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.
Claims 1 – 7 and 14 – 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without “significantly more”. Claims 1 – 7 and 14 - 20 are directed to Abstract Idea such as an idea standing alone such as an instantiated concept, pan or scheme, as well as a mental process (thinking) that can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper for example, “receiving a configuration indicating at least one candidate cell; storing a first Timing Advance (TA) and clearing or discarding the first TA in response to at least one of expiration of a timer associated with the first TA;…….the at least one candidate cell is full”.
The method claims 1 – 7 and 14 – 20 recites limitation, “receiving a configuration indicating at least one candidate cell; storing a first Timing Advance (TA) and clearing or discarding the first TA in response to at least one of expiration of a timer associated with the first TA;…….the at least one candidate cell is full”. Since the claim is directed to a process and a machine, which is one of the statutory categories of the invention (Step 1: YES).
The claim is then analyzed to determine whether it is directed to any judicial exception. The claim recites - receiving a configuration indicating at least one candidate cell - i. e., collecting information, and sending information step- i.e., storing a first Timing Advance (TA) and clearing or discarding the first TA in response to at least one of expiration of a timer associated with the first TA;…….the at least one candidate cell is full - i. e., outputting certain results of the obtaining and analysis steps are recited at a high level of generality such that they could practically be performed in the human mind, Electric Power Group v. Alstom, S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1353-54, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1741-42 (Fed. Cir. 2016) is no more than an abstract idea i.e., mental process of "collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis," etc. (Step 2A: Prong One Abstract Idea=Yes).
The claim is then analyzed if it requires an additional elements or a combination of additional elements in the claim to apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception, such that the claim is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception – i.e., limitation that are indicative of integration into a practical application: improving to the functioning of a computer or to any other technology or technical field. In the current claims, there is no additional elements that would integrate the abstract idea into a practical application (Step 2A: Prong Two Abstract Idea=Yes).
Next the claim as a whole is analyzed to determine if there are additional limitation recited in the claim such that the claim amount to significantly more than an abstract idea. The claim requires the additional limitation of a computer with the central processing unit, memory, a printer, an input and output terminal and a program. These generic computer components are claimed to perform the basic functions of storing, retrieving and processing data through the program that enables. In the current scenario, there are no additional elements that would amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, the claim does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself (Step 2B: No). Accordingly, the claim is not patent eligible.
The dependent claims 2 – 7 and 15 - 20 does not carry any positive limitation or step that recite within the scope of the claim and does not carry patentable weight they are also rejected for the same reasons as independent claims.
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.
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.
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.
Claims 1 – 7 and 14 – 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Xu US PGPub: US 2023/0209423 A1 Jun. 29, 2023 and in view of
Aiba US PGPub: US 2018/0242326 A1 Aug. 23, 2018.
Regarding claims 1, 14, Xu discloses,
a method of a User Equipment UE and a User Equipment UE (the infrastructure equipment 1100 may be implemented as a base station, radio head, RAN node, AN, application server, and/or any other element/device discussed herein. In other examples, the infrastructure equipment 1100 could be implemented in or by a UE – Fig. 11, paragraph 0098. A platform 1200 in accordance with various embodiments. In embodiments, the computer platform 1200 may be suitable for use as UEs, application servers, and/or any other element/device discussed herein – Fig. 12, paragraph 0107), comprising: a memory (Figs. 11/1108, 12/1202 and 1208); and a processor (combined Figs. 11/1104 and 1114, 12/1204) operatively coupled to the memory (Layer 2 handling during a cell change procedure includes decoding an RRC reconfiguration message received from a first cell. A cell change message received from the first cell is decoded. The cell change message indicates that a cell change from the first cell to the second cell is to be performed. The stored L1 configuration corresponding to the second cell is applied for data transmission and reception associated with the second cell. A cell change to the second cell is initiated – ABSTRACT, paragraphs 0032, 0033, 0057. Performing timing advance timer TATimer maintenance per cell. TATimer maintenance may include maintaining a timing advance TA value and a TATimer corresponding to the first cell prior to changing cells, and resetting the TA value and restarting the TATimer with respect to the second cell after changing cells. The UE may start the TATimer upon receiving a TA value corresponding to the second cell or start the TATimer when transmitting a first UL to the second cell – Fig. 8, paragraph 0063), comprising and, wherein the processor is configured to execute program code to:
receiving a configuration indicating at least one candidate cell including a first candidate cell (the UE receives the target cell’s TA via the source cell or derives the target TA based on the source TA and a DL timing difference – paragraphs 0033. The UE decodes a radio resource control RRC reconfiguration message received from a first cell – Figs. 8/802, 9/902, paragraphs 0057, 0069);
storing a first Timing Advance TA associated with the first candidate cell (the UE may maintain a TATimer and a TA value based on the serving/source cell. Before a cell change, the UE may maintain the TA in the serving/source cell – paragraph 0032. In response to decoding the RRC reconfiguration message, stores the L1 configuration corresponding to the second cell – Figs. 8/804, 9/904, paragraphs 0059, 0070); and
clearing (resetting the TA value and restarting the TATimer with respect to the second cell after changing cells – paragraph 0063) at least one of:
expiry of a timer associated with the first TA;
performing Radio Resource Control (RRC) re-establishment;
the UE entering RRC_IDLE state or RRC_INACTIVE state;
a serving cell change (while after the cell change, the UE may reset the TA value and restart the TATimer in the target cell – paragraph 0032. In response to decoding the cell change message, applies the stored L1 configuration corresponding to the second cell for data transmission and reception associated with the second cell – Figs. 8/808, 9/908, paragraphs 0060, 0072); and/or
the UE storing a second TA when a list or a set of stored TAs for the at least one candidate cell is full,
Though Xu discloses, resetting the TA value and restarting the TATimer with respect to the second cell after changing cells – paragraph 0063 – i. e., “clearing”, but, just to show the word “clearing” the examiner had introduced secondary reference.
Aiba teaches, the terminal device 1 may clear the configured grant based on the third parameter i.e., parameter for indicating the Number of empty transmissions before release, configured by the base station device 3. Here, for the terminal device 1 to clear the configured grant, the terminal needs to store the parameter (paragraphs 0174, 0178, 0255).
The cell groups and/or TAGs for which the third timer is considered as expired may be prioritized. For example, as described above, a prioritization may be made such as the PTAG of the master cell group>the STAG of the master cell group>the PSTAG of the secondary cell group>the STAG of the secondary cell group. Here, how the cell groups and/or TAGs are prioritized may be defined in advance by specifications or the like (paragraph 0321).
In a case that the verification is succeeded, the terminal device 1 may consider (recognize) that the received DCI format indicates a valid semi-persistent activation or a valid semi-persistent release (paragraph 0124).
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 Layer 2 handling during a cell change procedure includes decoding an RRC reconfiguration message received from a first cell of Xu (Xu, ABSTRACT, Figs. 8, 9, paragraphs 0032, 0033, 0057, 0063) wherein the system of Xu, would have incorporated the terminal device 1 may clear the configured grant based on the third parameter i.e., parameter for indicating the Number of empty transmissions before release, configured by the base station device 3 of Aiba (Aiba, paragraphs 0124, 0174, 0178, 0255, 0321) to provide a terminal device, a base station device, a communication method, and an integrated circuit, which enable efficient transmission of uplink data (Aiba, paragraph 0009, 0011).
Regarding claims 2, 15, Xu discloses,
the method of claim 1, wherein the UE obtains the first TA by receiving a message (the UE receives the target cell’s TA via the source cell or derives the target TA based on the source TA and a DL timing difference – paragraphs 0033. The UE decodes a radio resource control RRC reconfiguration message received from a first cell – Figs. 8/802, 9/902, paragraphs 0057, 0069) or
signaling indicating the first TA (the UE receives the target cell’s TA via the source cell or derives the target TA based on the source TA and a DL timing difference – paragraphs 0033. The UE decodes a radio resource control RRC reconfiguration message received from a first cell – Figs. 8/802, 9/902, paragraphs 0057, 0069), or
by UE based TA measurement (the UE receives the target cell’s TA via the source cell or derives the target TA based on the source TA and a DL timing difference – paragraphs 0033. The UE decodes a radio resource control RRC reconfiguration message received from a first cell – Figs. 8/802, 9/902, paragraphs 0057, 0069).
Regarding claims 3, 16, Xu discloses,
the method of claim 1, wherein the UE starts
Regarding claims 4, 17, Xu discloses,
the method of claim 1, wherein the serving cell change is performed in response to a reconfiguration with sync (uplink UL and downlink DL sync in target cell – paragraphs 0018 - 0020) or a L1/L2 Triggered Mobility LTM procedure (wireless communication systems, including Layer 2 operation for Layer 1/Layer 2-centric inter-cell mobility – paragraphs 0001, 0021, 0022).
Regarding claims 5, 18, Xu discloses all the claimed features,
but, does not disclose, the method of claim 1, wherein the UE stores a third TA associated with a source cell when initiating an LTM procedure to a second candidate cell.
Aiba teaches, the terminal device 1 may clear the configured grant based on the third parameter i.e., parameter for indicating the Number of empty transmissions before release, configured by the base station device 3. Here, for the terminal device 1 to clear the configured grant, the terminal needs to store the parameter (paragraphs 0174, 0178, 0255).
The cell groups and/or TAGs for which the third timer is considered as expired may be prioritized. For example, as described above, a prioritization may be made such as the PTAG of the master cell group>the STAG of the master cell group>the PSTAG of the secondary cell group>the STAG of the secondary cell group. Here, how the cell groups and/or TAGs are prioritized may be defined in advance by specifications or the like (paragraph 0321).
In a case that the verification is succeeded, the terminal device 1 may consider (recognize) that the received DCI format indicates a valid semi-persistent activation or a valid semi-persistent release (paragraph 0124).
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 Layer 2 handling during a cell change procedure includes decoding an RRC reconfiguration message received from a first cell of Xu (Xu, ABSTRACT, Figs. 8, 9, paragraphs 0032, 0033, 0057, 0063) wherein the system of Xu, would have incorporated the terminal device 1 may clear the configured grant based on the third parameter i.e., parameter for indicating the Number of empty transmissions before release, configured by the base station device 3 of Aiba (Aiba, paragraphs 0124, 0174, 0178, 0255, 0321) to provide a terminal device, a base station device, a communication method, and an integrated circuit, which enable efficient transmission of uplink data (Aiba, paragraph 0009, 0011).
Regarding claims 6, 19, Xu discloses all the claimed features,
but, does not disclose, the method of claim 1, wherein the UE clears or discards the first TA based on an Identity ID associated with the first TA,
Aiba teaches, the terminal device 1 may clear the configured grant based on the third parameter i.e., parameter for indicating the Number of empty transmissions before release, configured by the base station device 3. Here, for the terminal device 1 to clear the configured grant, the terminal needs to store the parameter (paragraphs 0174, 0178, 0255).
The cell groups and/or TAGs for which the third timer is considered as expired may be prioritized. For example, as described above, a prioritization may be made such as the PTAG of the master cell group>the STAG of the master cell group>the PSTAG of the secondary cell group>the STAG of the secondary cell group. Here, how the cell groups and/or TAGs are prioritized may be defined in advance by specifications or the like (paragraph 0321).
In a case that the verification is succeeded, the terminal device 1 may consider (recognize) that the received DCI format indicates a valid semi-persistent activation or a valid semi-persistent release (paragraph 0124).
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 Layer 2 handling during a cell change procedure includes decoding an RRC reconfiguration message received from a first cell of Xu (Xu, ABSTRACT, Figs. 8, 9, paragraphs 0032, 0033, 0057, 0063) wherein the system of Xu, would have incorporated the terminal device 1 may clear the configured grant based on the third parameter i.e., parameter for indicating the Number of empty transmissions before release, configured by the base station device 3 of Aiba (Aiba, paragraphs 0124, 0174, 0178, 0255, 0321) to provide a terminal device, a base station device, a communication method, and an integrated circuit, which enable efficient transmission of uplink data (Aiba, paragraph 0009, 0011).
Regarding claims 7, 20, Xu discloses all the claimed features,
but, does not disclose, the method of claim 1, wherein the UE clears or discards the first TA based on:
“the first TA is invalid”.
Aiba teaches, the terminal device 1 may clear the configured grant based on the third parameter i.e., parameter for indicating the Number of empty transmissions before release, configured by the base station device 3. Here, for the terminal device 1 to clear the configured grant, the terminal needs to store the parameter (paragraphs 0174, 0178, 0255).
The cell groups and/or TAGs for which the third timer is considered as expired may be prioritized. For example, as described above, a prioritization may be made such as the PTAG of the master cell group>the STAG of the master cell group>the PSTAG of the secondary cell group>the STAG of the secondary cell group. Here, how the cell groups and/or TAGs are prioritized may be defined in advance by specifications or the like (paragraph 0321).
In a case that the verification is succeeded, the terminal device 1 may consider (recognize) that the received DCI format indicates a valid semi-persistent activation or a valid semi-persistent release (paragraph 0124).
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 Layer 2 handling during a cell change procedure includes decoding an RRC reconfiguration message received from a first cell of Xu (Xu, ABSTRACT, Figs. 8, 9, paragraphs 0032, 0033, 0057, 0063) wherein the system of Xu, would have incorporated the terminal device 1 may clear the configured grant based on the third parameter i.e., parameter for indicating the Number of empty transmissions before release, configured by the base station device 3 of Aiba (Aiba, paragraphs 0124, 0174, 0178, 0255, 0321) to provide a terminal device, a base station device, a communication method, and an integrated circuit, which enable efficient transmission of uplink data (Aiba, paragraph 0009, 0011).
The prior arts made of record and not relied upon are considered pertinent to applicants disclosure.
Babaei US PGPub: US 2019/0215712 A1 Jul. 11, 2019.
A wireless device receives one or more messages from a base station. The one or more messages comprise: first configuration parameters of one or more cells grouped into a timing advance group; second configuration parameters of a time alignment timer for the timing advance group; and third configuration parameters of semi-persistent channel state information (CSI) reports for transmission via a first cell of the one or more cells. A downlink control information is received. The downlink control information indicates activation of a plurality of resources of the first cell for the semi-persistent CSI reports. A semi-persistent CSI report, of the semi-persistent CSI reports, is transmitted via a first resource of the plurality of resources. In response to the time alignment timer expiring, second resources of the plurality of resources that occur after the time alignment timer expires are cleared.
Palle Venkata US PGPub: US 2026/0239133 A1 Aug. 13, 2026.
Technologies for handling timing advances in wireless networks.
Guo US PGPub: US 2025/0330883 A1 Oct. 23, 2025.
A user equipment (UE) may receive a control message indicating a first timing advance group (TAG) and a first time alignment timer (TAT) associated with the first TAG and a first transmission-reception point (TRP) for a serving cell. The control message may indicate a second TAG and a second TAT associated with the second TAG associated with a second TRP for the serving cell. The UE may release one or more network parameters at a TRP-level or one or more network parameters at a cell-level, or both, based on the first time alignment timer expiring. The UE may communicate with the first TRP or the second TRP, or both, based on the first TAT expiring.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NIMESH PATEL whose telephone number is (571)270-1228. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday: 6:30 AM - 3:30 PM EST.
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, Rafael Perez-Gutierrez can be reached at 571-272-7915. 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.
/NIMESH PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2642
Prosecution Insights