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 Interpretation
Claim 7 discloses, “in response to a parameter for the target cell being absent in the first set of parameters, determine a corresponding parameter of a source cell as the parameter for the target cell”,
This is contingent/conditional limitation(s). The contingent/conditional limitations are not positively recited in the claim(s) and are thus only executed [or performed or implemented], when the condition is true/met.
[See, (MPEP 2111.04) II. CONTINGENT LIMITATIONS
The broadest reasonable interpretation of a method (or process) claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent is not met].
In present claim 7 for instance first the step of determining corresponding parameter of a source cell as the parameter of the cell is performed only parameter for the target cell being absent in the first cell of parameters; otherwise, this step is not performed, and the prior art is not required to teach this element when the condition is not met.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 8-11 and 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(2) as being anticipated by Wu (US 2023/0083266)(hereafter Wu).
Regarding claims 1, 15 and 16, Wu discloses a user equipment (UE) (see, Fig. 3, UE, 102) for wireless communication, comprising:
at least one memory; and at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory (see, para [0029]) and configured to cause the UE (see, Fig. 3, UE, 102) to:
receive a first set of parameters associated with a target cell for a dual active protocol stack (DAPS) handover (see, Fig. 3, step 304, determine to initiate the DAPS handover, the RRC reconfiguration , 306 message to the UE , 102 from source base station, 104); and
apply the first set of parameters to the target cell for the DAPS handover (see, para [0081], para [0082], The T-BS 106B includes multiple configuration parameters in the handover command message to configure radio resources for the UE 102 to communicate with the T-BS 106B via target P-Cell 126B, The multiple configuration parameters can configure zero, one, or more radio bearers, including SRB(s) (e.g., SRB1, SRB2 and/or SRB4) and/or DRB(s). The UE 102 can exchange RRC messages with the T-BS 106B via the SRB(s) (i.e., SRB(s) for the target))).
Regarding claims 2 and 17, Wu further discloses the UE, wherein the first set of parameters is received (see, para [0081], para [0082], The T-BS 106B includes multiple configuration parameters in the handover command message) in at least one of the following messages: a radio resource control (RRC) reconfiguration message from a first base station (BS) that manages a source cell of the UE (see, Fig. RRC reconfiguration to release M cells in step 306); or a container message from a second BS that manages the target cell.
Regarding claim 8, Wu further discloses the UE, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to cause the UE to: Receive a second set of parameters associated with a source cell; and apply the second set of parameters to the source cell ([0037] Upon receiving the handover command message, the UE 102 hands over to the base station 106A via cell 126A and communicates with the base station 106A by using the configuration parameters in the handover command message, [0038], the base station 106B includes configuration parameters configuring radio resources for the UE 102 in a handover command, includes the handover command message in a Handover Request Acknowledge message, and sends the Handover Request Acknowledge message to the base station 104).
Regarding claim 9, Wu further discloses the UE wherein the second set of parameters is received along with the first set of parameters from a first base station (BS) that manages the source cell of the UE, or wherein the second set of parameters is received from a second BS that manages a target cell (see, para [0037], Upon receiving the handover command message, the UE 102 hands over to the base station 106A via cell 126A and communicates with the base station 106A by using the configuration parameters in the handover command message, [0038], the base station 106B includes configuration parameters configuring radio resources for the UE 102 in a handover command, includes the handover command message in a Handover Request Acknowledge message, and sends the Handover Request Acknowledge message to the base station 104).
Regarding claim 10, Wu further discloses a first base station (BS) (see, fig. 3, source base station, 104), comprising:
at least one memory; and at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory (see, para [0029]) and configured to cause the first BS (see, Fig. 3, 104) to:
receive, from a second BS, configuration information for a dual active protocol stack (DAPS) handover between the first BS and the second BS (see, para [0038], DAPS handover, the base station 106B includes configuration parameters configuring radio resources for the UE 102 in a handover command); and
transmit, to a user equipment (UE), a first set of parameters associated with a target cell for the DAPS handover (see, Fig. 3, step 304, determine to initiate the DAPS handover, the RRC reconfiguration , 306 message to the UE , 102 from source base station, 104, para [0038], base station 106B includes configuration parameters configuring radio resources for the UE 102 in a handover command, includes the handover command message in a Handover Request Acknowledge message),
wherein the first set of parameters is determined based on the configuration information (para [0038], base station 106B includes configuration parameters configuring radio resources for the UE 102 in a handover command, includes the handover command message in a Handover Request Acknowledge message).
Regarding claim 11, Wu further discloses the first BS, wherein the configuration information is received in a handover request message or a handover request acknowledge message (see, para [0038], In the DAPS handover preparation procedure, the base station 104 sends a Handover Request message to the base station 106B. In some implementations, the base station 104 can explicitly request DAPS handover in the Handover Request message, e.g., by including a DAPS indicator in the Handover Request message).
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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 non-obviousness.
Claim(s) 3- 7, 12- 14 and 18- 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu in view of Hori et al. (US 12342228)(hereafter Hori).
Regarding claims 3, 12 and 18, Wu does not disclose the UE, wherein the first set of parameters includes at least one of the following: one or more values for one or more first timers of the target cell; a round trip time (RTT) value associated with one or more second timers of the target cell; a first common timing advance (TA) of the target cell; a first feeder link delay of the target cell; a first indication associated with downlink hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) feedback of the target cell; a second indication associated with uplink HARQ retransmission of the target cell; a cell identity of the target cell; a cell type of the target cell; or a cell platform of the target cell.
However, in same field of endeavor, Hori teaches col. 57, lines 18-25 discloses 303) In FIG. 10 and FIG. 11, the information element represented by mobility Control Info is an information element including parameters related to mobility to the EUTRA for network control. Some or all of the pieces of information from (A) to (H) below may be included in the information element represented by mobility Control Info. (A) Target physical cell identity.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Hori with the Wu, as a whole, so as to use the target cell identifier as parameter for target cell, the motivation is to perform handover.
Regarding claims 4, 13 and 19, the combined teachings further discloses the UE of claim 3, wherein the one or more first timers of the target cell include at least one of the following: a scheduling request (SR) prohibit time; a downlink discontinuous reception (DRX) hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) round-trip time (RTT) timer; an uplink DRX HARQ RTT timer; a T-Reassembly timer; a discard timer; or a t-Reordering timer (since the claim upon which this claim depends recites options for steps written in the alternative and the option to which this claim directed is not the one for which prior art is cited, no art need be cited in the rejection of this claim).
Regarding claims 5, 14 and 20, the combined teachings further discloses the UE of claim 3, wherein the one or more second timers of the target cell include at least one of the following: a contention resolution timer; a downlink DRX HARQ RTT timer; or an uplink DRX HARQ RTT timer (since the claim upon which this claim depends recites options for steps written in the alternative and the option to which this claim directed is not the one for which prior art is cited, no art need be cited in the rejection of this claim).
Regarding claims 6, Wu further discloses the UE, wherein applying the first set of parameters to the target cell for the DAPS handover includes at least one of the following: applying the one or more first timers using the one or more values (para [0081] and [0082], the T-BS 106B configures a time value for the DAPS release timer in the handover command message or the RRC reconfiguration message in event 332. Upon receiving 318 the handover command message or receiving 332 the RRC reconfiguration message, the UE 102 starts the DAPS release timer. If the DAPS release timer expires, the UE 102 stops 336 communicating with the S-BS 104. Alternatively, the UE 102 uses a predetermined timer value if the T-BS 106B does not include the timer value in the handover command message or the RRC reconfiguration message. The T-BS 106B can include a timer value in the Handover Success message, which can be the same timer value in the RRC reconfiguration message in event 332 or larger than the timer value in the handover command message in event 318 ); applying the RTT value as an offset to the second timer; calculating the RTT value based on the first common TA and a first service link delay; calculating the RTT value based on the first feeder link delay and the first service link delay; enabling or disabling downlink HARQ feedback based on the first indication; enabling or disabling the uplink HARQ retransmission based on the second indication; determining the target cell based on the cell identity of the target cell; determining the target cell based on the cell type of the target cell; or determining the target cell based on the cell platform of the target cell.
Regarding claim 7, Wu further discloses the UE, wherein the at least processor is further configured to cause the UE to: in response to a parameter for the target cell being absent in the first set of parameters, determine a corresponding parameter of a source cell as the parameter for the target cell (Wu teaches all the limitations of the claim 7, the Examiner did not need to present evidence of the method steps that are not required to be performed under a broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim, See MPEP 2111.04 II. Ex parte Schulhauser).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kim et al. (US 12568414) discloses Method and Device for Dual Active Protocol Stack (DAPS) Handover in Next Generation Mobile Communication System.
Wallentin et al. (US 12200478) discloses User Equipment, Target Access Node and Methods in A Wireless Communications Network For Handling Packet Data Convergence Protocol (PDCP) Service Data Units (SDU) When Performing A Dual Active Protocol Stack (DAPS) Handover.
Kim et al. (US 2024/0056927) discloses DEVICE AND METHOD FOR PREVENTING POTENTIAL ERRORS THAT MAY OCCUR WHEN PERFORMING DAPS HANDOVER IN NEXT-GENERATION MOBILE COMMUNICATION SYSTEM.
Wang et al. (US 2023/0388873) discloses METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR DETERMINING DAPS HANDOVER FAILURE TYPE.
Dudda et al. (US 2023/0269646) discloses Dual Active Protocol Stack (DAPS) Handover During URLLC Packet Duplication
Byun et al. (US 2023/0119118) discloses METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR SUPPORTING A DAPS HANDOVER PROCEDURE IN A WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SYSTEM.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DHAVAL V PATEL whose telephone number is (571)270-1818. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday (8:00am-4:30pm).
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, Hannah Wang can be reached at 571-272-9018. 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.
/DHAVAL V PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2631
Prosecution Insights