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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This communication is responsive to Application # 18584884 filed 02/22/2024. Claims 1-30 are subject to examination.
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 1-30 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 1 and 29 recites “an independently updated security configuration”. Purpose of this updated security configuration is not clear. It is also not clear whether this updated security configuration is related to updated version of the “first security configuration” or any other security configuration.
Claim 9 and 24 recites “wherein the … cell is associated with at least one LTM candidate configuration for the second handover with an independently updated security configuration”. It is not clear what the claim limitation is implying, not clear how the cell is related to “the independently updated security configuration”.
Claim 9 and 24 recites “trigger a first layer 1 or layer 2 triggered mobility (LTM) procedure for a first handover or a second handover”. If “a first handover” is selected for LTM procedure, rest of the claim limitations related to the “second handover” becomes optional.
Claim(s) 2-8, 10-23, 25-28, and 30 are also rejected because they are dependent upon rejected claims 1, 9, 24, and 29 as set forth above and include limitations of the claims 1, 9, 24, and 29 respectively.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 19 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
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 1-18 and 20-30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HONG (HONG hereinafter) (US 20250254584 A1) in view of KUANG et al. (KUANG hereinafter) (WO 2025168381 A1).
Regarding claim 1 and claim 29, HONG teaches, A user equipment (UE), comprising:
one or more memories storing processor-executable code; and
one or more processors coupled with the one or more memories and individually or collectively operable to execute the code to cause the UE to (HONG; the UE, Par. 0143):
receive first information indicating at least one layer 1 or layer 2 triggered mobility (LTM) candidate configuration associated with a second cell provided by a second network entity (HONG; The source/serving base station (e.g. gNB-CU1) may instruct the corresponding information (the LTM candidate configuration including the NCC) to the UE, Par. 0143), wherein the first information is retained for a second handover (HONG; When the UE receives a handover command (or an RRC reconfiguration message including reconfiguration with sync) set with the corresponding instruction, one or more stored LTM UE variables, Par. 0132; the subsequent LTM may refer to an LTM cell switch to another candidate cell without reconfiguring the candidate cell through an RRC reconfiguration message, Par. 0131) with an independently updated security configuration subsequent to a first handover that is based on the at least one LTM candidate configuration (HONG; that information may be used in a subsequent intra-CU LTM cell switch ... the base station may instruct the security context information (e.g., one or more pieces of information among the NCC, the NH, and the {NH, NCC} pair) to the UE, Par. 0146);
receive second information from a first network entity, the second information indicating a first security configuration for securing UE communication (HONG; The target/candidate base station (e.g., gNB-CU2) may transmit the LTM candidate configuration including the received NCC to the source/serving base station. The source/serving base station (e.g. gNB-CU1) may instruct the corresponding information (the LTM candidate configuration including the NCC) to the UE., Par. 0143);
perform a first LTM procedure for the first handover or the second handover of the UE to the second cell based at least in part on the first information (HONG; the base station determines cell switch execution to the target cell and transmits LTM cell switch MAC CE including the candidate configuration index of the target cell to the UE, and then the UE switches over to the target cell and applies the configuration indicated by the candidate configuration index, Par. 0088); and
transmit a signal to the second network entity (HONG; the UE switches over to the target cell, Par. 0088).
Although HONG teaches that the UE may derive the base station key (KgNB) based on the received NCC value, but failed to explicitly teach that,
transmit a signal to the second network entity based at least in part on the second information indicating the first security configuration.
However, in the same field of endeavor, KUANG teaches,
transmit a signal to the second network entity based at least in part on the second information indicating the first security configuration (KUANG; the UE 100 derives in step S1110 an intermediate session key KNG-RAN* for the target cell 1a and transmits a first UL transmission to the target gNB1 300, pg 21 line 10-11; Session keys in wireless communication networks like 5G networks serve as cryptographic keys that are dynamically generated and used for securing communication sessions between a user device and the network infrastructure, pg 13 line 12-13).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of HONG to include the use of KgNB/NCC as taught by KUANG in order to implement security (KUANG; pg 21).
Specifically for claim 29 HONG teaches, A method for wireless communication at a user equipment (UE), comprising (HONG; the UE., Par. 0143).
Regarding claim 2 and claim 30, HONG- KUANG teaches, The UE of claim 1 and The method of claim 29 respectively, wherein the first information indicating the at least one LTM candidate configuration and the second information indicating the first security configuration are received in a same message (HONG; The source/serving base station (e.g. gNB-CU1) may instruct the corresponding information (the LTM candidate configuration including the NCC) to the UE., Par. 0143).
Regarding claim 3, HONG- KUANG teaches, The UE of claim 1, wherein the first information indicating the at least one LTM candidate configuration comprises an LTM candidate configuration associated with a third cell and the first LTM procedure is for the first handover (HONG; an LTM configuration including the cell 1, a cell 2, a cell 3, and a cell 4 as LTM candidate configurations to the UE, Par. 0143), wherein the one or more processors are individually or collectively operable to execute the code to cause the UE to:
receive third information from the second network entity subsequent to the first handover, the third information indicating a second security configuration for securing UE communication (HONG; The message may include a security context (e.g. a {NH, NCC} pair (or information about one or more of NH and NCC)). The target/candidate base station (e.g. gNB-CU2) stores that information. In addition, the information may be used for a further handover ... When the intra-CU LTM cell switch is performed, the base station may instruct the security context information (e.g., one or more pieces of information among the NCC, the NH, and the {NH, NCC} pair) to the UE, Par. 0145-0146);
receive a second indication to trigger a second LTM procedure of the UE to the third cell (HONG; Subsequent LTM may be executed by repeating the steps, Par. 0131);
perform the second LTM procedure for the second handover of the UE to the third cell based at least in part on the first information (HONG; Subsequent LTM may be executed by repeating the steps, Par. 0131); and
transmit a second signal via the third cell based at least in part on the third information indicating the second security configuration (HONG; the subsequent LTM may refer to an LTM cell switch to another candidate cell without reconfiguring the candidate cell through an RRC reconfiguration message. Subsequent LTM may be executed by repeating the steps of early synchronization, LTM execution, and LTM completion without releasing other LTM candidate configurations after completing each LTM, Par. 0131 & KUANG; In step S110, the UE 100 uses the derived intermediate session key KNG RAN* directly as the session key K.sub.gNB to communicate with the target gNB 300, pg 16).
The rational and motivation for adding this teaching of KUANG is the same as for Claim 1.
Regarding claim 4, HONG- KUANG teaches, The UE of claim 1, wherein the first information indicating the at least one LTM candidate configuration and the second information indicating the first security configuration are received from different network entities (HONG; The target/candidate base station (e.g., gNB-CU2) may transmit the LTM candidate configuration including the received NCC to the source/serving base station. The source/serving base station (e.g. gNB-CU1) may instruct the corresponding information (the LTM candidate configuration including the NCC) to the UE., Par. 0143).
Regarding claim 5, HONG- KUANG teaches, The UE of claim 4, wherein the one or more processors are individually or collectively operable to execute the code to cause the UE to perform a second LTM procedure for the first handover of the UE to a first cell provided by the first network entity prior to receiving the second information (HONG; the UE may perform the intra-CU LTM cell switch from the cell 1 to the cell 2 (e.g., a cell provided through CU-1 and DU-2) within one base station, Par. 0144).
Regarding claim 6, HONG- KUANG teaches, The UE of claim 1, wherein the first security configuration comprises a next hop chaining count (NCC) value (HONG; The source/serving base station (e.g. gNB-CU1) may instruct the corresponding information (the LTM candidate configuration including the NCC) to the UE., Par. 0143).
Regarding claim 7, HONG- KUANG teaches, The UE of claim 1, wherein the second information comprises an indication that the first security configuration is for an LTM procedure between network entities, an LTM procedure to the second network entity, an LTM procedure to a network entity included in a set of network entities comprising the second network entity, an LTM procedure to a first cell provided by the first network entity, an LTM procedure to a cell included in a set of cells comprising a first cell provided by the first network entity, or any combination thereof (HONG; This information may be information/index/ID used to determine/instruct/distinguish whether security key refresh/update is necessary. This information may be information/index/ID used to determine/instruct/distinguish whether the Next Hop Chaining Counter (NCC) value currently maintained by the UE needs to be updated, Par. 0093).
Regarding claim 8, HONG- KUANG teaches, The UE of claim 1, wherein:
the first information and the second information are received from one network entity (HONG; The source/serving base station (e.g. gNB-CU1) may instruct the corresponding information (the LTM candidate configuration including the NCC) to the UE., Par. 0143).
Regarding claim 9, HONG teaches, A source network entity, comprising:
one or more memories storing processor-executable code (HONG; The source/serving base station, Par. 0143); and
one or more processors coupled with the one or more memories and individually or collectively operable to execute the code to cause the source network entity to (HONG; The source/serving base station, Par. 0143):
output second information to a user equipment (UE), the second information indicating a first security configuration for securing UE communication (HONG; The source/serving base station (e.g. gNB-CU1) may instruct the corresponding information (the LTM candidate configuration including the NCC) to the UE., Par. 0143); and
output a first indication from the source network entity to trigger a first layer 1 or layer 2 triggered mobility (LTM) procedure for a first handover or a second handover (HONG; Fig. 7 [Note that cell 3, 4 are under different BS]) of the UE to a second cell provided by a second network entity (HONG; the base station determines cell switch execution to the target cell and transmits LTM cell switch MAC CE including the candidate configuration index of the target cell to the UE, and then the UE switches over to the target cell and applies the configuration indicated by the candidate configuration index, Par. 0088), wherein the second cell is associated with at least one LTM candidate configuration for the second handover with an independently updated security configuration subsequent to the first handover that is based on the at least one LTM candidate configuration (HONG; that information may be used in a subsequent intra-CU LTM cell switch ... the base station may instruct the security context information (e.g., one or more pieces of information among the NCC, the NH, and the {NH, NCC} pair) to the UE, Par. 0146).
Although HONG teaches inter-CU LTM handover, but failed to explicitly teach the messaging sequences. However, in the same field of endeavor, KUANG teaches inter-gNB LTM cell switch process in Fig. 6.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of HONG to include the use of messaging as taught by KUANG in order to implement LTM process (KUANG; Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 10, HONG- KUANG teaches, The source network entity of claim 9, wherein the first security configuration comprises a next hop chaining count (NCC) value (HONG; The source/serving base station (e.g. gNB-CU1) may instruct the corresponding information (the LTM candidate configuration including the NCC) to the UE., Par. 0143).
Regarding claim 11, HONG- KUANG teaches, The source network entity of claim 9, wherein the second information comprises an indication that the first security configuration is for an LTM procedure between network entities, an LTM procedure to the second network entity, an LTM procedure to a network entity included in a set of network entities comprising the second network entity, an LTM procedure to a first cell provided by the source network entity, an LTM procedure to a cell included in a set of cells comprising a first cell provided by the source network entity, or any combination thereof (HONG; The source/serving base station (e.g. gNB-CU1) may instruct the corresponding information (the LTM candidate configuration including the NCC) to the UE, Par. 0143 & KUANG; The configuration acknowledgement may include the NCC, the PCI, and ARFCN-DL for respective candidate cells ... The gNB2 200 forwards the packets including the parameters for each candidate cell to the UE 100 in an RRCReconfiguration message, pg 20 line 25-31).
The rational and motivation for adding this teaching of KUANG is the same as for Claim 9.
Regarding claim 12, HONG- KUANG teaches, The source network entity of claim 9, wherein the one or more processors are individually or collectively further operable to execute the code to cause the source network entity to: output first information to the UE, the first information indicating the at least one LTM candidate configuration associated with the second cell provided by the second network entity (HONG; the base station determines cell switch execution to the target cell and transmits LTM cell switch MAC CE including the candidate configuration index of the target cell to the UE, and then the UE switches over to the target cell and applies the configuration indicated by the candidate configuration index, Par. 0088).
Regarding claim 13, HONG- KUANG teaches, The source network entity of claim 9, wherein the one or more processors are individually or collectively further operable to execute the code to cause the source network entity to:
output an indication of the first security configuration to a network entity that provides a cell that is associated with the at least one LTM candidate configuration for the UE (HONG; The source/serving base station (e.g., gNB-CU1) may forward a {K.sub.NG-RAN*, NCC} pair to the target/candidate base station (e.g., gNB-CU2) for the LTM candidate configuration, Par. 0143).
Regarding claim 14, HONG- KUANG teaches, The source network entity of claim 13, wherein the network entity is the second network entity and the cell is a target cell for the first LTM procedure for the first handover (HONG; the target/candidate base station (e.g., gNB-CU2), Par. 0143).
Regarding claim 15, HONG- KUANG teaches, The source network entity of claim 13, wherein the network entity is a third network entity separate from the second network entity and the cell is a third cell separate from a target cell for the first LTM procedure for the first handover (HONG; Fig. 7 & KUANG; candidate gNB3 400, pg 20 line 15).
The rational and motivation for adding this teaching of KUANG is the same as for Claim 9.
Regarding claim 16, HONG- KUANG teaches, The source network entity of claim 13, wherein the indication further indicates a next hop chaining count (NCC) value and a key value associated with the cell provided by the network entity (HONG; The source/serving base station (e.g., gNB-CU1) may forward a {K.sub.NG-RAN*, NCC} pair to the target/candidate base station (e.g., gNB-CU2) for the LTM candidate configuration, Par. 0143).
Regarding claim 17, HONG- KUANG teaches, The source network entity of claim 13, wherein the indication is outputted concurrently with the first LTM procedure (KUANG; Each of the LTM configuration requests includes the respective K.sub.NG-.sub.RAN* intermediate session key derived for respective candidate cell. In steps S3100 and S4100, each of the candidate gNBs 300 and 400 performs decision processing (LTM configuration decision) and transmits a respective configuration acknowledgement message to the source gNB (gNB2) 200, pg 20 line 21-25) or subsequent to the first LTM procedure .
The rational and motivation for adding this teaching of KUANG is the same as for Claim 9.
Regarding claim 18, HONG- KUANG teaches, The source network entity of claim 13, wherein the indication is outputted prior to the first LTM procedure or prior to outputting the second information to the UE (KUANG; Fig. 6).
The rational and motivation for adding this teaching of KUANG is the same as for Claim 9.
Regarding claim 20, HONG- KUANG teaches, The source network entity of claim 9, wherein the one or more processors are individually or collectively further operable to execute the code to cause the source network entity to:
obtain at least part of the first security configuration from an access and mobility management function (AMF) entity associated with the UE for outputting the second information to the UE, the first security configuration comprising a next hop chaining count (NCC) value or an indication for the source network entity to utilize a fresh key (KUANG; Fig. 6).
The rational and motivation for adding this teaching of KUANG is the same as for Claim 9.
Regarding claim 21, HONG- KUANG teaches, The source network entity of claim 20, wherein the one or more processors are individually or collectively further operable to execute the code to cause the source network entity to:
output an NCC value of zero to the UE in response to the indication for the source network entity to utilize the fresh key (HONG; This information may be information/index/ID to determine/instruct/distinguish the NCC value currently maintained by the UE to be reset (e.g., reset/initialized to 0), Par. 0093).
Regarding claim 21, HONG- KUANG teaches, The source network entity of claim 9, wherein the source network entity comprises a central unit (CU) and a distributed unit (DU), and wherein:
the CU outputs the second information to the UE via the DU,
the DU outputs the first indication to trigger the first LTM procedure to the UE,
the DU outputs an indication of triggering the first LTM procedure to the CU, and
the CU outputs an indication of the first security configuration to the second network entity, a third network entity, or a combination thereof (HONG; Fig. 7; The gNB-DU refers to a logical node that hosts the radio link control (RLC), medium access control (MAC), and physical (PHY) layers of a base station (or a logical node that hosts one or more radio access protocols not included in the gNB-CU), par. 0081).
Regarding claim 23, HONG- KUANG teaches, The source network entity of claim 9, wherein the second network entity is the source network entity (HONG; the UE may perform the intra-CU LTM cell switch from the cell 1 to the cell 2 (e.g., a cell provided through CU-1 and DU-2) within one base station, Par. 0144).
Regarding claim 24, HONG teaches, A target network entity, comprising:
one or more memories storing processor-executable code (HONG; The target/candidate base station, Par. 0143); and
one or more processors coupled with the one or more memories and individually or collectively operable to execute the code to cause the target network entity to (HONG; The target/candidate base station, Par. 0143):
obtain, from a source network entity, an indication of triggering a first layer 1 or layer 2 triggered mobility (LTM) procedure for a first handover or a second handover of a user equipment (UE) to a target cell provided by the target network entity (HONG; the target/candidate base station/gNB-CU transmits a message for indicating success in handover (for example, a HANDOVER SUCCESS message) to the source base station/gNB-CU, Par. 0167), wherein the target cell is associated with at least one LTM candidate configuration for the second handover with an independently updated security configuration subsequent to the first handover that is based on the at least one LTM candidate configuration (HONG; that information may be used in a subsequent intra-CU LTM cell switch ... the base station may instruct the security context information (e.g., one or more pieces of information among the NCC, the NH, and the {NH, NCC} pair) to the UE, Par. 0146);
obtain an indication of a first security configuration for securing UE communication with the target network entity (HONG; The target/candidate base station (e.g., gNB-CU2) may transmit the LTM candidate configuration including the received NCC to the source/serving base station, Par. 0143);
obtain a message from the UE indicating a completion of the LTM procedure to the target cell (HONG; the UE switches over to the target cell, Par. 0088); and
communicate with the UE based at least in part on the message and the indication (HONG; the UE switches over to the target cell, Par. 0088).
Although HONG teaches inter-CU LTM handover, but failed to explicitly teach the messaging sequences. However, in the same field of endeavor, KUANG teaches inter-gNB LTM cell switch process in Fig. 6. KUANG teaches in pg 21 that “A corresponding cell change notification is transmitted to the decided target gNB, i.e., gNB1 300 for this round of cell switch. Based on the NCC value, the cell PCI, and the ARFCN- DL, the UE 100 derives in step S1110 an intermediate session key KNG-RAN* for the target cell 1a and transmits a first UL transmission to the target gNB1 300. The first UL transmission may be, for example, an RRCReconfigurationComplete message” and in pg 13 that “Session keys in wireless communication networks like 5G networks serve as cryptographic keys that are dynamically generated and used for securing communication sessions between a user device and the network infrastructure”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of HONG to include the use of messaging as taught by KUANG in order to implement LTM process (KUANG; Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 25, HONG- KUANG teaches, The target network entity of claim 24, wherein the first security configuration comprises a next hop (NH) value and a next hop chaining count (NCC) value (HONG; The source/serving base station (e.g. gNB-CU1) may instruct the corresponding information (the LTM candidate configuration including the NCC) to the UE., Par. 0143; the base station may instruct the security context information (e.g., information about at least one of the NCC, the NH, and the {NH, NCC} pair) to the UE, Par. 0150).
Regarding claim 26, HONG- KUANG teaches, The target network entity of claim 24, wherein the message comprises a radio resource control (RRC) reconfiguration complete message (KUANG; The first UL transmission may be, for example, an RRCReconfigurationComplete message, pg 21 line 11-12).
The rational and motivation for adding this teaching of KUANG is the same as for Claim 24.
Regarding claim 27, HONG- KUANG teaches, The target network entity of claim 24, wherein the one or more processors are individually or collectively further operable to execute the code to cause the target network entity to: buffer the message to process the message subsequent to obtaining the indication of the first security configuration (KUANG; session keys are primarily used for encrypting and decrypting data transmitted between the device and the network, pg 13 line 17-18 [Note that received messages will be decrypt]).
The rational and motivation for adding this teaching of KUANG is the same as for Claim 24.
Regarding claim 28, HONG- KUANG teaches, The target network entity of claim 24, wherein the one or more processors are individually or collectively further operable to execute the code to cause the target network entity to:
output a path switch request to an access and mobility management function (AMF) entity based at least in part on the message; and obtain an acknowledgment of the path switch request with an updated next hop (NH) value and an updated next hop chaining count (NCC) value (HONG; Upon receiving the path switch request message, a core network control plane entity (e.g., AMF) ... may transmit a path switch request acknowledgement message to the target/candidate base station (e.g., gNB-CU2). The message may include a security context (e.g. a {NH, NCC} pair, Par. 0145).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Reference Leng et al. (US 20250227466 A1) teaches LTM for inter-gNB-CU scenarios and security key update process in Fig. 18.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHARMIN CHOWDHURY whose telephone number is (571)272-6419. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 am - 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, Noel Beharry can be reached at 5712705630. 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.
/SHARMIN CHOWDHURY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2416