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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the application filed on 07/05/2024.
Claims 23-44 are currently pending.
Claims 23-25, 27-29, 32-36, 38-40 and 43-44 are rejected.
Claims 26, 30-31, 37 and 41-42 are objected to
Claims 23 and 34 are independent claims.
- Claim Objection
6. Claim 33 is objected to because of the following informalities: “cto” in line 3 should be “to”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
7. 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 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.
8. 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.
9. 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 pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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.
10. Claims 23-25, 27-29, 32-36, 38-40 and 43-44 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mengjie ZHANG et al. (US 2023/0078307b A1), hereinafter ZHANG, in view of Angelo Centonza et al. (US 2014/0206361 A1), hereinafter Centonza.
For claim 23, ZHANG teaches a method by a target network node associated with a Conditional Handover (CHO) or Conditional Primary Secondary Cell Group Cell (PSCeII) change of a user equipment (UE) ZHANG, Fig. 3 and paragraphs 91-93 teach CHO. See also paragraphs 115-135.), the method comprising:
receiving, from a source network node, a first message requesting the CHO or Conditional PSCeII change of the UE, the first message comprising user equipment history information (UHI) (ZHANG, Fig. 3 step S130 and paragraph 92 teach the source cell 302A sends a CHO request (labeled in FIG. 3 as, “S130. CHO request”) to the target cell 302B. See also paragraphs 115-135 for UHI.);
receiving, from the UE, a second message indicating a completion of applying a Radio Resource Control (RRC) reconfiguration (ZHANG, Fig. 3 step S190 and paragraph 93 teach the UE 304 sends a message (labeled in FIG. 3 as, “RRCReconfigurationComplete”) to the target cell 302B. See also paragraphs 115-135.).
Centonza further teaches updating the UHI based on an amount of time between receiving the first message comprising the UHI and receiving the second message indicating the completion of applying the RRC reconfiguration (Centonza, Table 5 and paragraphs 136-140 teach a timestamp field is added in the user equipment history information IE that tells exactly when the user equipment was handed over to a cell. So for the same example as above, the user equipment history information will be like the entries shown in Table 5. Thus by looking at the timestamp and the duration, cell C can find out that the user equipment was connected to both cells during the time duration t3-t2. In other words, the t2 is the time of receiving the first message comprising the UHI and the t3 is the time of receiving the second message indicating the completion of applying the RRC reconfiguration. See also Fig. 15 and paragraphs 132-134.).
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 method taught in ZHANG with updating the UHI based on an amount of time between receiving the first message comprising the UHI and receiving the second message indicating the completion of applying the RRC reconfiguration taught in Centonza for optimizations such as ping pong handover detection, and estimation of user equipment mobility state which may be further used to scale speed dependent handover triggering parameters such as TTT [Centonza: paragraph 133].
For claim 24, ZHANG and Centonza further teach the method of claim 23, wherein the UHI comprises a parameter indicating an amount of time that the UE stayed in a cell associated with the source network node before the source network node sent the first message to the target network node (Centonza, Table 6 and paragraphs 136-140 teach TABLE-US-00007 TABLE 6 User equipment history, selective handovers indicated explicitly. Cell Cell Handover Time UE stayed ID Type type in a cell A Type 1 Selective t2-t1. In other words, the t2-t1 is the amount of time that the UE stayed in a cell associated with the source network node before the source network node sent the first message to the target network node. See also Fig. 15 and paragraphs 132-134.).
For claim 25, ZHANG and Centonza further teach the method of claim 24, wherein the cell associated with the source network node comprises a Primary Cell (PCell) or a PSCeII (ZHANG, Fig. 4 and paragraphs 95-97 teach to improve mobility reliability (i.e., mobility robust) in case of SN change or SN addition, a Conditional PSCell Addition and PSCell Change (CPAC) may also be promoted. Similar to CHO, CPAC is defined as having a configured CPAC execution condition that determines when and/or whether the corresponding PSCell addition/change command is executed.).
For claim 27, ZHANG and Centonza further teach the method of claim 23, wherein updating the UHI comprises updating a PCell entry or PSCeII entry in the UHI, the PCell entry or the PSCeII entry being associated with a cell of the source network node (ZHANG, Fig. 4 and paragraph 97 teach o improve mobility reliability (i.e., mobility robust) in case of SN change or SN addition, a Conditional PSCell Addition and PSCell Change (CPAC) may also be promoted. Similar to CHO, CPAC is defined as having a configured CPAC execution condition that determines when and/or whether the corresponding PSCell addition/change command is executed. See also paragraphs 103-105.).
For claim 28, ZHANG and Centonza further teach the method of claim 23, wherein the first message comprises a handover request message (ZHANG, Fig. 3 step S130 and paragraph 92 teach the source cell 302A sends a CHO request (labeled in FIG. 3 as, “S130. CHO request”) to the target cell 302B. See also paragraphs 115-135.).
For claim 29, ZHANG and Centonza further teach the method of claim 23, wherein the second message comprises a RRCReconfiguration message (ZHANG, Fig. 3 step S190 and paragraph 93 teach the UE 304 sends a message (labeled in FIG. 3 as, “RRCReconfigurationComplete”) to the target cell 302B. See also paragraphs 115-135.).
For claim 32, ZHANG and Centonza further teach the method of claim 23, wherein the UHI comprises a plurality of parameters, each parameter associated with an amount of time the UE stayed in a respective one of a plurality of cells (Centonza, Table 6 and paragraphs 136-140 teach TABLE-US-00007 TABLE 6 User equipment history, selective handovers indicated explicitly. Cell Cell Handover Time UE stayed ID Type type in a cell A Type 1 Selective t2-t1 B Type 2 Selective t3-t2 A Type 1 Selective t4-t3. See also Fig. 15 and paragraphs 132-134.).
For claim 33, ZHANG and Centonza further teach the method of claim 23, further comprising transmitting, to the source network node, information indicating a successful completion of the CHO or the conditional PSCeII change from the source network node cto the target network node, the information indicating that the UE successfully accessed a target cell associated with the target network node (ZHANG, Fig. 3 step S190 and paragraph 93 teach the UE 304 sends a message (labeled in FIG. 3 as, “RRCReconfigurationComplete”) to the target cell 302B. See also paragraphs 115-135.).
For claim 34, ZHANG teaches a target network node associated with a Conditional Handover (CHO) or Conditional Primary Secondary Cell Group Cell (PSCeII) change of a user equipment (UE) (ZHANG, Fig. 3 and paragraphs 91-93 teach CHO. See also paragraphs 115-135.), the target network node comprising processing circuitry the target network node comprising processing circuitry configured to:
(ZHANG, Fig. 2 item 214.) configured to:
receive, from a source network node, a first message requesting the CHO or Conditional PSCeII change of the UE, the first message comprising user equipment history information (UHI) (ZHANG, Fig. 3 step S130 and paragraph 92 teach the source cell 302A sends a CHO request (labeled in FIG. 3 as, “S130. CHO request”) to the target cell 302B. See also paragraphs 115-135 for UHI.);
receive, from the UE, a second message indicating a completion of applying a Radio Resource Control (RRC) reconfiguration (ZHANG, Fig. 3 step S190 and paragraph 93 teach the UE 304 sends a message (labeled in FIG. 3 as, “RRCReconfigurationComplete”) to the target cell 302B. See also paragraphs 115-135.).
Centonza further teaches updating the UHI based on an amount of time between receiving the first message comprising the UHI and receiving the second message indicating the completion of applying the RRC reconfiguration (Centonza, Table 5 and paragraphs 136-140 teach a timestamp field is added in the user equipment history information IE that tells exactly when the user equipment was handed over to a cell. So for the same example as above, the user equipment history information will be like the entries shown in Table 5. Thus by looking at the timestamp and the duration, cell C can find out that the user equipment was connected to both cells during the time duration t3-t2. In other words, the t2 is the time of receiving the first message comprising the UHI and the t3 is the time of receiving the second message indicating the completion of applying the RRC reconfiguration. See also Fig. 15 and paragraphs 132-134.).
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 method taught in ZHANG with updating the UHI based on an amount of time between receiving the first message comprising the UHI and receiving the second message indicating the completion of applying the RRC reconfiguration taught in Centonza for optimizations such as ping pong handover detection, and estimation of user equipment mobility state which may be further used to scale speed dependent handover triggering parameters such as TTT [Centonza: paragraph 133].
For claim 35, ZHANG and Centonza further teach the target network node of claim 34, the UHI comprises a parameter indicating an amount of time that the UE stayed in a cell associated with the source network node before the source network node sent the first message to the target network node (Centonza, Table 6 and paragraphs 136-140 teach TABLE-US-00007 TABLE 6 User equipment history, selective handovers indicated explicitly. Cell Cell Handover Time UE stayed ID Type type in a cell A Type 1 Selective t2-t1. In other words, the t2-t1 is the amount of time that the UE stayed in a cell associated with the source network node before the source network node sent the first message to the target network node. See also Fig. 15 and paragraphs 132-134.).
For claim 36, ZHANG and Centonza further teach the target network node of claim 35, wherein the cell associated with the source network node comprises a Primary Cell (PCell) or a PSCeII (ZHANG, Fig. 4 and paragraphs 95-97 teach to improve mobility reliability (i.e., mobility robust) in case of SN change or SN addition, a Conditional PSCell Addition and PSCell Change (CPAC) may also be promoted. Similar to CHO, CPAC is defined as having a configured CPAC execution condition that determines when and/or whether the corresponding PSCell addition/change command is executed.).
For claim 38, ZHANG and Centonza further teach the target network node of claim 34, wherein, when updating the UHI, the processing circuitry is configured to update a PCell entry or PSCeII entry in the UHI, the PCell entry or the PSCeII entry being associated with a cell of the source network node (ZHANG, Fig. 4 and paragraph 97 teach o improve mobility reliability (i.e., mobility robust) in case of SN change or SN addition, a Conditional PSCell Addition and PSCell Change (CPAC) may also be promoted. Similar to CHO, CPAC is defined as having a configured CPAC execution condition that determines when and/or whether the corresponding PSCell addition/change command is executed. See also paragraphs 103-105.).
For claim 39, ZHANG and Centonza further teach the target network node of claim 34, wherein the first message comprises a handover request message (ZHANG, Fig. 3 step S130 and paragraph 92 teach the source cell 302A sends a CHO request (labeled in FIG. 3 as, “S130. CHO request”) to the target cell 302B. See also paragraphs 115-135.).
For claim 40, ZHANG and Centonza further teach the target network node of claim 34, wherein the second message comprises a RRCReconfiguration message (ZHANG, Fig. 3 step S190 and paragraph 93 teach the UE 304 sends a message (labeled in FIG. 3 as, “RRCReconfigurationComplete”) to the target cell 302B. See also paragraphs 115-135.).
For claim 43, ZHANG and Centonza further teach the target network node of claim 34, wherein the UHI comprises a plurality of parameters, each parameter associated with an amount of time the UE stayed in a respective one of a plurality of cells (Centonza, Table 6 and paragraphs 136-140 teach TABLE-US-00007 TABLE 6 User equipment history, selective handovers indicated explicitly. Cell Cell Handover Time UE stayed ID Type type in a cell A Type 1 Selective t2-t1 B Type 2 Selective t3-t2 A Type 1 Selective t4-t3. See also Fig. 15 and paragraphs 132-134.).
For claim 44, ZHANG and Centonza further teach the method of claim 23, further comprising transmitting, to the source network node, information indicating a successful completion of the CHO or the conditional PSCeII change from the source network node cto the target network node, the information indicating that the UE successfully accessed a target cell associated with the target network node (ZHANG, Fig. 3 step S190 and paragraph 93 teach the UE 304 sends a message (labeled in FIG. 3 as, “RRCReconfigurationComplete”) to the target cell 302B. See also paragraphs 115-135.).
Allowable Subject Matter
11. Claims 26, 30-31, 37 and 41-42 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
12. Claims 26, 30-31, 37 and 41-42 are considered allowable because the prior art does not teach limitations including:
"transmitting a third message to a candidate target network node during a handover of the UE from the target network node to the candidate target network node, the third message comprising: the updated UHI associated with the source network node indicating an updated amount of time that the UE stayed in the cell associated with the source network node; and UHI associated with the target network node indicating an amount of time that the UE stayed in a cell associated with the target network node" in addition to other claim limitations as recited in dependent claims 26 and 37.
"starting a timer in response to receiving the first message; and stopping the timer in response to receiving the second message" in addition to other claim limitations as recited in dependent claims 30-31 and 41-42.
Conclusion
13. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILL W LIN whose telephone number is (571)272-8749. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:00.
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, Charles Jiang can be reached at 571-270-7191. 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.
/WILL W LIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2412
Prosecution Insights