073] – [0074] and Fig. 5, When the UE 502 hands over to NR, the UEs can adjust the video quality to 5G NR. The UE 504 decides on a suitable call resolution based on its own radio frequency and the RF of UE 502. The UE 504 triggers an update to increase the resolution level (bit rate) of the call to that supported by NR. The UE 502 then communicates the call using the higher resolution provided by NR. This reads on updating an RRM configuration of the first UE based on the determined RRM settings for the second UE).
Regarding claim 32 Venugopal teaches a second UE comprising: memory (360, Fig. 3); and processing circuitry (359, Fig. 3), wherein the memory stores instructions executable (see paragraph [0025]) by the processing circuitry for configuring the second UE to perform (see paragraph [0048] and Fig. 3) a method comprising: obtaining a dependency between a first UE first UE and the second UE (see paragraph [0070] and Fig. 5, A UE 502 is camped on LTE and a UE 504 is camped on NR. A call is initiated between the UE 502 and the UE 504. This reads on obtaining a dependency between a first UE first UE and the second UE); determining RRM settings for the second UE (see paragraph [0070], The UE 504 is camped on NR and determined to be on NR when the call was initiated. The UE 502 and UE 504 agree on a lowest video quality (low bit rate) for the call. The reads on determining RRM settings for the second UE); determining RRM settings for the first UE first UE based on the RRM settings for the second UE (see paragraph [0070], The UE 502 is camped on LTE and determined to be on LTE when the call was initiated. The UE 502 and UE 504 agree on a lowest video quality (low bit rate) for the call. The reads on determining RRM settings for the first UE first UE based on the RRM settings for the second UE); updating an RRM configuration of the second UE based on the determined RRM settings for the second UE (see paragraphs [0073] – [0074] and Fig. 5, When the UE 502 hands over to NR, the UEs can adjust the video quality to 5G NR. The UE 504 decides on a suitable call resolution based on its own radio frequency and the RF of UE 502. The UE 504 triggers an update to increase the resolution level (bit rate) of the call to that supported by NR. The UE 504 then communications the call using the higher resolution provided by NR. This reads on updating an RRM configuration of the second UE based on the determined RRM settings for the second UE); and updating an RRM configuration of the first UE based on the determined RRM settings for the second UE (see paragraphs [0073] – [0074] and Fig. 5, When the UE 502 hands over to NR, the UEs can adjust the video quality to 5G NR. The UE 504 decides on a suitable call resolution based on its own radio frequency and the RF of UE 502. The UE 504 triggers an update to increase the resolution level (bit rate) of the call to that supported by NR. The UE 502 then communicates the call using the higher resolution provided by NR. This reads on updating an RRM configuration of the first UE based on the determined RRM settings for the second UE).
Regarding claim 34 Venugopal teaches a method performed by a first user equipment (UE), the method comprising: receiving radio resource management (RRM) settings for the first UE, wherein the RRM setting for the first UE were determined using RRM settings for a second UE (see paragraphs [0073] – [0074] and Fig. 5, When the UE 502 hands over to NR, the UEs can adjust the video quality to 5G NR. The UE 504 decides on a suitable call resolution based on its own radio frequency and the RF of UE 502. The UE 504 triggers an update to increase the resolution level (bit rate) of the call to that supported by NR. The UE 502 then communicates the call using the higher resolution provided by NR. This reads on receiving radio resource management (RRM) settings for the first UE, wherein the RRM setting for the first UE were determined using RRM settings for a second UE).
Regarding claim 35 Venugopal teaches first user equipment (UE), the first UE comprising: memory (360, Fig. 3); processing circuitry (359, Fig. 3); and a receiver (356, Fig. 3) for receiving radio resource management (RRM) settings for the first UE, wherein the RRM setting for the first UE were determined using RRM settings for a second UE (see paragraphs [0073] – [0074] and Fig. 5, When the UE 502 hands over to NR, the UEs can adjust the video quality to 5G NR. The UE 504 decides on a suitable call resolution based on its own radio frequency and the RF of UE 502. The UE 504 triggers an update to increase the resolution level (bit rate) of the call to that supported by NR. The UE 502 then communicates the call using the higher resolution provided by NR. This reads on receiving radio resource management (RRM) settings for the first UE, wherein the RRM setting for the first UE were determined using RRM settings for a second UE).
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.
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.
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.
V. Claims 2-6 and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Venugopal et al. (US 2021/0014763 A1) in view of Berliner et al. (US 2022/0330102 A1).
Regarding claim 2 Venugopal teaches the method of claim 1 except for obtaining route information for the second UE and determining the RRM settings for the second UE based on the route information for the second UE.
Berliner teaches obtaining route information for the second UE and determining RRM settings for the second UE based on the route information for the second UE (see paragraphs [0082] – [0083], The base station may predict a specific route for a UE or a set of UEs. The base station may predict that the UE may be located in a direction of a subset of beams and because the subset beams overlap with the predicted location of the UE or set of UEs (e.g., a predicted route, a predicted region), the base station may add the subset of beams to a provisioned beam list. This reads on obtaining route information for the second UE and determining RRM settings for the second UE based on the route information for the second UE).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make Venugopal adapt to include obtaining route information for the second UE and determining the RRM settings for the second UE based on the route information for the second UE because it would further improve updating of RRM information when a UE moves across coverage areas (see Venugopal, paragraph [0021] and Berliner, paragraph [0014]).
Regarding claim 3 Berliner teaches wherein the RRM settings are related to a future location for the second UE based on the route information (see paragraph [0082] and Fig. 4, The base station determines a predicted location (e.g. predicted route, predicted region) for the UE. This reads on wherein the RRM settings are related to a future location for the second UE based on the route information).
Regarding claim 4 Berliner teaches wherein determining RRM settings for the first UE comprises determining a network resource allocation for the future location for the second UE (see paragraphs [0082] – [0083] and Fig. 4, The base station may predict a specific route for a UE or a set of UEs. The base station may predict that the UE may be located in a direction of a subset of beams and because the subset beams overlap with the predicted location of the UE or set of UEs (e.g., a predicted route, a predicted region), the base station may add the subset of beams to a provisioned beam list. This reads on determining RRM settings for the first UE comprises determining a network resource allocation for the future location for the second UE).
Regarding claim 5 Berliner teaches determining RRM settings for a base station at the future location for the second UE; and updating an RRM configuration of the base station at the future location (see paragraphs [0082] – [0083] and Fig. 4, The base station may predict a specific route for a UE or a set of UEs. The base station may predict that the UE may be located in a direction of a subset of beams and because the subset beams overlap with the predicted location of the UE or set of UEs (e.g., a predicted route, a predicted region), the base station may add the subset of beams to a provisioned beam list. A message including the beam provisioned may be sent to another base station. This reads on determining RRM settings for a base station at the future location for the second UE; and updating an RRM configuration of the base station at the future location).
Regarding claim 6 Berliner teaches determining a reallocation of resources at the future location; storing information regarding said reallocation as part of allocation prediction information; and
determining said network resource allocation for the future location based on said allocation prediction information (see paragraphs [0082] – [0083] and Fig. 4, The base station may predict a specific route for a UE or a set of UEs. The base station may predict that the UE may be located in a direction of a subset of beams. The base station determines that the subset beams overlap with the predicted location of the UE or set of UEs (e.g., a predicted route, a predicted region). The base station may add the subset of beams (e.g. along a predicted route) to a provisioned beam list (storing information regarding reallocation). A message including the beam provisioned may be sent. This reads on determining a reallocation of resources at the future location; storing information regarding said reallocation as part of allocation prediction information; and determining said network resource allocation for the future location based on said allocation prediction information).
Regarding claim 29 Venugopal teaches the method of claim 24 except for wherein the network node is configured to determine RRM settings for the second UE.
Berliner teaches wherein the network node is configured to determine RRM settings for the second UE (see paragraphs [0082] – [0083], The base station may predict a specific route for a UE or a set of UEs. The base station may predict that the UE may be located in a direction of a subset of beams and because the subset beams overlap with the predicted location of the UE or set of UEs (e.g., a predicted route, a predicted region), the base station may add the subset of beams to a provisioned beam list. This reads on wherein the network node is configured to determine RRM settings for the second UE).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make Venugopal adapt to include wherein the network node is configured to determine RRM settings for the second UE because it would further improve updating of RRM information when a UE moves across coverage areas (see Venugopal, paragraph [0021] and Berliner, paragraph [0014]).
VI. Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Venugopal et al. (US 2021/0014763 A1) in view of Monajemi et al. (US 2021/0282214 A1).
Regarding claim 15 Venugopal teaches the method of claim 1 except for wherein determining the dependency between the first UE and the second UE based matching mobility measurements.
Monajemi teaches determining a first UE and a second UE have matching mobility measurements (see paragraph [0050], Two pairs of STAs may have the same RSSI and this reads on determining a first UE and a second UE have matching mobility measurements).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to make determining the dependency between the first UE and the second UE in Venugopal be based on first UE and a second UE having matching mobility measurements because mobility measurements of the first and second UE in Venugopal can be determined to be matched in the same way as the mobility measurements in Monajemi and it would allow for a well-known and efficient mechanism for grouping/pairing mobile devices.
VII. Claims 16 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Venugopal et al. (US 2021/0014763 A1) in view of Ohwatari et al. (US 2017/0164346 A1).
Regarding claim 16 Venugopal teaches the method of claim 1 including obtaining capability data regarding the first UE; obtaining capability data regarding the second UE; determining a dependency between the first UE and the second UE based on the capability data; and determining RRM settings for the second UE based on the capability data regarding the second UE (see paragraphs [0070]; [0073]; [0075], The UE 502 is camped on LTE and the UE 504 is camped on NR. A call between UE 502 and UE 504 is initially established on low bit rate LTE. The UE 502 may handover to NR and after the UE 504 can trigger a procedure to increase the bit rate of the call by moving the call between UE 502 and UE 504 to NR. This reads on obtaining capability data regarding the first UE; obtaining capability data regarding the second UE; determining a dependency between the first UE and the second UE based on the capability data; and determining RRM settings for the second UE based on the capability data regarding the second UE) and except for the first UE has first power capabilities and the second UE has second power capabilities exceeding the power capabilities of the first UE.
Ohwatari teaches the first UE has first power capabilities and the second UE has second power capabilities exceeding the power capabilities of the first UE (see paragraph [0150], A second UE belonging to the same group as the first UE and for which the transmission power is higher than that for the first UE reads on the first UE has first power capabilities and the second UE has second power capabilities exceeding the power capabilities of the first UE).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to make Venugopal adapt to include the first UE has first power capabilities and the second UE has second power capabilities exceeding the power capabilities of the first UE because it is well known that UE capabilities includes transmission power capability.
Regarding claim 18 Venugopal teaches determining the RRM settings for the second UE also based on the capability data regarding the first UE (see paragraph [0070], The UE 502 is camped on LTE and the UE 504 is camped on NR. A call between UE 502 and UE 504 is initially established on low bit rate LTE. This reads on determining the RRM settings for the second UE also based on the capability data regarding the first UE).
Regarding claim 19 Venugopal obtaining capability data regarding the first UE comprises the second UE receiving the capability data regarding the first UE (see paragraph [0073], The UE 504 receives information the UE 502 hands over to NR. This reads on obtaining capability data regarding the first UE comprises the second UE receiving the capability data regarding the first UE); and determining the dependency between the first UE and the second UE comprises the second UE determining the dependency (see paragraph [0075], The UE 504 can trigger a procedure to increase the bit rate of the call in accordance with NR support when it is determined that the UE 502 has handed over to NR. This reads on determining the dependency between the first UE and the second UE comprises the second UE determining the dependency).
VIII. Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Venugopal et al. (US 2021/0014763 A1) in view of Ohwatari et al. (US 2017/0164346 A1) and Pawar et al. (US 10,021,693 B1).
Regarding claim 17 Venugopal and Ohwatari teach the method of clam 16 except for wherein the mobility measurements are based on the capability data regarding the first UE and the capability data regarding the second UE.
Pawar teaches mobility measurements based on capability data regarding the user equipment (UE) (see col. 6, lines 33-43, The UE provides the eNodeB with a channel quality report with channel quality indicator based on RSRP and UE capabilities. This reads on mobility measurements based on capability data regarding the user equipment (UE)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the Venugopal and Ohwatari combination adapt to include wherein the mobility measurements are based on the capability data regarding the first UE and the capability data regarding the second UE because it would allow further facilitate improved communication quality (see Pawar, abstract).
IX. Claims 20-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Venugopal et al. (US 2021/0014763 A1) in view of Ohwatari et al. (US 2017/0164346 A1) and Nenner et al. (US 2018/0242256 A1).
Regarding claim 20 Venugopal and Ohwatari teach the method of claim 16 except for obtaining capability data regarding the first UE comprises the network node receiving the capability data regarding the first UE; determining a dependency between at least one of the first UE and the second UE comprises the network node determining the dependency.
Nenner teaches obtaining capability data regarding the first UE comprises the network node receiving the capability data regarding the first UE; determining a dependency between at least one of the first UE and the second UE comprises the network node determining the dependency (see paragraph [0009] and Fig. 1, A radio resource management entity assigns a first set or radio resources to a user equipment. The radio resource management entity may obtain power consumption information of a user equipment using the first set of radio resources. The radio resource management entity may assign a second set of radio resources to the user equipment based on the power consumption of the user equipment using the first set of resources. This reads on capability data regarding the first UE comprises the network node receiving the capability data regarding the first UE; determining a dependency between at least one of the first UE and the second UE comprises the network node determining the dependency).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to make Venugopal and Ohwatari combination adapt to include obtaining capability data regarding the first UE comprises the network node receiving the capability data regarding the first UE; determining a dependency between at least one of the first UE and the second UE comprises the network node determining the dependency because it is well-known that network nodes can make determinations on UE capability and resource management (see Nenner above).
Regarding claim 21 Venugopal and Ohwatari teach the method of claim 16 except for the network node determining the RRM settings.
Nenner teaches the network node determining the RRM settings see paragraph [0009] and Fig. 1, A radio resource management entity assigns a first set or radio resources to a user equipment. The radio resource management entity may obtain power consumption information of a user equipment using the first set of radio resources. The radio resource management entity may assign a second set of radio resources to the user equipment based on the power consumption of the user equipment using the first set of resources. This reads on the network node determining the RRM settings).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to make Venugopal and Ohwatari combination adapt to include the network node determining the RRM settings because it is well-known that network nodes can make determinations on UE capability and resource management (see Nenner above).
X. Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Venugopal et al. (US 2021/0014763 A1) in view of Ohwatari et al. (US 2017/0164346 A1) and Wang et al. (US 2015/0304911 A1).
Regarding claim 22 Venugopal and Ohwatari teach the method of claim 16 except for the second UE providing suggested RRM settings and the network node deciding on the RRM settings to use.
Wang teaches a UE providing suggested RRM settings and the network node deciding on the RRM settings to use (see paragraphs [0066] & [0069] – [0070], The serving eNodeB requests a measurement report from the coordinating UE. The measurement report is received from the coordinating UE. The eNodeB determines a target cell based on the received measurement report. This reads on second UE providing suggested RRM settings and the network node deciding on the RRM settings to use).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to make Venugopal and Ohwatari combination adapt to include because it is well-known that network nodes can make determinations on UE capability and resource management (see Wang above).
Conclusion
XI. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRANDON J MILLER whose telephone number is (571)272-7869. The examiner can normally be reached M-F.
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, Alison Slater can be reached at 571-270-0375. 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.
/BRANDON J MILLER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2647
January 28, 2026