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 § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because:
Claim 26 is directed to computer readable medium. Computer readable medium, as recited in claims and the disclosure could include transitory signals. In order for a computer readable medium claim to be statutory, the claim must be recited in a way to exclude transitory media. Examiner suggests using language similar to “non-transitory computer readable medium” instead of “computer readable medium”.
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.
Claim(s) 18, 21, 22, 25, 26, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CHEN (US 2020/0059395) in view of LEE et al (US 2022/0132518).
Regarding claim 18, 22, 26, CHEN discloses a method, in a wireless device, for collecting measurement results, the method comprising:
selecting, for inclusion in a report stored by the wireless device (CHEN: ¶49, measurement results (report) is delivered to the network by the UE (wireless device)), first radio quality measurement results based on a first type of at least two types of reference signals used by the wireless device for measuring radio quality (CHEN: ¶49, ¶59, ¶61 the measurement results include a first type (e.g. SSB types) used by the wireless device for measuring results), wherein said selecting comprises selecting radio quality measurement results reflecting the best radio quality, among available radio quality measurement results based on the first type of reference signal, for neighbor cells (CHEN: ¶39, ¶60-61, ¶49, the measurement results reported to the network include selecting qualified results reflecting the best SSBs (best radio quality) among the measured SSBs for the cells that are neighboring the UE and the primary cell/PCell);
including the selected first radio quality measurement results in the report (CHEN: ¶49, ¶61, measurement results are measured based on the measurement configurations received from at least the MN and includes the qualified SSB); and
including in the report, along with the selected first radio quality measurement results, one or more available radio quality measurement results based on a second type of the at least two types of reference signals (CHEN: ¶49, ¶59, ¶60, the measurement results are “cell-level” and include a second type (e.g. CSI-RS type) used by the wireless device for measuring results), wherein the selected first radio quality measurement results number less than a predetermined maximum number of radio quality measurement results (CHEN: ¶61, ¶48, the number of the best SSBs are also configured and is implemented by the UE when sending the report; the number is the maximum number of the measured SSBs included in it), and
wherein the method comprises further including, in the report, one or more additional radio quality measurement results based on the second type of reference signal (CHEN: ¶49, ¶59, the measurement results include a second type (e.g. CSI-RS type) used by the wireless device for measuring results), up to a number of additional radio quality measurement results such that the total number of the selected first radio quality measurement results and the number of additional radio quality measurement results equals the predetermined maximum number (CHEN: ¶61, the number of the best CSI-RSs are also configured and is implemented by the UE when sending the report; the number is the maximum number of the measured CSI-RSs included in it which is also capped by the amount of resources in the uplink for the report), wherein the additional radio quality measurement results comprise radio quality measurements reflecting the best radio quality among available radio measurements for neighbor cells based on the second type of reference signal and for cells not corresponding to the cell identifiers associated with the selected first radio quality measurement results (CHEN: ¶49, ¶59, the measurement results include a second type (e.g. CSI-RS type) used by the wireless device for measuring results; ¶60-61, the best radio quality (qualified) CSI-RSs measurement results are included in the report sent to the network).
CHEN remains silent regarding, however, LEE et al (US 2022/0132518) discloses that the additional radio measurement results are corresponding to the cell identifiers associated to the selected radio quality measurement results (LEE: ¶220, the additional radio measurement results (CSI-RS measurements) are corresponding to the cell associated with the best SSB index; ¶95, ¶220, this is corresponding to the cell identifier of the SSB which is the best SSB).
A person of ordinary skill in the art working with the invention of CHEN would have been motivated to use the teachings of LEE as it provides a way to measure a broader range of reference signals for the cells with qualified SSBs to verify its validity and reliability as a measurement. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify invention of CHEN with teachings of LEE in order to improve reliability of the measurements.
Regarding claim 21, 25, CHEN modified by LEE discloses method of claim 18, wherein each of one or more of the radio quality measurement results is associated with one or more additional measurement results of a different measured quantity, according to the first measurement type (CHEN: ¶49, ¶59, the measurement results include a first type (e.g. SSB types) used by the wireless device for measuring results; LEE: ¶220, the additional radio measurement results (CSI-RS measurements) are corresponding to the cell associated with the best SSB index).
Claim(s) 19-20, 23-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CHEN modified by LEE as applied to claim 18/22 above, further in view of MOCHIZUKI et al (US 2015/0036658)
Regarding claim 19, 23, CHEN modified by LEE discloses the method of claim 18, as above. CHEN modified by LEE remains silent regarding, however, MOCHIZUKI et al (US 2015/0036658) wherein the first radio quality measurement results are ordered in the report so as to be grouped according to the measured quantity for each radio quality measurement result and ordered with the best radio quality measurement for each measured quantity appearing first, for the corresponding measured quantity (MOCHIZUKI: ¶414, ¶416, Fig. 23, results are ranked based on the CSI derived and group according to the measured quantity for each radio quality measurement and with the best at the top).
A person of ordinary skill in the art working with the invention of CHEN modified by LEE would have been motivated to use the teachings of MOCHIZUKI as it provides a way to improve selection by default position in a list for the best cell. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify invention of CHEN modified by LEE with teachings of MOCHIZUKI in order to improve simplicity of implementing the selection process at the network.
Regarding claim 20, 24, CHEN modified by LEE discloses method of claim 18, CHEN modified by LEE remains silent regarding, however, MOCHIZUKI et al (US 2015/0036658) wherein each of the first radio quality measurement results is associated, in the report, with respective cell identifiers corresponding to the selected first radio quality measurement results (MOCHIZUKI: ¶414, ¶416, Fig. 23, the cell IDs are used to indicate associated measurement results).
A person of ordinary skill in the art working with the invention of CHEN modified by LEE would have been motivated to use the teachings of MOCHIZUKI as it provides a way to improve selection by default position in a list for the best cell. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify invention of CHEN modified by LEE with teachings of MOCHIZUKI in order to improve simplicity of implementing the selection process at the network.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Document U discloses that Radio link failure (RLF) means the radio link between the eNB and the UE is lost. Once the eNB has detected the loss of the radio link and the radio link failure condition is met, the eNB requests the MME to release the UE context in the eNB, by sending the UE context release request message, with the cause “Release due to E‐UTRAN generated reason,” to the MME. Finally the UE switches to idle state, and the call is dropprd. Once the UE re‐enter the coverage area it may initiate the UE triggered connection re‐activation at any point in time. Drop call measurements can be based on drive tests or statistics. The main reasons for poor retainability include but are not limited to missing neighbor relations, poor radio environment, badly tuned handover parameters, admission reject (due to lack of licenses). For UL, the radio link supervision is performed in the eNB, for DL, it is carried out by similar supervision function located in the UE.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OMER S MIAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7524. The examiner can normally be reached M,T,W,Th: 10a-7p, Fri, 9a-12p.
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, Huy D Vu can be reached at 571-272-3155. 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.
OMER S. MIAN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2461
/OMER S MIAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2461
Prosecution Insights