CTNF 18/710,514 CTNF 85621 Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. DETAILED ACTION Response to Preliminary Amendment Applicant preliminary amendment filed on 5/15/2024 has been entered and fully considered. Claims 7, 12 and 13 are canceled, and claims 1-6 and 8-11 are currently pending. Priority This application is a 371 National Stage of International Patent Application PCT/KR2022/020538, filed on December 16, 2022, which claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Application No. 63/290,592 filed on December 16, 2021. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements (IDS) is submitted on 5/20/2024 and 12/30/2025 were filed in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. According, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner. Specification 07-29 AIA The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: The use of the term Wi-Fi, IEEE, 3GPP, ZigBee, Bluetooth, which is a trade name or a mark used in commerce, has been noted in this application. The term should be accompanied by the generic terminology; furthermore the term should be capitalized wherever it appears or, where appropriate, include a proper symbol indicating use in commerce such as ™, SM , or ® following the term. Although the use of trade names and marks used in commerce (i.e., trademarks, service marks, certification marks, and collective marks) are permissible in patent applications, the proprietary nature of the marks should be respected and every effort made to prevent their use in any manner which might adversely affect their validity as commercial marks . Appropriate correction is required. Claim Objections 07-29-01 AIA Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 6 recites “determined based on the type of ongoing traffic session”. Examiner suggest changing the limitation to “determined based on [[the]] a type of ongoing traffic session”. Further, a claim should end in punctuation period “.”, which is missing at end of claim 6 . Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. 07-15 AIA Claim s 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Kim et al. (US 20190274076 A1 and Kim hereinafter) . Regarding claim 8, Kim teaches a method for performing communication, the method performed by a User Equipment (UE) (Figures 9 and 16) and comprising: receiving measurement configuration from a source base station (BS) (Figure 9 and Paragraph 0203; the source eNB configures a UE measurement procedure according to the roaming and access restriction information. Figure 16 and Paragraphs 0339 and 0341; the source access node (e.g., a source base station, etc.) transmits a measurement configuration to the UE); transmitting measurement report to the source BS (Figure 9 and Paragraph 0204; MEASUREMENT REPORT is triggered and sent to the eNB. Figure 16 and Paragraphs 0382 and 0341; if the measurement report is triggered, the UE sends a measurement report to the source access node); transmitting UE's first preference information related to one or more neighboring BSs to the source BS (Paragraph 0011; the list of neighbor access nodes for supporting the tunneling model in use by the UE may include only a neighbor access node which may support the tunneling model in use by the UE. Each of the neighbor access nodes may support the tunneling model is indicated, or include both the neighbor access node which may support the tunneling model in use by the UE and the neighbor access node which cannot support the tunneling model in use by the UE, wherein the neighbor access node which may support the tunneling model in use by the UE is given a high priority. Paragraph 0341; the measurement report from UE includes information on capability of a neighbor access node for a tunneling model. Paragraph 0374; the list of neighbors access nodes for supporting the tunneling model used by the corresponding UE may include only the neighbor access node capable of supporting the tunneling model that the UE is using); and performing handover procedure with a target BS (Figure 9 and Paragraphs 0210 and 0212; the UE receives an instruction from the source eNB to perform HO, and receives an RRCConnectionReconfiguration message including mobilityControllnformation and subsequently performs synchronization with the target eNB. Paragraph 0214; the UE successfully accesses the target cell). Regarding claim 9, Kim teaches all of the limitations of claim 8, as described above. Further, Kim teaches performing measurement and/or prediction for one or more neighboring BSs (Paragraph 0369; quantity to be included in the measurement report by the UE include received signaling strength indicator (RSSI) and other related information); and determining the UE's first preference information based on the measurement and/or the prediction (Paragraphs 0392 and 0396; select, as the target access node, the access node having highest signal strength, among the access node which is able to support the tunneling model A and/or the access node which is able to support a tunnel of the tunneling model A)). Regarding claim 10, claim 10 recites similar features as claim 8, therefore is rejected for at least the same reason as discussed above regarding claim 8. Further, Kim teaches a User Equipment (UE) in a wireless communication system (Figure 9 and Paragraph 0053; a UE may be called a terminal, mobile equipment, or mobile station, and may be a portable device such as a notebook computer, mobile phone, smart phone, or vehicle-mounted device), the UE comprising: at least one transceiver (Figure 9 and Paragraph 0053; a mobile phone has a transceiver, and the UE is capable of communicate with source eNB and target eNB, therefore a transceiver is present); at least one processor (Figure 9 and Paragraph 0053; a mobile phone has a processor, and the UE is capable of communicate with source eNB and target eNB, therefore a processor is present); and at least one computer memory operably connectable to the at least one processor and storing instructions that, based on being executed by the at least one processor, perform operations (Figure 9 and Paragraph 0053; a mobile phone has a memory for storing instructions to be executed by processor, and the UE is capable of communicate with source eNB and target eNB, therefore a processor is present to communicate with instructions stored in memory in order to perform the steps shown in the figures) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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 of this title, 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. 07-23-aia AIA The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co. , 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim, as applied in the claims above, further in view of Mansour et al. “Enhanced Matching Game for Decoupled Uplink Downlink Context-Aware Handover,” April 2018, 18 pages, hereinafter D1 . Regarding claim 1, Kim teaches a method for performing communication, the method performed by a source Base Station (BS) (Figures 9 and 16) and comprising: transmitting measurement configuration to a User Equipment (UE) (Figure 9 and Paragraph 0203; the source eNB configures a UE measurement procedure according to the roaming and access restriction information. Figure 16 and Paragraphs 0339 and 0341; the source access node (e.g., a source base station, etc.) transmits a measurement configuration to the UE); receiving measurement report from the UE (Figure 9 and Paragraph 0204; MEASUREMENT REPORT is triggered and sent to the eNB. Figure 16 and Paragraphs 0382 and 0341; if the measurement report is triggered, the UE sends a measurement report to the source access node); receiving UE's first preference information related to one or more neighboring BSs from the UE (Paragraph 0011; the list of neighbor access nodes for supporting the tunneling model in use by the UE may include only a neighbor access node which may support the tunneling model in use by the UE. Each of the neighbor access nodes may support the tunneling model is indicated, or include both the neighbor access node which may support the tunneling model in use by the UE and the neighbor access node which cannot support the tunneling model in use by the UE, wherein the neighbor access node which may support the tunneling model in use by the UE is given a high priority. Paragraph 0341; the measurement report from UE includes information on capability of a neighbor access node for a tunneling model. Paragraph 0374; the list of neighbors access nodes for supporting the tunneling model used by the corresponding UE may include only the neighbor access node capable of supporting the tunneling model that the UE is using); receiving neighboring BS’s information from a neighboring BS (Figure 2 and Paragraph 0077; the X2 control plane interface (X2-CP) is defined between two neighboring eNBs to perform functions of the functions of context delivery between eNBs, control of user plane tunnel between a source eNB and a target eNB, delivery of handover-related messages, uplink load management, and so on. Paragraph 0393; the source access node may determine a target access node based on other information (e.g., load status information of the neighbor access node, etc.) received through a control plane from a node of the core network, as well as the signal strength); performing handover decision for the UE (Figure 9 and Paragraph 0205; source eNB determines to perform handover on the UE based on the MEASUREMENT REPORT and Radio Resource Management (RRM) information. Figure 16 and Paragraphs 0391, 0396 and 0398; source access node may select, as a target access node, an access node having highest signal strength, among the access nodes which can support the UE, based on the measurement report received from the UE and the capability information for the tunneling model of the neighbor access node included in the measurement report); transmitting handover request message to a target BS (Figure 9 and Paragraphs 0205 and 0206; source eNB determines to perform handover on the UE based on the MEASUREMENT REPORT and Radio Resource Management (RRM) information. The source eNB sends a HANDOVER REQUEST message to the target eNB that transfers the information required for the target side to prepare HO), wherein the target BS is determined based on both of the UE's first preference information (Figure 16 and Paragraphs 0391, 0396 and 0398; source access node may select, as a target access node, an access node having highest signal strength, among the access nodes which can support the UE, based on the measurement report received from the UE and the capability information for the tunneling model of the neighbor access node included in the measurement report) and the neighboring BS’s information (Paragraph 0393; the source access node may determine a target access node based on other information (e.g., load status information of the neighbor access node, etc.) received through a control plane from a node of the core network, as well as the signal strength). Kim does not explicitly teach neighboring BS's second preference information related to one or more UEs including the UE; and wherein the target BS is determined based on the neighboring BS’s second preference information. In an analogous art, D1 teaches neighboring BS's second preference information related to one or more UEs including the UE (Page 6 Table 2; preference relations of every UE and every BS. Page 8; UEs and BSs matching game is characterized by two arrangements of players: UEs N and BSs M, and the preference relations of every UE and BS; allowing UEs and BSs to give preference over one another, to rank the BSs in M and UEs in N, respectively); and wherein the target BS is determined based on the neighboring BS’s second preference information (Page 2; an uplink execution during the association step for the handover procedure to meet the service requirements by filtering the candidate BSs for the selective handover process. Page 8; UEs and BSs matching game is characterized by two arrangements of players: UEs N and BSs M, and the preference relations of every UE and BS; allowing UEs and BSs to give preference over one another, to rank the BSs in M and UEs in N, respectively). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Kim and D1 because it would maximize the gain of all components of a heterogeneous network while preserving a load balancing that guarantees a required quality of service (D1, Page 2). Regarding claim 2, the combination of Kim and D1 teaches all of the limitations of claim 1, as described above. Further, D1 teaches wherein the first preference information includes a list of the one or more neighboring BSs in the order preferred by the UE (Page 6 Table 2; preference relations of every UE and preference relations of every BS. Page 8; UEs and BSs matching game is characterized by two arrangements of players: UEs N and BSs M, and the preference relations of every UE and BS; allowing UEs and BSs to give preference over one another, to rank the BSs in M and UEs in N, respectively). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Kim and D1 because it would maximize the gain of all components of a heterogeneous network while preserving a load balancing that guarantees a required quality of service (D1, Page 2). Regarding claim 3, the combination of Kim and D1 teaches all of the limitations of claim 1, as described above. Further, D1 teaches wherein the second preference information includes a list of the one or more UEs in the order preferred by the neighboring BS (Page 6 Table 2; preference relations of every UE and preference relations of every BS. Page 8; UEs and BSs matching game is characterized by two arrangements of players: UEs N and BSs M, and the preference relations of every UE and BS; allowing UEs and BSs to give preference over one another, to rank the BSs in M and UEs in N, respectively). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Kim and D1 because it would maximize the gain of all components of a heterogeneous network while preserving a load balancing that guarantees a required quality of service (D1, Page 2). Regarding claim 4, the combination of Kim and D1 teaches all of the limitations of claim 1, as described above. Further, Kim teaches determining source BS's preference information based on at least one UEs (Paragraph 0011; the list of neighbor access nodes for supporting the tunneling model in use by the UE may include only a neighbor access node which may support the tunneling model in use by the UE. Paragraph 0013; an access node having highest signal strength, among access nodes which may support the tunneling model of the UE, may be determined as the target access node on the basis of the capability information regarding the tunneling models of the neighbor access nodes. Paragraph 0374; the list of neighbors access nodes for supporting the tunneling model used by the corresponding UE may include only the neighbor access node capable of supporting the tunneling model that the UE is using). Regarding claim 5, the combination of Kim and D1 teaches all of the limitations of claim 4, as described above. Further, D1 teaches wherein the target BS is determined based on the UE's first preference information, the source BS's preference information (Paragraph 0011; the list of neighbor access nodes for supporting the tunneling model in use by the UE may include only a neighbor access node which may support the tunneling model in use by the UE. Paragraph 0013; an access node having highest signal strength, among access nodes which may support the tunneling model of the UE, may be determined as the target access node on the basis of the capability information regarding the tunneling models of the neighbor access nodes. Paragraph 0374; the list of neighbors access nodes for supporting the tunneling model used by the corresponding UE may include only the neighbor access node capable of supporting the tunneling model that the UE is using). In addition, D1 teaches based on the neighboring BS's second preference information (Page 2; an uplink execution during the association step for the handover procedure to meet the service requirements by filtering the candidate BSs for the selective handover process. Page 8; UEs and BSs matching game is characterized by two arrangements of players: UEs N and BSs M, and the preference relations of every UE and BS; allowing UEs and BSs to give preference over one another, to rank the BSs in M and UEs in N, respectively). In an analogous art, D1 teaches receiving neighboring BS's second preference information related to one or more UEs including the UE from a neighboring BS; and wherein the target BS is determined based on the neighboring BS’s second preference information. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Kim and D1 because it would maximize the gain of all components of a heterogeneous network while preserving a load balancing that guarantees a required quality of service (D1, Page 2). Regarding claim 6, the combination of Kim and D1 teaches all of the limitations of claim 4, as described above. Further, Kim teaches wherein the source BS's preference information is determined based on the type of ongoing traffic session, the degree of mobility, and/or application-layer information (Paragraph 0013; an access node having highest signal strength, among access nodes which may support the tunneling model of the UE, may be determined as the target access node on the basis of the capability information regarding the tunneling models of the neighbor access nodes) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim, as applied in the claims above, further in view of Ramachandra et al. (US 20250254579 A1 and Ramachandra hereinafter) . Regarding claim 11, Kim teaches all of the limitations of claim 10, as described above. Further, Kim teaches wherein the UE is a driving device that communicates with at least one of a mobile terminal, a network, and an autonomous vehicle other than the UE (Figure 9 and Paragraph 0053; a UE may be called a terminal, mobile equipment, or mobile station, and may be a portable device such as a notebook computer, mobile phone, smart phone, or vehicle-mounted device. The UE communicates with source eNB and target eNB). Kim does not explicitly teach autonomous driving device. In an analogous art, Ramachandra teaches autonomous driving device (Figures 5A and 5B and Paragraph 0046; FIGS. 5A and 5B illustrate a flow chart that illustrates a method performed by a first network node to enable efficient inter-frequency load balancing or carrier aggregation setup or dual connectivity setup or multi-connectivity setup in accordance with one embodiment of the present disclosure. Paragraph 0159; a UE, when in the form of an IoT device, may be a device for use in one or more application domains, such as an autonomous vehicle). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Kim and Ramachandra because it would help the network know beforehand what cells are suitable handover candidates in any mobile communications system such as in autonomous driving (Ramachandra, Paragraphs 0003 and 0020). Pertinent Prior Art 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Chiu (US 20100067490 A1) discloses handing over a user equipment from serving base station to a target base station with the user equipment indicating a preferred base station. Jain et al. (US 20140031037 A1) discloses determining a uplink/downlink (ULDL) preference of a User Equipment (UE) in communication with a first evolved Node B (eNB) having a first ULDL configuration and a second eNB having a second ULDL configuration. The UE selects the first eNB based on the first ULDL configuration matching the ULDL preference . Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jing Gao whose telephone number is (571)270-7226. The examiner can normally be reached on 9am - 6pm M-F. 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 on (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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /Jing Gao/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2647 Application/Control Number: 18/710,514 Page 2 Art Unit: 2647 Application/Control Number: 18/710,514 Page 3 Art Unit: 2647 Application/Control Number: 18/710,514 Page 4 Art Unit: 2647 Application/Control Number: 18/710,514 Page 5 Art Unit: 2647 Application/Control Number: 18/710,514 Page 6 Art Unit: 2647 Application/Control Number: 18/710,514 Page 7 Art Unit: 2647 Application/Control Number: 18/710,514 Page 8 Art Unit: 2647 Application/Control Number: 18/710,514 Page 9 Art Unit: 2647 Application/Control Number: 18/710,514 Page 10 Art Unit: 2647 Application/Control Number: 18/710,514 Page 11 Art Unit: 2647 Application/Control Number: 18/710,514 Page 12 Art Unit: 2647 Application/Control Number: 18/710,514 Page 13 Art Unit: 2647
Prosecution Insights