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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 7/23/26 is being considered by the examiner.
Terminal Disclaimer
The terminal disclaimer filed on 8/4/26 disclaiming the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration date of U.S. Patent No. 11,997,552 has been reviewed and is accepted. The terminal disclaimer has been recorded.
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.
Claim(s) 21-24, 26-27, 31-35, and 40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sang et al. (US 2018/0279182) in view of Novlan et al. (US 2018/0324780).
Regarding claim 21, Sang teaches a user equipment (UE) [Fig. 1, item 170] for wireless communications, comprising:
one or more memories; and
one or more processor coupled with the one or more memories configured to cause the UE to:
receive signaling indicating:
a measurement configuration (L2 measurement control message) for a set of cells (see “At step 330, the source DU 310 transmits to the UE 305 an L2 measurement control message using L1 signaling or L2 signaling of MAC CEs, DCI, or UCI” [0085]);
report, to a network entity (Source DU), measurements (L2 measurement report) for one or more cells in the set of cells in accordance with the measurement configuration (see “At step 340, the UE 305 transmits an L2 measurement report to the source DU 310” [0086] which implies UE transmits L2 measurement report in accordance with L2 measurement control message); and
receive, from the network entity, the PHY layer or MAC layer mobility signaling (L2 handover command) to move the UE to at least one cell of the set of cells (target DU), wherein the PHY layer or MAC layer mobility signaling is based, at least in part, on the reported measurements (see “At step 365, the target DU 315 transmits to the UE 305 an L2 handover command using L1 signaling or L2 signaling of MAC CEs, DCI, or UCI rather than using L3 signaling” [0088] and “Alternatively, the source DU 310 transmits to the UE 305 the L2 handover command or request, which the UE 305 acknowledges” [0088] which in combination implies source DU may transmit L2 handover command to UE using L1 or L2 signaling for handover to a target DU).
Sang does not explicitly teach the UE receives signaling indicating: a set of cells that support physical (PHY) layer or medium access control (MAC) layer mobility signaling; and a measurement configuration for the set of cells. In an analogous prior art reference, Novlan teaches a UE (mobile device) receives signaling indicating: a set of cells that support physical (PHY) layer or medium access control (MAC) layer mobility signaling (one or multiple DUs); and a measurement configuration for the set of cells (see “A mobile device can be provided with a measurement configuration enabling beam
based measurement of one or multiple DUs” [0061] which reads on the claimed measurement configuration for “a set of cells that support physical (PHY) layer or medium access control (MAC) layer mobility signaling” because the measurement configuration is for one or multiple DUs, and a DU supports PHY or MAC layer signaling since it comprises a MAC layer and a Physical layer [0051; Fig. 4, item 408, 410]). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Sang to allow the UE to receive signaling indicating: a set of cells that support physical (PHY) layer or medium access control (MAC) layer mobility signaling; and a measurement configuration for the set of cells, in order to configure the UE to measure one or more DUs in order to effectively perform inter-DU handover.
Regarding claim 22, Sang teaches the UE of claim 21, wherein the set of cells are supported by one or more distributed units (DUs) [Fig. 2, items 215, 220] under a common central unit (CU) [Fig. 2, item 205].
Regarding claim 23, Sang teaches the UE of claim 22, wherein the one or more DUs comprises a common DU that supports each cell of the set of cells [Fig. 2, items 265, 270].
Regarding claim 24, Sang teaches the UE of claim 21, wherein the signaling indicating the set of cells comprises radio resource control (RRC) signaling (see “The pre-configuration comprises dynamic
L3 RRC signaling, dynamic L2 signaling, dynamic selection of the mobility scheme, or statically-programmed policies or parameters” [par 85]).
Regarding claim 26, Sang teaches the UE of claim 21, wherein the set of cells are on the same carrier frequencies (see par 72 network is NR network which supports cells on the same carrier frequency).
Regarding claim 27, Sang teaches the UE of claim 21, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the UE to receive PHY layer or MAC layer signaling that indicates to select beams associated with the one or more cells in the set of cells.
Regarding claim 31, Sang teaches the UE of claim 21, wherein:
the PHY layer or MAC layer mobility signaling is transmitted from a source cell to move the UE to a target cell (see “Alternatively, the source DU 310 transmits to the UE 305 the L2 handover command or request, which the UE 305 acknowledges” [par 88]); and
the one or more processors are further configured to cause the UE to resume communications in the target cell without resetting one or more of a packet data convergence protocol (PDCP, a radio link control (RLC), or a media access control (MAC) protocol stack (see “Both maintaining an anchor at a CU and using inter-DU L2 mobility reduces or avoids overhead from resetting radio bearers, resetting security contexts, and unnecessary RRC handshakes during a handover from a source DU to a target DU and setting up UE access to the target DU” [par 83]).
Claim 32 recites subject matter similar to claim 21, but from the perspective of a network entity, and is therefore rejected on the same basis.
Claim 33 recites subject matter similar to claim 22 and is therefore rejected on the same basis.
Claim 34 recites subject matter similar to claim 23 and is therefore rejected on the same basis.
Claim 35 recites subject matter similar to claim 24 and is therefore rejected on the same basis.
Claim 40 recites subject matter similar to claim 21 and is therefore rejected on the same basis.
Claim(s) 25 and 28-30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sang et al. (US 2018/0279182) in view of Novlan et al. (US 2018/0324780), as applied to claim 21 above, and further in view of Zhang et al. (US 2022/0377622).
Regarding claim 25, Sang and Novlan in combination does not explicitly teach wherein the set of cells belong to a common timing advance group (TAG). In an analogous prior art reference, Zhang teaches a set of cells belong to a common timing advance group (TAG) (see “At 970, the handover is successful. System 200 stops the confirmation timer and applies a new Timing Advance Group (TAG) associated with the new cell” [par 85] which suggests Source gNB or Target gNB cells belong to a TAG). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Sang and Novlan to allow the set of cells to belong to a common timing advance group (TAG), as taught by Zhang, in order for the UE to apply a new TAG corresponding to the neighbor cell before transmitting an uplink signal.
Regarding claim 28, Sang teaches the one or more processors are further configured to cause the UE to report measurements associated with the one or more cells via at least one of: PHY layer signaling, wherein the measurements comprise PHY layer measurements; or MAC layer signaling (MAC CEs), wherein the measurements comprise MAC layer measurements (see “At step 340, the UE 305 transmits an L2 measurement report to the source DU 310. The L2 measurement report comprises CEs, UCI, or an RLC status” [par 86] and “As shown, at least steps 330-345, 365, and 370-390 implement L2 signaling to perform a handover” [par 90] which suggests that the L2 measurement report comprises MAC CEs which reads on the claimed “MAC layer measurements” and is transmitted via L2 signaling which reads on the claimed “PHY/ MAC layer signaling”). However, Sang does not explicitly teach that the measurements are beam measurements for the beams associated with the one or more cells. In analogous prior art reference, Zhang teaches a UE reports beam measurements associated with one or more cells (see “Source gNB 110 receives the measurements in reports. Based on the reports, Source gNB 110 can group TCI states (e.g., group beams) from a neighboring cell (e.g., a Target gNB cell) into a group. And, Source gNB 110 can group TCI states from the Source gNB cell (e.g., a serving gNB cell) into another group. Using the measurements and the groupings of TCI states, Source gNB 110 makes a handover decision 140 to change from one beam (e.g., TCI state) to another using L1 or L2 signaling” [par 28]). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Sang to allow the UE to report beam measurements associated with one or more cells, as taught by Zhang, in order to make a handover decision from a beam of the source cell to a beam of a target cell.
Regarding claim 29, Zhang teaches the UE of claim 28, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the UE to receive an indication of an active beam set (TCI states from source/neighboring cell) corresponding to the one or more cells in the set of cells, wherein the active beam set includes one or more beams of the beams associated with the one or more cells (see “Source gNB 110 receives the measurements in reports. Based on the reports, Source gNB 110 can group TCI states (e.g., group beams) from a neighboring cell (e.g., a Target gNB cell) into a group. And, Source gNB 110 can group TCI states from the Source gNB cell (e.g., a serving gNB cell) into another group30” [par28])
Regarding claim 30, Zhang teaches the UE of claim 29, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the UE to modify the active beam set (group of TCI states) (see “In some embodiments a gNB such as a Serving gNB (e.g., Source gNB 110) can configure N groups of TCI states for a UE (e.g., UE 105) by RRC signaling (e.g., see FIG. 3)” [par 69] which suggests Source gNB may use RRC signaling to configure a group of TCI states which reads on the claimed “modify the active beam set”).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 21-40 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Nam T Huynh whose telephone number is (571)272-5970. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-5pm.
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.
/NAM T HUYNH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2647
