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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 4-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 4-11 disclose “the method according to claim 2, wherein in response to determining that a reason for a secondary cell group failure….”. However, claim 2 or even claim 1 does not have a step of “determining that a reason for a secondary cell group failure” or any requesting of determining a reason, it’s unclear why the procedure goes to the step of “in response to determining”.
Corrections are required.
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.
Claims 1-3, 7-14, 18, 25, 27 and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kumar et al. (US patent 1,778,525 B2).
Regarding to claim 1, Kumar teaches the invention as claimed including a method for reporting information, performed by a terminal device, comprising transmitting secondary cell group failure information to a network device [305 a-b, Fig. 3] in response to detecting that a specified event occurs in a secondary cell group [col. 8, line 38-40, col. 20 line 8 -col. 22, line 17], wherein the secondary cell group failure information comprises information related to a conditional primary secondary cell (PSCeII) addition or change [col. 2, line 43-58, col. 8, line 28-40, col. 22, line 18- col. 23, line 12] .
Regarding to claim 2, Kumar teaches wherein the information related to the conditional primary secondary cell (PSCeII) addition or change comprises at least one of the following:
candidate cell list information for the conditional primary secondary cell (PSCeII) addition or change [col. 4, line 18-42; col. 7, line 17-44; col. 21, line 22-34]];
a time interval from receiving conditional configuration information for the conditional primary secondary cell (PSCeII) addition or change to performing the conditional primary secondary cell (PSCeII) addition or change [col. 3, line 11-13; col. 21, line 4-20];
a time interval from receiving the conditional configuration information for the conditional primary secondary cell (PSCeII) addition or change to occurring a radio link failure [col. 3, line 7-57; col. 4, line 62- - col. 5, line 42; col. 20, 8-32];
a time interval from receiving the conditional configuration information for the conditional primary secondary cell (PSCeII) addition or change to occurring a beam failure [col. 4, line 18-42; col. 5, line 55 - col. 6, line 11];
a type of the primary secondary cell (PSCeII) addition or change last performed before detecting that the specified event occurs in the secondary cell group [col, 38, line 39-63]; or the identity of a primary secondary cell failing in addition [col. 38, line 62-63].
Regarding claim 3, Kumar teaches the specified event comprises at least one of the following:
a radio link failure for the secondary cell group [col. 3, line 7-57; col. 4, line 62- - col. 5, line 42; col. 20, 8-32]; reconfiguration with a synchronization failure of the secondary cell group; or detecting a beam failure of a primary secondary cell (PSCeII) of the secondary cell group while the secondary cell group is deactivated [col. 4, line 18-42; col. 5, line 55 - col. 6, line 11] .
Regarding to claim 7, Kumar teaches in response to determining that a reason for a secondary cell group failure is a primary secondary cell (PSCeII) addition or change failure, the information related to the conditional primary secondary cell (PSCeII) addition or change comprises the time interval from receiving the conditional configuration information for the conditional primary secondary cell (PSCeII) addition or change to performing the conditional primary secondary cell (PSCeII) addition or change [col. 3, line 11-13; col. 21, line 4-20].
Regarding to claim 8, Kumar teaches wherein in response to determining that a reason for a secondary cell group failure is a radio link failure, the information related to the conditional primary secondary cell (PSCeII) addition or change comprises the time interval from receiving the conditional configuration information for the conditional primary secondary cell (PSCeII) addition or change to occurring the radio link failure [col. 3, line 7-57; col. 4, line 62- - col. 5, line 42; col. 20, 8-32].
Regarding to claim 9, Kumar teaches wherein in response to determining that a reason for a secondary cell group failure is a beam failure, the information related to the conditional primary secondary cell (PSCeII) addition or change comprises the time interval from receiving the conditional configuration information for the conditional primary secondary cell (PSCeII) addition or change to occurring the beam failure [col. 4, line 18-42; col. 5, line 55 - col. 6, line 11].
Regarding to claim 10, Kumar teaches wherein types of the primary secondary cell (PSCeII) addition or change comprise at least one of a conditional primary secondary cell (PSCeII) addition, a conditional primary secondary cell (PSCeII) change, a primary secondary cell (PSCeII) addition, or a primary secondary cell (PSCeII) change [col. 21, line 56-col. 22, line 17].
Regarding to claim 11, Kumar teaches wherein in response to determining that a reason for a secondary cell group failure is a primary secondary cell (PSCeII) addition failure, the information related to the conditional primary secondary cell (PSCeII) addition or change comprises the identity of the primary secondary cell failing in addition; and the identity of the primary secondary cell failing in addition comprises a physical cell identity and a carrier frequency of the primary secondary cell [col. 20, line 4 – 51].
Regarding to claims 12-14 and 18, since they disclose the same limitations as claims 1-3 and 7 from different prospectors (sending vs receiving), they are rejected under the same basis as claims 1-3 and 7 aet forth above.
Regarding claim 25, Since it is apparatus claims of claim 1, it’s rejected under the same basis as claim set forth above.
Regarding claim 27, since it is apparatus claim of claim 12, it’s rejected under the same basis as claim 12 set forth above.
Regarding claim 29, since it is computer product claim of claim 1, it is rejected under the same basis as claim 1 set forth above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 4-6 and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kumar et al. (US patent 1,778,525 B2) as applied to claims 1-3, 7-14, 18, 25, 27 and 29 above, and further in view of Yan et al. (US PUB 2025/0193760).
Regarding claim 4, Kumar teaches wherein in response to determining that a reason for a secondary cell group failure is a primary secondary cell (PSCeII) addition or change failure and that available conditional configuration information for the conditional primary secondary cell (PSCeII) addition or change exists, the candidate cell list information for the conditional primary secondary cell (PSCeII) addition or change comprises the identity of candidate cells [col. 2, line 43-58, col. 8, line 28-40, col. 22, line 18- col. 23, line 12]. Kumar does not specifically teach the identity includes a global cell identity and a tracking area code of each candidate cell. However, in the same field, Yan clearly teaches a global cell identity and a tracking area code of each candidate cell [par. 0213, 0273, 0275]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kumar’s system with the teaching from Yan to make the record of configuration procedure more accurate by providing detail information relate to the potential candidate cells.
Regarding to claim 5, Kumar teaches the invention substantially as claimed in claim 1. Kumar does not specifically teach a physical cell identity and a carrier frequency of each candidate cell. However, in the same field, Yan clearly teaches a physical cell identity and a carrier frequency of each candidate cell [par. 0213, 0273, 0275]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kumar’s system with the teaching from Yan to make the configuration procedure more efficiency.
Regarding claim 6, Kumar further teaches wherein the candidate cell list information for the conditional primary secondary cell (PSCeII) addition or change does not comprise a serving cell and a neighboring cell in the secondary cell group failure information [Kumar, col. 4, line 18-42, col. 7, line 18-44, i.e., the report separates the information for the serving cells, neighboring primary secondary cells and candidate primary secondary cells].
Regarding to claims 15-16, since they disclose the same limitations as claims 4-5 from different prospectors (sending vs receiving), they are rejected under the same basis as claims 4-5 aet forth above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JINSONG HU whose telephone number is (571) 272- 3965. The examiner can normally be reached at 7AM-5PM M-TH.
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:/Awww.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. 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:/Awww.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent- center for more information about Patent Center and https:/Awww.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.
/JINSONG HU/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2643
Prosecution Insights