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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. IN 202341053791, filed on 08/10/2023.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS’s) submitted on 12/17/2024 and 05/22/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 31 and 31 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Within the claims provided, there are two instances of Claim 31. The claims have been denotated as Claims 31A and 31B for ease of reference and should be renumbered, alongside all claims that would be impacted, in a subsequent application.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 26-28, 32-33, and 38-39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being anticipated by You et al. (CN 117676733 A), hereinafter You in view of 3GPP TSG-RAN WG2 Meeting #122 (R2-2305371), hereinafter 3GPP 1.
Re. Claim 26, You teaches a network device comprising: at least one processor; and at least one memory storing instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor (Fig. 8), cause the network device at least to: receive, from the plurality of candidate target network devices, first information related to measurements for changes between the plurality of candidate target cells (Pg. 2, Paragraph 3 - after receiving the cell quality of the serving cell and the plurality of candidate cells, the network device may select a target cell from the plurality of candidate cells according to the cell quality of the plurality of candidate cells); and transmit, to a terminal device, second information related to the measurements for use in executing of the change from a first candidate target cell to a second candidate target cell among the plurality of candidate target cells after handover from a source cell to the first candidate target cell (Pg. 2, Paragraph 3 - instruct the terminal device to switch from the serving cell to the target cell. & Pg. 3 Line 1 - In this way, the first network device sends the first indication information to the terminal device through the layer 1/layer 2 message, which can effectively reduce the handover delay compared with the first network device sending the handover command to the terminal device through the RRC message).
However, You does not expressly teach how to transmit, to a plurality of candidate target network devices, an indication of a plurality of candidate target cells of the plurality of candidate target network devices.
Yet, 3GPP 1 explicitly teaches how to transmit, to a plurality of candidate target network devices, an indication of a plurality of candidate target cells of the plurality of candidate target network devices (Pg. 4, Proposal 4 – The information of the other candidate target PSCell and the corresponding condReconfigId can be provided to the candidate target PSCell to configure the CPC execution condition and to update the measConfig if needed);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of 3GPP 1 to the teaching of You. The motivation for such would be to improve transmission by evaluating all candidates for later cell changes rather than only for the optimal cell as 3GPP 1 provides the exchanging of all target cell data between all options (3GPP 1, Proposal 4). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements, as claimed by known methods, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Re. Claim 32, You teaches a terminal device comprising: at least one processor; and at least one memory storing instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor (Fig. 8), cause the terminal device at least to: receive, from a network device, second information related to measurements for changes between a plurality of candidate target cells of a plurality of candidate target network devices (Pg. 3, Paragraph 6 - receiving second indication information from the first network device, wherein the second indication information is used for indicating the terminal device to select a second target cell); and perform, based on the second information, a measurement for the change from a first candidate target cell to a second candidate target cell among the plurality of candidate target cells after handover from a source cell to the first candidate target cell (Pg. 3, Paragraph 6 - if selecting the second target cell from the M cells according to the configuration information of the M cells, switching to the cell switching of the second target cell, and successfully switching).
Re. Claim 38, You teaches a candidate target network device comprising: at least one processor; and at least one memory storing instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor (Fig. 9), cause the candidate target network device at least to: receive, from a network device, an indication of a plurality of candidate target cells of the candidate target network device and at least a further candidate target network device (Pg. 2, Paragraph 3- the terminal device can measure the service cell and multiple candidate cells according to the measurement configuration information from the network device to obtain the cell quality of the service cell and multiple candidate cells); and transmit, to the network device, first information related to measurements for changes between the plurality of candidate target cells (Pg. 2, Paragraph 3- report the cell quality of the service cell and the plurality of candidate cells to the network equipment after obtaining the cell quality of the service cell and the plurality of candidate cells).
However, You does not expressly teach how to receive, from a network device, an indication of a plurality of candidate target cells of the candidate target network device and at least a further candidate target network device.
Yet, 3GPP 1 explicitly teaches how to receive, from a network device, an indication of a plurality of candidate target cells of the candidate target network device and at least a further candidate target network device (Pg. 4, Proposal 4 – The information of the other candidate target PSCell and the corresponding condReconfigId can be provided to the candidate target PSCell to configure the CPC execution condition and to update the measConfig if needed);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of 3GPP 1 to the teaching of You. The motivation for such would be to improve transmission by evaluating all candidates for later cell changes rather than only for the optimal cell as 3GPP 1 provides the exchanging of all target cell data between all options (3GPP 1, Proposal 4). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements, as claimed by known methods, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Re. Claims 27, 33, and 39, You and 3GPP 1 teaches Claims 26 and 32.
Additionally, You further teaches wherein the first information includes AT LEAST ONE OF: configurations related to the measurements (Pg. 2, Paragraph 3 - the terminal device can measure the service cell and multiple candidate cells according to the measurement configuration information from the network device to obtain the cell quality of the service cell and multiple candidate cells. Additionally, Examiner interprets that only one of the claimed features needs to be mapped because of the presence of “Or”), OR identifications of the measurements.
Re. Claim 28, You and 3GPP 1teaches Claim 26.
Additionally, You further teaches wherein the second information contains the first information (Pg. 11, Paragraph 11 - In the cell handover procedure in fig. 3, after reporting the measurement report to the source network device, the source network device selects a target cell from the multiple candidate cells according to the quality of the multiple candidate cells, and sends a handover command to the terminal device to instruct the terminal device to handover to the target cell).
Claims 29-31A, 34-36, and 40-41 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over You, in view of 3GPP 1, and Zhang, Chunli (CN 114430579 A), hereinafter Zhang.
Re. Claim 29, You and 3GPP 1 teaches Claim 26.
However, You and 3GPP 1 do not expressly teach wherein the at least one memory and the at least one processor cause the network device to: determine invalid information from the first information; and generate the second information by removing the invalid information from the first information.
Yet, Zhang explicitly teaches wherein the at least one memory and the at least one processor cause the network device to: determine invalid information from the first information; and generate the second information by removing the invalid information from the first information (Pg. 2, Paragraph 17 - the terminal device prescribes an execution stage of validity verification, avoids measurement and evaluation of the candidate cells with invalid configuration, effectively reduces the power consumption of the terminal device, and improves the performance of the terminal device).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Zhang to the teaching of You and 3GPP 1. The motivation for such would be to improve handover efficiency by removing invalid information before sending the second information as Zhang provides that invalid configurations of candidate cells are removed prior to handover (Zhang, Pg. 2, Paragraph 17). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements, as claimed by known methods, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Re. Claims 30, 35, and 40, You and 3GPP 1 teaches Claim 26, 32, and 38.
However, You and 3GPP 1 do not expressly teach wherein the changes between the plurality of candidate target network devices comprise at least one of: changes between a first list of candidate target cells of a first candidate target network device of the plurality of candidate target network devices, or changes from the first list of candidate target cells to a second list of candidate target cells of a second candidate target network device of the plurality of candidate target network devices.
Yet, Zhang explicitly teaches wherein the changes between the plurality of candidate target network devices comprise AT LEAST ONE OF: changes between a first list of candidate target cells of a first candidate target network device of the plurality of candidate target network devices (Pg. 2, Paragraph 17 - the terminal device prescribes an execution stage of validity verification, avoids measurement and evaluation of the candidate cells with invalid configuration, effectively reduces the power consumption of the terminal device, and improves the performance of the terminal device. Additionally, Examiner interprets that only one of the claimed features needs to be mapped because of the presence of “Or”), OR changes from the first list of candidate target cells to a second list of candidate target cells of a second candidate target network device of the plurality of candidate target network devices.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Zhang to the teaching of You and 3GPP 1. The motivation for such would be to improve handover efficiency by removing invalid information before sending the second information as Zhang provides that invalid configurations of candidate cells are removed prior to handover, thus constituting a change (Zhang, Pg. 2, Paragraph 17). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements, as claimed by known methods, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Re. Claims 31A, 36, and 41, You, 3GPP 1, and Zhang teach Claims 30, 35, 40.
Additionally, You further teaches wherein the first candidate target network device serves the first candidate target cell, and the at least one memory and the at least one processor further cause the network device to: receive, from the first candidate target network device, a preparation configuration for the handover from the source cell to the first candidate target cell, the preparation configuration being associated with the first information for the change from the first candidate target cell to at least the second candidate target cells of the plurality of candidate target cells (Pg. 2, Paragraph 3 - after receiving the cell quality of the serving cell and the plurality of candidate cells, the network device may select a target cell from the plurality of candidate cells according to the cell quality of the plurality of candidate cells); and transmit, to the terminal device, the preparation configuration in association with the second information for the change from the first candidate target cell to at least the second candidate target cell among the plurality of candidate target cells ( Pg. 2, Paragraph - report the cell quality of the service cell and the plurality of candidate cells to the network equipment after obtaining the cell quality of the service cell and the plurality of candidate cells).
Re. Claim 34, You and 3GPP 1 teaches Claim 26.
However, You and 3GPP 1 does not expressly teach wherein the at least one memory and the at least one processor cause the terminal device to: before performing the measurements, remove invalid information from the second information.
Yet, Zhang explicitly teaches wherein the at least one memory and the at least one processor cause the terminal device to: before performing the measurements, remove invalid information from the second information (Pg. 2, Paragraph 17 - the terminal device prescribes an execution stage of validity verification, avoids measurement and evaluation of the candidate cells with invalid configuration, effectively reduces the power consumption of the terminal device, and improves the performance of the terminal device).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Zhang to the teaching of You and 3GPP 1. The motivation for such would be to improve handover efficiency by removing invalid information before sending the second information as Zhang provides that invalid configurations of candidate cells are removed prior to handover (Zhang, Pg. 2, Paragraph 17). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements, as claimed by known methods, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Claims 31B, 37 and 42 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over You in view of 3GPP 1, Hu, Xingxing (US 2024/0244491 A1), in view of Hu.
Re. Claims 31B, 37 and 42, You and 3GPP 1 teaches Claim 26, 32, and 38.
However, You and 3GPP 1 do not expressly teach wherein the network device comprises a master node, and the candidate target network device comprises a secondary node.
Yet, Hu explicitly teaches wherein the network device comprises a master node, and the candidate target network device comprises a secondary node (¶0083 - UE is currently connected to one master node (namely, a master node 1 in FIG. 1C) and a secondary node (namely, a secondary node 1 in FIG. 1C)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Hu to the teaching of You and 3GPP 1. The motivation for such would be to improve transmission efficiency by specifying the nodes used for the handover between network devices as Hu provides that the original network devices is a master node and the target device is a secondary node (Hu, ¶0083). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements, as claimed by known methods, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Zhang et al. (WO 2023010419 A1) – Pg. 2, Paragraphs 1-7
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NOAH JAMES SUGDEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7406. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 9:00-6:00 ET, Fri 9:00-1:00 ET.
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, Khaled Kassim can be reached at (571) 270-3770. 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.
/N.J.S./Examiner, Art Unit 2475
/KHALED M KASSIM/supervisory patent examiner, Art Unit 2475
Prosecution Insights