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 .
Examiner has considered Amendment after Non-Final mailed 5/26/2026.
Claims 1-15, 17-20 are pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Gao et al. US 20220303883.
Regarding claim 1, A radio terminal (wireless device such as UE, Figure 3, element 310, a network node, Figure 1, element 104, can send a first message, element 106, to the UE, element 102, the first message can include UAC parameters and the UE can perform a barring check, element 108, using the UAC parameters and the UE send a second message based on the results of the barring check to the network node, para. 0064) comprising: at least one memory storing instructions; and at least one processor (processor, Figure 4, element 410) coupled to the at least one memory (memories, para. 0166) and configured to execute the instructions to: select a first cell to camp on in a cell selection procedure or a cell reselection procedure; and after camping on the first cell (unified access control (UAC) parameters generally can be broadcast per cell and each UE that camps on a certain cell can apply the UAC parameters broadcast from each cell to perform a barring check, para. 0061), perform an access barring check before sending an initial Radio Resource Control (RRC) message to enter an RRCCONNECTED mode from an RRCIDLE or RRC INACTIVE mode (the network can configure a UE with signaling such as RRCReconfiguration message including UAC parameters that will be used for UE in IDLE and/or INACTIVE mode, para. 0034-0036, 0096), the access barring check comprising determining whether access by the radio terminal to the firsta UE can decide to reselect to a neighbor cell/frequency, if the UAC parameters of the current cell showing that the cell is over loaded and there is lower possibility that the access attempts will be allowed, such as if the access of current camping cell is allowed but with a lower access possibility, but the access of a neighbor cell/frequency is allowed with a higher access possibility, then the UE can initiate the cell reselection based on the UAC parameters, para. 0087-0088).
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.
Claim(s) 2, 6-11, 15, 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gao in view of Teyeb et al. US 20240284272.
Regarding claim 2, The radio terminal according to claim 1,Gao does not expressly disclose wherein the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to compare a first metric that increases as the downlink signal quality of the serving cell improves with a second metric that increases as the downlink signal quality of the neighbor cell improves.
Teyeb discloses an acceptable cell is one for which measured cell attributes satisfy the cell selection criteria and the cell is not barred, if a cell's signal levels and/or quality are better than certain configured thresholds, the cell may be considered to satisfy the cell selection criteria, the WTRU may camp on that cell as the serving cell and commence the cell reselection procedure, where a WTRU in the RRC IDLE state may change the cell the WTRU is camping on if the WTRU detects a neighbor cell that has better radio conditions, if a cell's signal levels and/or quality are better than certain configured thresholds, the cell may be considered to satisfy a cell selection criteria, para. 0092-0093. Before the filing of the invention it would have been obvious to modify Gao to include Teyeb’s cell selection method. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so to find an acceptable level of quality in a serving cell or neighboring cell.
Regarding claim 6, The radio terminal according to claim 2, Gao does not expressly disclose wherein the first metric is related to a received signal power or received signal quality of a downlink signal of the first cell, and the second metric is related to a received signal power or received signal quality of a downlink signal of the neighbor cell.
Teyeb discloses specific comparison thresholds that the WTRU may be configured with via the broadcast information of the current serving cell, para. 0093, WTRU measures the serving cell and neighbors RSRP, RSRQ, or SINR and validate it with the threshold or offset defined in report configuration, para. 0118. Before the filing of the invention it would have been obvious to modify Gao to include Teyeb’s cell selection method. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so to find an acceptable level of quality in a serving cell or neighboring cell.
Regarding claim 7, The radio terminal according to claim 2, Gao does not disclose wherein each of the first metric and the second metric comprises or is derived from Reference Signal Received Power (RSRP), Reference Signal Received Quality (RSRQ), or signal-to- interference-plus-noise power ratio (SINR). Teyeb discloses specific comparison thresholds that the WTRU may be configured with via the broadcast information of the current serving cell, para. 0093, WTRU measures the serving cell and neighbors RSRP, RSRQ, or SINR and validate it with the threshold or offset defined in report configuration, para. 0118. Before the filing of the invention it would have been obvious to modify Gao to include Teyeb’s cell selection method. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so to find an acceptable level of quality in a serving cell or neighboring cell.
Regarding claim 8, The radio terminal according to claim 1, Gao does not expressly disclose wherein the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to determine that access to the first cell is allowed if a third metric, which increases as the downlink quality of the serving cell improves and decreases as the downlink quality of the neighbor cell improves, is greater than a threshold value. Teyeb discloses specific comparison thresholds that the WTRU may be configured with via the broadcast information of the current serving cell, para. 0093, WTRU measures the serving cell and neighbors RSRP, RSRQ, or SINR and validate it with the threshold or offset defined in report configuration, para. 0118. Before the filing of the invention it would have been obvious to modify Gao to include Teyeb’s cell selection method. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so to find an acceptable level of quality in a serving cell or neighboring cell.
Regarding claim 9, The radio terminal according to claim 8, Gao does not expressly disclose wherein the third metric comprises or is derived from Reference Signal Received Quality (RSRQ) or signal-to-interference-plus- noise power ratio (SINR) of a downlink signal of the first cell. Teyeb discloses specific comparison thresholds that the WTRU may be configured with via the broadcast information of the current serving cell, para. 0093, WTRU measures the serving cell and neighbors RSRP, RSRQ, or SINR and validate it with the threshold or offset defined in report configuration, para. 0118. Before the filing of the invention it would have been obvious to modify Gao to include Teyeb’s cell selection method. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so to find an acceptable level of quality in a serving cell or neighboring cell.
Regarding claim 10, The radio terminal according to claim 1, Gao does not expressly disclose wherein the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to provide a Radio Resource Control (RRC) layer function, wherein the RRC layer function is configured to perform the determination. Teyeb discloses a control plane protocol stack where RRC protocol is responsible for controlling a WTRU's connection to the network including one or more of the following functions such as broadcast of system information for enabling access to the cell by WTRUs, paging for indicating to the WTRU the arrival of downlink (DL) data; establishment, maintenance, and release of a radio connection, mobility functions such as handover, context transfer, cell selection, and re-selection; WTRU measurements and control of the reporting, para. 0089. Before the filing of the invention it would have been obvious to modify Gao to include Teyeb’s cell selection method. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so to find an acceptable level of quality in a serving cell or neighboring cell.
Regarding claim 11, The radio terminal according to claim 10, Gao does not expressly disclose wherein the RRC function is configured to perform the determination when an upper layer requests establishment or resumption of an RRC connection. Teyeb discloses WTRU may trigger ProSe WTRU-to-Network Relay reselection if signal strength of the current ProSe WTRU-to-Network Relay is below configured signal strength threshold the served WTRU receives a layer-2 link release message from the ProSe WTRU-to-Network Relay, para. 0118. Before the filing of the invention it would have been obvious to modify Gao to include Teyeb’s cell selection method. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so to find an acceptable level of quality in a serving cell or neighboring cell.
Claims 15, 17, 18 are rejected under the same rationale.
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) 3-5, 19-20 s/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gao in view of Teyeb in view of Wang et al. US 20240196376.
Regarding claim 3, The radio terminal according to claim 2, Gao and Teyeb do not explicitly disclose wherein the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to determine that access to the first cell is allowed if the second metric minus the first metric is less than a threshold value. Wang discloses optimising pre-defined thresholds e.g., TimeToTrigger, para. 0073. hysteresis parameter [dB], and cell reselection message includes parameters to ensure the RSRP difference between the serving and the neighbour cell is equal to the hysteresis timeToTrigger, para. 0079-0080. Before the filing of the invention it would have been obvious to modify Gao and Teyeb to include Wang’s RSRP difference between a serving and neighbour cell. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so to enhance mobility, para. 0073.
Regarding claim 4, The radio terminal according to claim 3, Gao does not expressly disclose wherein the threshold value is a positive value. Teyeb discloses the WTRU may be configured to not perform measurements on neighbor cells for cell re-selection as long as the current serving cell's radio signal level/quality are not below a certain threshold, para. 0093. Before the filing of the invention it would have been obvious to modify Gao to include Teyeb’s cell selection method. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so to find an acceptable level of quality in a serving cell or neighboring cell.
Regarding claim 5, The radio terminal according to claim 3, Gao does not expressly disclose wherein the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to receive via broadcast from the first cell an information element indicating the threshold value. Teyeb discloses a cell re-selection where a WTRU in the RRC IDLE state may change the cell the WTRU is camping on if the WTRU detects a neighbor cell that has better radio conditions, according to specific comparison thresholds that the WTRU may be configured with via the broadcast information of the current serving cell, the WTRU may be configured to not perform measurements on neighbor cells for cell re-selection as long as the current serving cell's radio signal level/quality are not below a certain threshold, para. 0093. Before the filing of the invention it would have been obvious to modify Gao to include Teyeb’s cell selection method. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so to find an acceptable level of quality in a serving cell or neighboring cell.
Claims 19-20 are rejected under the same rationale.
Claim(s) 12-13 s/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gao in view of Teyeb in view of Zhou et al. US 20230063082.
Regarding claim 12, The radio terminal according to claim 1, Gao and Teyeb do not explicitly disclose wherein the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to provide a Medium Access Control (MAC) layer function, wherein the MAC layer function is configured to perform the determination. Zhou discloses a wireless device receives from a base station one or more RRC messages comprising configuration parameters of a plurality of cells and the wireless device may communicate with at least one base station via the plurality of cells, the one or more messages, as a part of the configuration parameters, may comprise parameters of physical, MAC, RLC, PCDP, SDAP, RRC layers for configuring the wireless device, para. 0228. Before the filing of the invention it would have been obvious to modify Gao and Teyeb to include Zhou’s RRC configuration and MAC layer parameters. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so for control plane functionality including broadcast of system information, establishment, maintenance and release of an RRC connection between the UE and the RAN, mobility functions and the UE measurement reporting and control of the reporting, para. 0113.
Regarding claim 13, The radio terminal according to claim 12, Gao and Teyeb do explicitly disclose wherein the MAC layer function is configured to perform the determination when the MAC layer function is triggered to initiate a random access procedure. Zhou discloses mobility of the UE may be managed by the UE through a procedure known as cell reselection and the RRC state may transition from RRC idle to RRC connected through a connection establishment procedure 612, which may involve a random access procedure, para. 0116, a wireless device receives from a base station one or more RRC messages comprising configuration parameters of a plurality of cells and the wireless device may communicate with at least one base station via the plurality of cells, the one or more messages, as a part of the configuration parameters, may comprise parameters of physical, MAC, RLC, PCDP, SDAP, RRC layers for configuring the wireless device, para. 0228. Before the filing of the invention it would have been obvious to modify Gao and Teyeb’s cell reselection and cell barring determination to include Zhou’s RRC configuration, MAC layer parameters and random access procedure. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so for control plane functionality including broadcast of system information, establishment, maintenance and release of an RRC connection between the UE and the RAN, mobility functions and the UE measurement reporting and control of the reporting, para. 0113.
Regarding claim 14, The radio terminal according to claim 12, Gao and Teyeb do not explicitly disclose wherein the MAC layer function is configured to perform the determination when initiating a random access procedure. Zhou discloses mobility of the UE may be managed by the UE through a procedure known as cell reselection and the RRC state may transition from RRC idle to RRC connected through a connection establishment procedure 612, which may involve a random access procedure, para. 0116, a wireless device receives from a base station one or more RRC messages comprising configuration parameters of a plurality of cells and the wireless device may communicate with at least one base station via the plurality of cells, the one or more messages, as a part of the configuration parameters, may comprise parameters of physical, MAC, RLC, PCDP, SDAP, RRC layers for configuring the wireless device, para. 0228. Before the filing of the invention it would have been obvious to modify Gao and Teyeb’s cell reselection and cell barring determination to include Zhou’s RRC configuration, MAC layer parameters and random access procedure. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so for control plane functionality including broadcast of system information, establishment, maintenance and release of an RRC connection between the UE and the RAN, mobility functions and the UE measurement reporting and control of the reporting, para. 0113.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments 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
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. A selection of the prior art is described below:
Kim et al. US 20250317819 discloses on transition from an RRC connected state or RRC inactive state to an RRC idle state, a UE may camp on a cell as result of cell selection and the UE may attempt to find a suitable cell, cell reselection identifies the cell that the UE should camp on, the cell reselection is based on cell reselection criteria which involves measurements of the serving and neighbor cells, the UE in an RRC inactive or idle state performs access barring check for access attempt of the RRC connection establishment procedure or the RRC connection resume procedure.
Kim et al. US 20240147328 discloses based on initiating the RRC connection establishment procedure or the RRC connection resume procedure, the wireless device in an RRC inactive or idle state performs an access barring check for access attempt of the RRC connection establishment procedure or the RRC connection resume procedure, the wireless device may determine the access category and access identities for access attempt, a wireless device may determine the access attempt being barred based on metric thresholds.
Wallentin et al. US 20210266817 discloses after determining the access category for a particular access attempt, the UE reads access barring information that is part of a broadcasted system information block 1 and the UE then performs an access barring check for the access attempt, using the determined access category and the access barring information as input.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 MELANIE JAGANNATHAN whose telephone number is (571)272-3163. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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, Marcus Smith can be reached at 571-270-1096. 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.
/MELANIE JAGANNATHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2468
Prosecution Insights