18591338Notice 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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 1/9/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 4, 6 and 9 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant argues that the references do not disclose the newly amended limitation of
sending a configuration to the UE that specifies a number of failed beam recovery attempts, of the active beam pair, that should occur before the UE to take action regarding a radio link failure (RLF) procedure.
Examiner respectfully disagrees and would like to assert that due to the broadness of the claim language, Jung does disclose that beam failures are declared by the base station to the UE (Jung [0469]) and a max number of detected failures occurred (Jung [0459]). Jung discloses all the particulars of the claim but is unclear about the limitation the UE to taking action regarding a radio link failure (RLF) procedure when the number of failed beam recovery attempts occurs.
However, Cheng does disclose the limitation the UE to taking action regarding a radio link failure (RLF) procedure when the number of failed beam recovery attempts occurs ([0025]: the UE monitoring when reaches maximum number of BFRQ transmission, then the UE will trigger RLF procedure and start with RRC).
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art at the time of invention to incorporate Cheng disclosure to reconnect for service.
Due to the broadness of the claim language, the claims are still not yet in condition for allowance and are still rejected as shown below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-4 and 6-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung et al. (US 2018/0192371; using foreign Application effective date; hereinafter Jung) in view of Cheng (US 2019/0166555).
Regarding claims 1 and 6, Jung discloses a method for wireless communications performed by a base station (BS), comprising:
communicating using beamforming with a user equipment (UE) via a transmit beam and a receive beam of an active beam pair ([0288]: using beam pair for communications between BS and terminal); and
sending a configuration to the UE that specifies a number of failed beam recovery attempts, of the active beam pair ([0459]: beam recovery will continue until a max number of failures is detected),
Jung discloses all the particulars of the claim but is unclear about the limitation the UE to taking action regarding a radio link failure (RLF) procedure when the number of failed beam recovery attempts occurs.
However, Cheng does disclose the limitation the UE to taking action regarding a radio link failure (RLF) procedure when the number of failed beam recovery attempts occurs ([0025]: the UE monitoring when reaches maximum number of BFRQ transmission, then the UE will trigger RLF procedure and start with RRC).
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art at the time of invention to incorporate Cheng disclosure to reconnect for service.
Regarding claims 2 and 7, Cheng discloses wherein the BS sends the configuration via radio resource control (RRC) signaling ([0025]: UE start the RRC connection).
Regarding claims 3 and 8, Jung discloses the invention further comprising configuring the UE to use a particular transmit beam shape for sending one or more beam recovery messages in one or more directions as part of the failed beam recovery attempts ([0287]: beams having various directions).
Regarding claims 4 and 9, Jung discloses a method for wireless communications performed by a user equipment (UE), comprising:
communicating using beamforming with a base station (BS) via a transmit beam and a receive beam of an active beam pair ([0288]: using beam pair for communications between BS and terminal);
obtaining a configuration from the BS indicating a number of failed beam recovery attempts, of the active beam pair ([0459]: beam recovery will continue until a max number of failures is detected),
Jung discloses all the particulars of the claim but is unclear about the limitation the UE to taking action regarding a radio link failure (RLF) procedure when the number of failed beam recovery attempts occurs.
However, Cheng does disclose the limitation the UE to taking action regarding a radio link failure (RLF) procedure when the number of failed beam recovery attempts occurs ([0025]: the UE monitoring when reaches maximum number of BFRQ transmission, then the UE will trigger RLF procedure and start with RRC).
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art at the time of invention to incorporate Cheng disclosure to reconnect for service.
Claim(s) 5 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung in view of Cheng as applied to claims 4 and 9 above, and further in view of Park et al. (US 2015/0257073; hereinafter Park).
Regarding claims 5 and 10, Jung in view of Cheng discloses all the particulars of the claim but is unclear about wherein taking action regarding the RLF procedure comprises:
detecting a beam from a neighboring cell; and
performing a forward handover (HO) to the neighboring cell.
However Park does disclose the limitations of wherein taking action regarding the RLF procedure comprises:
detecting a beam from a neighboring cell ([0085], [0094]: performing handover after acquiring neighboring measurements within the beam forming environment); and
performing a forward handover (HO) to the neighboring cell ([0085], [0094]: performing handover after acquiring neighboring measurements within the beam forming environment).
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art at the time of invention to incorporate Park’s disclosure to provide handover and continue service coverage.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHUCK HUYNH whose telephone number is (571)272-7866. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10am - 6pm.
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, Kathy Wang-Hurst can be reached on 571-270-5371. 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.
/CHUCK HUYNH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2644