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 .
This Office Action is in response to Applicant’s amendment filed on August 06, 2026 in which claims 1-20 are presented for examination; of which, claims 3, 9, 13, 16, 17 and 19 were amended.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on August 06, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Therefore, the rejection of claims 1-2, 4-18 and 20 remains (See rejections as detailed below); claims 3 and 19 remain 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.
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)(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.
Claim(s) 1 and 15-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by RAN2 CHAIRMAN (INTEL): "Chairman notes", 3GPP DRAFT; 3RD GENERATION PARTNERSHIP PROJECT (3GPP), MOBILE COMPETENCE CENTRE; 650, ROUTE DES LUCIOLES; -06921 SOPHIA-ANTIPOLIS CEDEX; FRANCE; vol. RAN WG2, no. Reno, USA; 20171127 -2017120 12 December 2017 (2017-12-02), XP051372942, Retrieved from the Internet:
Regarding claim 1, RAN2 CHAIRMAN (INTEL) discloses “A wireless communication method, comprising: communicating, by a first wireless communication node with a second wireless communication node to share one or more configuration containers” (see page 87 "Agreements 1: To support delta configuration for bearer type change between MCG (split) DRB and SCG (split) DRB and SN change, the "SCGConfigInfo" and 'SCGConfig' INMs should include both radioBearerConfig containers and nr-secondaryCellGroupConfig container. Also Handover case also needs to be checked and aligned with the previous agreement", page 3 "Ericsson think RAN2 could indicate that the container approach is feasible), “wherein the one or more configuration containers include various information associated with a terminal service” (see page 87 "Agreements 1" and Chapter 9.4.4 "Potential enhancements for handover for UAV"), and “wherein the one or more configuration containers correspond to different radio access technologies (RATs)” (see page 87 "Agreements 1", see 10.2.14 "Mobility – Inter-RAT).
Regarding claim 15, RAN2 CHAIRMAN (INTEL) discloses “A wireless communication method, comprising: communicating, by a second wireless communication node with a first wireless communication node to share one or more configuration containers” (see page 87 "Agreements 1: To support delta configuration for bearer type change between MCG (split) DRB and SCG (split) DRB and SN change, the "SCGConfigInfo" and 'SCGConfig' INMs should include both radioBearerConfig containers and nr-secondaryCellGroupConfig container. Also Handover case also needs to be checked and aligned with the previous agreement", page 3 "Ericsson think RAN2 could indicate that the container approach is feasible), “wherein the one or more configuration containers include various information associated with a terminal service” (see page 87 "Agreements 1" and Chapter 9.4.4 "Potential enhancements for handover for UAV"), and “wherein the one or more configuration containers correspond to different radio access technologies (RATs)” (see page 87 "Agreements 1", see 10.2.14 "Mobility – Inter-RAT).
Regarding claim 16, RAN2 CHAIRMAN (INTEL) discloses “A second wireless communication node, comprising: at least one processor configured to: communicating, via a transceiver with a first wireless communication node to share one or more configuration containers” (see page 87 "Agreements 1: To support delta configuration for bearer type change between MCG (split) DRB and SCG (split) DRB and SN change, the "SCGConfigInfo" and 'SCGConfig' INMs should include both radioBearerConfig containers and nr-secondaryCellGroupConfig container. Also Handover case also needs to be checked and aligned with the previous agreement", page 3 "Ericsson think RAN2 could indicate that the container approach is feasible), “wherein the one or more configuration containers include various information associated with a terminal service” (see page 87 "Agreements 1" and Chapter 9.4.4 "Potential enhancements for handover for UAV"), and “wherein the one or more configuration containers correspond to different radio access technologies (RATs)” (see page 87 "Agreements 1", see 10.2.14 "Mobility – Inter-RAT).
Regarding claim 17, RAN2 CHAIRMAN (INTEL) discloses “A first wireless communication node, comprising: at least one processor configured to: communicating, via a transceiver with a second wireless communication node to share one or more configuration containers” (see page 87 "Agreements 1: To support delta configuration for bearer type change between MCG (split) DRB and SCG (split) DRB and SN change, the "SCGConfigInfo" and 'SCGConfig' INMs should include both radioBearerConfig containers and nr-secondaryCellGroupConfig container. Also Handover case also needs to be checked and aligned with the previous agreement", page 3 "Ericsson think RAN2 could indicate that the container approach is feasible), “wherein the one or more configuration containers include various information associated with a terminal service” (see page 87 "Agreements 1" and Chapter 9.4.4 "Potential enhancements for handover for UAV"), and “wherein the one or more configuration containers correspond to different radio access technologies (RATs)” (see page 87 "Agreements 1", see 10.2.14 "Mobility – Inter-RAT).
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) 2, 4-14 and 18 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over RAN2 CHAIRMAN (INTEL) and KR 2021 0081052 A (LG ELECTRONICS INC [KR]) 1 July 2021 (2021-07-01).
As per claims 2, 4-14 and 18 and 20, these additional subject-matters are regarded as obvious implementation options for the person skilled in the art in light of RAN2 CHAIRMAN (INTEL) and KR 2021 0081052 A (LG ELECTRONICS INC [KR]) 1 July 2021 (2021-07-01). The relevant passages in RAN2 CHAIRMAN (INTEL) and KR 2021 0081052 A (LG ELECTRONICS INC [KR]) 1 July 2021 (2021-07-01) are the following:
Claims 2, 4-14, 18 and 20: see RAN2 CHAIRMAN (INTEL) pages 1-128 and KR 2021 0081052 A Pages 1-57. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have incorporated the teachings of KR 2021 0081052 A (LG ELECTRONICS INC [KR]) into the methods disclose in RAN2 CHAIRMAN (INTEL) because that would have enhanced the versatility of RAN2 CHAIRMAN (INTEL) by allowing it to effectively provide wireless communication while sharing configuration containers corresponding to different radio access technologies (RATs).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3 and 19 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: the prior art of record failed to show “wherein the various information includes at least one of: wireless communication device identification configured to identify a wireless communication device; wireless communication device service subscription information configured to notify the wireless communication node that the wireless communication device is qualified to use wireless communication device service; one or more report receiver's addresses to which wireless communication device's data is to be collected; wireless communication device location information configuring wireless communication device location measurement and reporting; height reporting information associated with the wireless communication device; flight path information associated with the wireless communication device; or measurement information including frequency-related information of the wireless communication device.” These claimed features would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Remarks
The Applicant argued that “the pending claims are patentable over RAN2 CHAIRMAN (INTEL) because the reference does not disclose each and every element of the claims” The Examiner disagrees with this line of argument because RAN2 CHAIRMAN (INTEL) provides that configuration containers can be used in handovers. Particularly, page 87 Agreement 1, RAN2 CHAIRMAN (INTEL) states "Agreements 1: To support delta configuration for bearer type change between MCG (split) ORB and SCG (split)
ORB and SN change, the 'SCGConfigInfo' and 'SCGConfig' INMs should include both
radioBearerConfig containers and nr-secondaryCellGroupConfig container => Handover case also needs to be checked and aligned with the previous agreement". "Ericsson think RAN2 could indicate that the container approach is feasible" under item "On QCls for EPC based ULLC." In view of these passages, RAN2 CHAIRMAN (INTEL) clearly
suggests using a configuration container to include various information
associated with a terminal service (e.g., QoS Class Identifiers (QCIs)) during the handover process.
The Applicant also argued that “the cited reference fails to disclose sharing any configuration containers that include information associated with a terminal service and correspond to different RATs”; and that RAN2 CHAIRMAN (INTEL) fails to actually describe sharing configuration containers between nodes where the one or more shared configuration containers correspond to different radio access technologies (RATs). The Examiner respectfully submits (see 10.2.14 "Mobility – Inter-RAT) provides a discussion on “Potential enhancements for handover” wherein, R2-1712517 Inter-RAT handover between LTE and NR (different radio access technologies (RATs with the possibility of sharing configuration containers during the handover process) Huawei, HiSilicon discussion
Rel-15 suggests LTE and NR (New Radio) (different radio access technologies (RATs) with the possibility of sharing configuration containers as suggested using a configuration container to include various information associated with a terminal service (e.g., QoS Class Identifiers (QCIs)) during the handover process.
NR and newRAT-Core (different radio access technologies (RATs) R2-1710566 with the possibility of sharing configuration containers as suggested using a configuration container to include various information associated with a terminal service (e.g., QoS Class Identifiers (QCIs)) during the handover process.
R2-1712518 Message content in inter-RAT handover Huawei, HiSilicon discussion
Rel-15
NR_newRAT-Core (different radio access technologies (RATs) R2-1710567
R2-1713761 NR inter-RAT mobility to CSG cell LG Electronics Inc. discussion
Rel-15 R2-1711647 with the possibility of sharing configuration containers as suggested using a configuration container to include various information associated with a terminal service (e.g., QoS Class Identifiers (QCIs)) during the handover process.
R2-1713920 Supporting Lossless Inter-RAT Handover Samsung discussion
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 FRANTZ COBY whose telephone number is (571)272-4017. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7AM-5:30PM.
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, Tonia Dollinger can be reached at (571) 272-4170. 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.
/FRANTZ COBY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2459
September 17, 2026
Prosecution Insights