DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendments
The Amendment filed 06/10/2026 has been entered. Claims 1, 6, 11, and 16 have been amended.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's argument(s) filed on 06/10/2026 with respect to the rejection of claims have been considered but are not persuasive.
Main Arguments : “D1 and D2 fail to disclose or render obvious "determining, by an NCR-mobile termination (NCR-MT) entity of the NCR node, degradation of a backhaul link beam, while the NCR-MT entity is in inactive state;" and "based on the determination, ceasing, by an NCR-forwarding (NCR-Fwd) entity of the NCR node, amplifying and forwarding of radio frequency (RF) signals …."
Reply, Examiner respectfully disagree.
D2 expressly teaches an inactive-state repeater and use of a validity time for side control configuration. D2 teaches that a repeater may receive a side control configuration and a validity time, and that the repeater may be in RRC-idle, RRC-inactive, or RRC-connected state. See D2, e.g., paragraphs [0093]-[0103]; [0114]–[0115], [0127], and [0132].
In particular, D2 states that:
the repeater may be released to an RRC-idle state where the RAN node does not have information needed to page the repeater,
the repeater may be released to an RRC-inactive state, and
while the MT of the repeater is RRC released, the forwarding component may continue forwarding using the side control configuration until the validity time expires.
D2 therefore teaches the relevant inactive-state context and shows that a repeater can continue forwarding operations while its MT is released/inactive.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show non-obviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
The combination of D1 and D2 teaches or suggests the claimed inactive-state beam degradation detection. Applicant’s core position is that D1 only operates in a connected state and D2 only teaches timer-based behavior. However, this characterization is too narrow and ignores what the two references collectively teach.
D1 supplies the degradation-detection and forwarding-stop functionality
D1 teaches detecting channel variation/degradation of the backhaul link and modifying forwarding accordingly, including deactivating forwarding or ceasing beam transmission.
D2 supplies the inactive-state operating context
D2 teaches that the repeater’s MT may be in an inactive/released state while forwarding continues using a previously configured side control configuration.
A person of ordinary skill would have combined the teachings
It would have been obvious to apply D1’s degradation-based forwarding control to the inactive-state repeater of D2 in order to avoid forwarding degraded signals during periods when the MT is inactive. Doing so would provide a predictable benefit: if the backhaul link beam becomes degraded while the repeater is in an inactive state, the repeater could stop or modify forwarding rather than continuing to amplify a poor-quality signal.
Applicant is reminded that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See in re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR international Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1-2 ,4-7, 9-12, 14-17, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Akl (US 20240267112 A1), hereinafter Akl in view of Alk (US 20240267982 A1), hereinafter Alk982.
Regarding claim 1,
Alk teaches a method performed by a network-controlled repeater (NCR) node in a wireless communication system, the method comprising (fig. 9, [0102] an NCR may include an NCR mobile termination (NCR-MT) function and an NCR forwarding (NCR-Fwd) function):
determining, by an NCR-mobile termination (NCR-MT) entity of the NCR node, degradation of a backhaul link beam ... ([0114] a repeater (e.g., an NCR) detects channel variation on a backhaul link (e.g., by the NCR-MT). ... [0116] (detecting channel variation by a repeater may be based on radio frequency or intermediate frequency (RF/IF) domain measured power, energy, or signal strength within a bandwidth (BW). The bandwidth may be configured on the repeater (e.g., by a network entity))
based on the determination: ceasing, by an NCR-forwarding (NCR-Fwd) entity of the NCR node, amplifying and forwarding of radio frequency (RF) signals ([0004] The method includes modifying a forwarding behavior based on a change in channel condition of a communications link between the repeater and a network entity; and [0137] In some aspects, modifying the forwarding behavior comprises at least one of: activating forwarding by the repeater; deactivating forwarding by the repeater; modifying a beam-specific amplification gain of the repeater; modifying an access beam configuration of the repeater; modifying an access beam sweep pattern of the repeater; or ceasing transmitting a beam).
Alk does not explicitly teach while the NCR-MT entity is in inactive state ... performing, by the NCR-MT entity, a connection resume procedure.
Alk982 teaches while the NCR-MT entity is in inactive state ([0114-0115] control configurations based at least in part on the repeater indicating .... The procedure may be used where the repeater (e.g., an NCR-MT) is released to an RRC-idle state where the RAN node does not have information needed to page the repeater, where the repeater is released to an RRC-inactive state, and/or where the repeater stays in RRC-connected state) ... performing, by the NCR-MT entity, a connection resume procedure ([0132] the repeater may perform an RRC setup or resume procedure to reestablish the RRC connection).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teaching of Alk982 to the teaching of Alk. The motivation for such an addition would be to avoid radio link failure and/or communicate with improved spectral efficiency ([0008] Alk982).
Regarding claim 2,
Alk and Alk982 teach the method of claim 1,
Alk does not explicitly teach transmitting, by the NCR-MT entity, a message including a cause value related to the connection resume procedure.
Alk982 further teaches transmitting, by the NCR-MT entity, a message including a cause value related to the connection resume procedure (Fig. 1 and Fig. 5, and [0049] repeater (e.g.,... NCR-MT ... ) forward signaling to or from the RAN node based on the side control configuration ... [0106] the repeater may establish (e.g., if in RRC-idle state) or resume (e.g., if in RRC-inactive state) an RRC connection with the RAN node.... [0116] The message may indicate to stop a forwarding operation ... to establish or resume an RRC connection).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teaching of Alk982 to the teaching of Alk. The motivation for such an addition would be to avoid radio link failure and/or communicate with improved spectral efficiency ([0008] Alk982).
Regarding claim 4,
Alk and Alk982 teach the method of claim 1,
Alk further teaches receiving, by the NCR-MT entity from a base station, side control information, while the NCR-MT entity is in connected state (fig. 9)
and amplifying and forwarding, by the NCR-Fwd entity, RF signals based on the side control information ([0102] The NCR-Fwd function may perform amplifying-and-forwarding of UL and/or DL RF signals between the gNB and a UE via the backhaul (BH) link and the access link).
Regarding claim 5,
Alk and Alk982 teach the method of claim 4,
Alk does not explicitly teach wherein in case that the NCR-MT entity transitions from connected state to inactive state, the side control information is continuously used for amplifying and forwarding of RF signals.
Alk982 teaches wherein in case that the NCR-MT entity transitions from connected state to inactive state, the side control information is continuously used for amplifying and forwarding of RF signals ([0114-0115] the repeater may use validity times for side control configurations based at least in part on the repeater indicating a capability to use the validity times. .... repeater (e.g., an NCR-MT) is released to an RRC-idle state where the RAN node does not have information needed to page the repeater, where the repeater is released to an RRC-inactive state, and/or where the repeater stays in RRC-connected state).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teaching of Alk982 to the teaching of Alk. The motivation for such an addition would be to avoid radio link failure and/or communicate with improved spectral efficiency ([0008] Alk982).
Claim(s) [6-7, and 9-10] (method, NCR-MT), Claim(s) [11-12, and 14-15] (apparatus, NCR), and Claim(s) [16-17, and 19-20] (apparatus, NCR-MT) is/are rejected under the same reasoning as claim(s) [1-2, and 4-5] (method , NCR), where Alk teaches both apparatus and method for NCR and NCR-MT (0007 and 0084 and 0217 and 0243).
Claim(s) 3, 8, 13, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alk and Alk982 further in view of Fujishiro (US 20250365630 A1), hereinafter Fujishiro
Regarding claim 3,
Alk and Alk982 teach the method of claim 1,
Alk and Alk982 do not explicitly teach in case that a different cell than a last serving cell is selected while the NCR-MT entity is in inactive state, ceasing, by the NCR-Fwd entity, amplifying and forwarding of RF signals
Fujishiro teaches in case that a different cell than a last serving cell is selected while the NCR-MT entity is in inactive state, ceasing, by the NCR-Fwd entity, amplifying and forwarding of RF signals ([0268]-[0274] NCR-MT is allowed to prioritize the desired cell (that is, the cell of interest) in the cell reselection procedure. ... NCR-Fwd can be turned ON or OFF according to the last configuration received from the gNB ... after the NCR-MT becomes inactive, the NCR-MT is likely to reselect to a different cell .... When NCR-Fwd is OFF, there is no problem, but when NCR-Fwd is ON, the same problem as that described in section 2.1.2 is likely to occur. and [0248]-[0253] 2.1.2. Potential Problems with RRC Re-Establishment ... Step 2b: When the NCR-MT selects a different cell and the RRC re-establishment is successfully completed, it is determined whether the NCR-Fwd should be turned OFF).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teaching of Fujishiro to the teaching of Alk and Alk982. The motivation for such an addition would be to have efficient coverage extension can be realized using the NCR ([0059] Fujishiro).
Claim(s) [8] (method, NCR-MT), Claim(s) [13] (apparatus, NCR), and Claim(s) [18] (apparatus, NCR-MT) is/are rejected under the same reasoning as claim(s) [3] (method, NCR), where Alk teaches both apparatus and method for NCR and NCR-MT (0007, 0084, 0217 and 0243).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VAN T NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-6178. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 AM - 5:00 PM (EST). 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, Ayman A Abaza can be reached at (571) 270-0422. 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.
/VAN TA NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 2465
/AYMAN A ABAZA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2465
Prosecution Insights