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 § 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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (.US 2024/0147328 A1), hereinafter “Kim”, in view of RP-232339, “Mobility enhancements in Rel-19”, 3GPP TSG RAN Meeting #101, source Huawei, HiSilicon, hereinafter “Huawei”.
Claims 1 and 20:
Regarding claim 1, Kim teaches, an apparatus for wireless communication at a user equipment (UE), comprising: one or more memories; and one or more processors, coupled to the one or more memories (Kim: Fig. 15A), configured to cause the UE to:
receive groupings of cells for a layer 2 (L2) reset determination ([0004] “the wireless device may switch from a first cell to a second cell for communicating with the base station. One or more configuration parameters may indicate cell grouping that be used to determine whether the wireless device is to perform a reset and/or recovery procedure after the cell switch.”);
receive a lower layer triggered mobility (LTM) cell switch command for the UE to switch between cells ([0441] “The L1/L2 signaling (e.g., cell switch command) may comprise an indication indicating a first target cell that is one of (candidate) target cell(s) for LTM … the first target cell may be a target cell of LTM that a first configuration of the one or more configurations indicates. The indication may comprise an identifier or an index of the first target cell. The L1/L2 signaling indicating the first target cell may indicate that the wireless device initiates, executes, triggers, and/or performs ( e.g., in response to receiving the L1/L2 signaling) the LTM to the first target cell using configuration parameters associated with the first target cell.”);
determine whether the switch between cells indicated by the LTM cell switch command is an intra-group switch between cells or an inter-group switch between cells ([0503] “The cell switching may comprise inter-group cell switching and/or intra-group cell switching.”; see Fig.34 where both inter-group and inter-group cell switching is disclosed).
Regarding claim, perform or skip a packet data convergence protocol (PDCP) reestablishment based at least in part on whether the switch between cells is the intra-group switch between cells or the inter-group switch between cells, Kim: Fig. 34 shows that for inter-group cell switching MAC reset, RLC re-establishment and PDCP recovery are to be done while for intra-group cell switch none of these are done.
Kim however fails to disclose pdcp reestablishment.
Huawei in the same field of endeavor teaches pdcp reestablishment, “During the LTM execution phase, security keys shall be updated. The L2 behavior should be different from the one of Rel-18 LTM, i.e. PDCP need to be re-established at inter-gNB LTM.”.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine disclosure by Huawei with that of Kim and come up with the claimed invention motivated by update requirement of security keys during inter-gNB LTM, as discussed above.
Claim 20 is for method implemented by apparatus of claim 1. Claim is a change in category and is rejected based on rejection of claim 1.
Claims 2 and 18:
Regarding claim 2, combination of Kim and Huawei teaches the apparatus of claim 1 (discussed above).
Regarding claim, wherein the groupings of cells is based at least in part on cells associated with a first gNB-CU or gNB and cells associated with a second gNB-CU or gNB, wherein an inter-cell grouping is between gNB-CUs and an intra-cell grouping is within a same gNB-CU, though Kim teaches about base station structures containing CU and multiple DUs associated with a single CU, and cell switching (see Figs. 34-37, it does not expressly teach about grouping of cells based on gNB-CU/gNB, as claimed.
Huawei in the same field of endeavor teaches the groupings. Figs. 1 and 2 shows intra-gNB(CU) switching and inter-gNB switching respectively. Huawei teaches Cell group switch triggered by L2 signaling.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine disclosure by Huawei with that of Kim and come up with the claimed invention motivated by grouping of cells during inter-gNB LTM, or intra-gNB LTM, as discussed above.
Claim 18 is for apparatus implementing method complimentary to apparatus of claim 2. Claim elements are discussed above in claim 2. Claim is rejected based on rejection of claim 2.
Regarding claim 3, combination of Kim and Huawei teaches the apparatus of claim 2 (discussed above), wherein the groupings of cells refers to one or more of:
an indication of gNB identifiers, an indication of security keys associated with certain gNBs, an indication associated with the PDCP reestablishment, or an indication associated with a PDCP relocation (not expressly disclosed by Kim but implied by the disclosure in Huawei regarding updating requirement of security keys and PDCP reestabliment for inter-gNB LTM, “During the LTM execution phase, security keys shall be updated. The L2 behavior should be different from the one of Rel-18 LTM, i.e. PDCP need to be re-established at inter-gNB LTM.” .
Regarding claim 4, combination of Kim and Huawei teaches the apparatus of claim 1 (discussed above), wherein the PDCP reestablishment is associated with a layer 2 (L2) reset (Huawei: “During the LTM execution phase, security keys shall be updated. The L2 behavior should be different from the one of Rel-18 LTM, i.e. PDCP need to be re-established at inter-gNB LTM.”; “Layer-2 handling in Inter-gNB LTM, including security update, layer-2 protocol reset, etc.”.).
Regarding claim 5, combination of Kim and Huawei teaches the apparatus of claim 1 (discussed above), wherein the one or more processors are configured to cause the UE to: receive the groupings of cells based at least in part on radio resource control (RRC) signaling or system information (Kim: [0534] “a base station ( e.g., a base station CU and/or DU) may send, to a wireless device, an indication of one or more cell groups associated with an LTM configuration.”; [0259] “The RRC setup message may comprise a cell group configurations parameters”).
Regarding claim 6, combination of Kim and Huawei teaches the apparatus of claim 5 (discussed above), wherein the system information is associated with a source cell or a target cell (implied based on disclosure above in claim 5; target cell is selected from one of the cell groups.).
Claims 7 and 19:
Regarding claim 7, combination of Kim and Huawei teaches the apparatus of claim 1 (discussed above), wherein the groupings of cells is based at least in part on separate group listings of cells, the separate group listings of cells are associated with other forms of a layer 2 (L2) reset, and the other forms of the L2 reset include one or more of:
a medium access control (MAC) reset, a radio link control (RLC) reestablishment, or a packet data convergence protocol (PDCP) recovery (Kim: Figs. 34-37 discloses the L2 reset parameters ).
Claim 19 is for apparatus implementing method complimentary to apparatus of claim 7. Claim elements are discussed above in claim 7. Claim is rejected based on rejection of claim 7.
Regarding claim 8, combination of Kim and Huawei teaches the apparatus of claim 1 (discussed above), wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the UE to:
perform a UE-based timing advance (TA) calculation based at least in part on the groupings of cells, wherein the UE-based TA calculation includes a TA measurement to an LTM candidate cell in the groupings of cells (implied by disclosure in Kim: [0377], “The wireless device 2005 may derive the target base station 2015 specific keys and/or configure selected security algorithms that may be used in the target cell. The target base station 2015 may respond with a UL allocation and/or a timing advance”; and [0454] “the wireless device may determine a downlink timing advance value and/or an uplink timing advance value from the uplink synchronization and/or the downlink synchronization. The wireless device may use the downlink timing advance value to adjust reception timing of a downlink transmission from the target cell.”).
Regarding claim 9, Kim teaches, an apparatus for wireless communication at a first gNodeB (gNB), comprising: one or more memories; and one or more processors, coupled to the one or more memories (discussed above in claim 1).
Kim however does not expressly teach but in the same field of endeavor Huawei teaches, apparatus configured to cause the first gNB to
transmit, to a second gNB, a request for lower layer triggered mobility (LTM) cells served by the second gNB (“The gNB-CU needs to gather the configuration of candidate cell groups from the corresponding gNB DU via F1 interface, and send them to the UE via RRC signaling.”);
receive, from the second gNB and based at least in part on the request, an indication of the LTM cells served by the second gNB (receiving is implied based on the discussion above); and
transmit, to a user equipment (UE) and based at least in part on the indication, groupings of cells for a layer 2 (L2) reset determination (implied by the disclosure above “send them to the UE via RRC signaling”).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to come up with the claimed invention by combination of disclosure in Huawei and Kim motivated by handling scenario for inter-gNB LTM process, as detailed in proposal 2 of Huawei..
Regarding claim 10, combination of Kim and Huawei teaches the apparatus of claim 9 (discussed above), wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the first gNB to: receive, from the second gNB, an indication of a manner of L2 reset for a switching of cells under the second gNB (Fig.2 and associated text of Huawei provides details of gNB switching; cell group information ), wherein the indication includes a grouping of cells from the second gNB (cell group information is received from the target gNB, as disclosed in Huawei, “The gNB-CU needs to gather the configuration of candidate cell groups from the corresponding gNB-DUs via Fl interface, and send them to the UE via RRC signaling.”).
Regarding claim 11, combination of Kim and Huawei teaches the apparatus of claim 9 (discussed above), wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the first gNB to: transmit an LTM cell switch command for the UE to switch between cells, wherein the L2 reset determination is based at least in part on the LTM cell switch command (Kim: [0454] “The base station may transmit to the wireless device a L1/L2 signaling (e.g., cell switch command) indicating the determining the cell switch using LTM”).
Regarding claim 12, combination of Kim and Huawei teaches the apparatus of claim 11 (discussed above), wherein the switch is between cells associated with the first gNB (Kim: Figs. 34-37 ), or the switch is between a cell of the first gNB and a cell of the second gNB (Fig.2 of Huawei).
Regarding claim 13, combination of Kim and Huawei teaches the apparatus of claim 9 (discussed above), wherein the one or more processors are configured to cause the first gNB to: transmit the groupings of cells is based at least in part on radio resource control (RRC) signaling (discussed above in claims 9 and 10).
Regarding claim 14, combination of Kim and Huawei teaches the apparatus of claim 9 (discussed above).
The claim, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the first gNB to: transmit, to the second gNB, the groupings of cells for the L2 reset determination, though not disclosed by Kim or Huawei, may have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to come up with the claimed invention before the effective filing date of the claimed invention motivated by exchange of reciprocal information between neighbor gNBs so that LTM may be handled smoothly by both the gNBs, as required .
Regarding claim 15, combination of Kim and Huawei teaches the apparatus of claim 9 (discussed above).
The claim, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the first gNB to: transmit, to the second gNB and for the L2 reset determination, an indication of a partitioning of served LTM candidate cells associated with the first gNB, wherein the partitioning includes associations of served LTM candidate cells to gNB-DUs of the first gNB, is not expressly disclosed by Kim or Huawei..
Though not disclosed by Kim or Huawei, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill for reasons provided above in claim 14.
Regarding claim 16, combination of Kim and Huawei teaches the apparatus of claim 9 (discussed above), wherein:
signaling between the first gNB and the second gNB is based at least in part on non-UE-associated signaling, the signaling indicates a manner in which cells of the second gNB are partitioned for the L2 reset determination, the cells of the second gNB include all cells of the second gNB or a subset of cells of the second gNB that are configured as LTM candidate cells, and the groupings of cells are based at least in part on the non-UE-associated signaling (implied based on disclosures shown in claims 1 and 9; grouping of cells are based on groups of cells served by individual DUs/CUs and gNBs and not related to a particular UE; partitioning in a broad sense may imply creation of groups of cells served by individual gNBs/CUs, or DUs.))..
Regarding claim 17, combination of Kim and Huawei teaches the apparatus of claim 9 (discussed above), wherein an L2 reset associated with the L2 reset determination includes one or more of: a medium access control (MAC) reset, a radio link control (RLC) reestablishment, a packet data convergence protocol (PDCP) recovery, and a PDCP reestablishment (Figs. 34-37 of Kim).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
R2-2313384 teaches issues of RRC configured Layer-2 reset; .
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to INTEKHAAB AALAM SIDDIQUEE whose telephone number is (571)272-0895. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 9AM-5PM 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, Yemane Mesfin can be reached at 571-272-3927. 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.
/INTEKHAAB A SIDDIQUEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2462
Prosecution Insights