DETAILED ACTION
1. Claims 1-7, 16-26, and 35-36 (amended claim set received in the Office 11/22/2024) have been examined and are pending.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
2. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
3. Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d).
Information Disclosure Statement
4. The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 5/09/2025 and 11/10/2025 have been found to be in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements have been considered by the examiner.
Drawings
5. The drawings were received on 11/24/2024. These drawings are accepted.
Specification
6. The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
7. 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.
8. Claims 7 and 26 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.
a) Claims 7 and 26 recite the limitation “and/or”. The claims are rendered indefinite since “and” requires inclusion of the limitations that precede and follow the term, whereas “or” requires only one the limitations that either precede or follow the term. For purposes of examination, Examiner interprets the limitation as “or”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
9. 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.
10. 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.
11. Claims 1-7, 16-26, and 35-36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by United States Patent Application Publication 2023/0216893 A1 to Ma et al. (hereinafter “Ma”), claiming benefit to and fully supported by foreign-filed application CN 202210002280.4.
Regarding Claim 1, Ma discloses an information processing method for voice fallback, comprising:
recording, by a terminal, first relevant information of a failure, in a case that the terminal accesses a first target network-side device and the failure occurs, wherein the first target network-side device is a network device that the terminal requests access due to inter-system voice fallback (Ma: [0052-0056] – corresponds to a user equipment (UE) determining (recording) an radio link failure (RLF) on a target access network/node/cell wherein the UE may indicate/experience Internet Protocol (IP) Multimedia Subsystem (IMS) voice fallback process failure.); and
transmitting, by the terminal, the first relevant information to a second target network-side device, wherein the second target network-side device is a network device that the terminal successfully accesses after the failure occurs to access to the first target network-side device (Ma: [0058-0070], Figure 8 with description in [0706-0768] – from the time a UE experiences an RLF at a newly-connected/source gNB, the UE sends an RLF to the new source eNB (beginning a step 810) after successful handover to the target gNB (steps 801-809B). That is, the UE has completed a successful handover to a target gNB in steps 801-809B (indicating that the UE has completed a handover from a previous source gNB (first target network-side device)) to a target gNB (second target network-side device), and when a failure occurs after a short period of time, the UE sends an RLF to the target gNB (second target network-side device).).
Regarding Claim 2, Ma discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the case that the terminal accesses the first target network-side device and the failure occurs comprises one of the following:
the terminal successfully handovers from a source network-side device to the first target network-side device, and a radio link failure (RLF) occurs within a first duration (Ma: Figure 8 with [0727-0728] – “The UE encounters a radio connection failure within a short period of time after successful handover. The UE generates a corresponding RLF report.”);
after the terminal enters an RRC_idle state by releasing a radio resource control (RRC) connection with a source network-side device, the terminal successfully redirects to the first target network-side device, and an RLF occurs within a first duration (Alternative or dispositive limitation not required to be disclosed by the art of record. Examiner respectfully suggests positively reciting the limitation in order to be considered in view of the prior art of record.);
a handover failure occurs during the terminal handovers from a source network-side device to the first target network-side device (Ma: [0633] – “The source gNB requires the UE to perform handover, but handover failure occurs, or the UE is successfully handed over but a radio connection failure occurs within a short period of time. The UE generates an RLF report.”);
after the terminal enters an RRC_idle state by releasing an RRC connection with a source network-side device, a failure occurs during a process of initiating random access to the first target network-side device, wherein the source network-side device is a network-side device that is accessed by the terminal before performing inter-system voice fallback (Alternative or dispositive limitation not required to be disclosed by the art of record. Examiner respectfully suggests positively reciting the limitation in order to be considered in view of the prior art of record.).
Regarding Claim 3, Ma discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the first relevant information comprises at least one of the following:
an identification of the first target network-side device (Ma: [0058], [0060] – “The related information for the IMS voice related process (hereinafter, also referred to as “IMS voice fallback related information”) includes but is not limited to…a cell identifier used by a target cell…”.);
an identification of a source network-side device that is accessed by the terminal before performing inter-system voice fallback (Alternative or dispositive limitation not required to be disclosed by the art of record. Examiner respectfully suggests positively reciting the limitation in order to be considered in view of the prior art of record.);
an identification of the second target network-side device (Alternative or dispositive limitation not required to be disclosed by the art of record. Examiner respectfully suggests positively reciting the limitation in order to be considered in view of the prior art of record.);
carrier information of the first target network-side device (Ma: [0058], [0065] – “The related information for the IMS voice related process (hereinafter, also referred to as “IMS voice fallback related information”) includes but is not limited to…frequency information used for redirection (redirectedCarrierInfo)…”.);
a priority of the first target network-side device (Ma: [0058], [0066] – “The related information for the IMS voice related process (hereinafter, also referred to as “IMS voice fallback related information”) includes but is not limited to…cell reselection priorities (cellReselectionPriorities)…”.); or
voice fallback indication (Ma: [0058-0059] – “The related information for the IMS voice related process (hereinafter, also referred to as “IMS voice fallback related information”) includes but is not limited to at least…indication information, indicating that the report generated by the UE (e.g., a radio connection failure report (e.g., a RLF report)) is caused by an IMS voice fallback process or an IMS voice service configuration process or an emergency fallback process, or that the related information for the IMS voice related process (hereinafter, also referred to as “IMS voice fallback related information”) is related to an IMS voice fallback process, or indicating that the IMS voice fallback related information is set incorrectly, e.g., a target cell for handover is selected improperly or a redirection frequency is set improperly.”).
Regarding Claim 4, Ma discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the recording the first relevant information of the access failure comprises:
recording the first relevant information of the failure according to a defined coding format (Ma: [0705] – corresponds to being connected to 5G network, switching to a 4G network, and then switching back to a 5G network.), wherein the defined coding format comprises one of the following:
a network coding format corresponding to a mobile communication system to which a source network-side device that is accessed by the terminal before performing inter-system voice fallback belongs (Ma: [0705-0802] – corresponds to a 5G network of a connected terminal before (a second voice fallback), during a voice fallback, or after a voice fallback.);
a network coding format corresponding to a mobile communication system to which the first target network-side device belongs (Ma: [0705-0802] – corresponds to a switching to a 4G (second) from a 5G (first) network of a connected terminal before (a second voice fallback), during a voice fallback, or after a voice fallback.);
a network coding format corresponding to a mobile communication system to which the second target network-side device belongs (Ma: [0705-0802] – corresponds to a switching to a 4G from a 5G network of a connected terminal before (a second voice fallback), during a voice fallback, or after a voice fallback.).
Regarding Claim 5, Ma discloses the method according to claim 1, further comprising:
receiving a handover command or an RRC release message that carries voice fallback indication (Ma: [0632-0635] – corresponds to receiving a Handover Command to the source gNB.); and
accessing the first target network-side device from a source network-side device that is currently accessed, according to the handover command or the RRC release message (Ma: [0632-0635] – corresponds to connecting to a new gNB after the Handover Command.).
Regarding Claim 6, Ma discloses a network optimization method for voice fallback, comprising:
receiving, by a source network-side device, first relevant information of a terminal access failure transmitted by a target network-side device, wherein the first relevant information is relevant information recorded by a terminal when an access failure occurs in performing inter-system voice fallback (Ma: [0052-0056] – corresponds to a user equipment (UE) determining (recording) an radio link failure (RLF) on a target access network/node/cell wherein the UE may indicate/experience Internet Protocol (IP) Multimedia Subsystem (IMS) voice fallback process failure.); and
performing, by the source network-side device, network optimization on a voice fallback related parameter according to the first relevant information (Ma: [0053-0054], [0090] – corresponds to performing network or self-optimization based on voice fallback. See also [0058-0070], Figure 8 with description in [0706-0768] – from the time a UE experiences an RLF at a newly-connected/source gNB, the UE sends an RLF to the new source eNB (beginning a step 810) after successful handover to the target gNB (steps 801-809B). That is, the UE has completed a successful handover to a target gNB in steps 801-809B (indicating that the UE has completed a handover from a previous source gNB (first target network-side device)) to a target gNB (second target network-side device), and when a failure occurs after a short period of time, the UE sends an RLF to the target gNB (second target network-side device).).
Regarding Claim 7, Ma discloses the method according to claim 6, wherein the receiving, by the source network-side device, the first relevant information of the terminal access failure transmitted by the target network-side device comprises:
receiving, by the source network-side device, second relevant information transmitted by a second target network-side device, wherein the second relevant information comprises the first relevant information (Ma: Figure 8, steps 801-806 – the target eNB receives a handover message from the source gNB via mobility management entity (MME); see also [0708-0710] – describing the IMS voice fallback information is included in the handover message.);
and/or receiving third relevant information transmitted by a first target network-side device, wherein the third relevant information comprises the first relevant information, wherein the first target network-side device is a network device that the terminal requests access due to inter-system voice fallback, and the second target network-side device is a network device that the terminal successfully accesses after the failure occurs to access to the first target network-side device (Ma: [0058-0070], Figure 8 with description in [0706-0768] – from the time a UE experiences an RLF at a newly-connected/source gNB, the UE sends an RLF to the new source eNB (beginning a step 810) after successful handover to the target gNB (steps 801-809B). That is, the UE has completed a successful handover to a target gNB in steps 801-809B (indicating that the UE has completed a handover from a previous source gNB (first target network-side device)) to a target gNB (second target network-side device), and when a failure occurs after a short period of time, the UE sends an RLF to the target gNB (second target network-side device). This feature includes handover messages, including IMS voice fallback information, between source gNB and target eNB devices.).
Regarding Claim 16, Ma discloses an information processing method for voice fallback, comprising:
receiving, by a first target network-side device, first relevant information transmitted by a second target network-side device, wherein the first relevant information is relevant information recorded by a terminal when an access failure occurs in performing inter-system voice fallback (Ma: Figure 8, steps 801-806 – the target eNB receives a handover message from the source gNB via mobility management entity (MME); see also [0708-0710] – describing the IMS voice fallback information is included in the handover message.); and
transmitting, by the first target network-side device according to the first relevant information, third relevant information of the access failure of the terminal to a source network-side device that is accessed by the terminal before performing inter-system voice fallback, wherein the third relevant information comprises the first relevant information, wherein the second target network-side device is a network device that the terminal successfully accesses after a failure occurs to access to the first target network-side device (Ma: [0058-0070], Figure 8 with description in [0706-0768] – from the time a UE experiences an RLF at a newly-connected/source gNB, the UE sends an RLF to the new source eNB (beginning a step 810) after successful handover to the target gNB (steps 801-809B). That is, the UE has completed a successful handover to a target gNB in steps 801-809B (indicating that the UE has completed a handover from a previous source gNB (first target network-side device)) to a target gNB (second target network-side device), and when a failure occurs after a short period of time, the UE sends an RLF to the target gNB (second target network-side device). This feature includes handover messages, including IMS voice fallback information, between source gNB and target eNB devices.).
Regarding Claim 17, Ma discloses the method according to claim 16, wherein the transmitting, according to the first relevant information, the third relevant information of the access failure of the terminal to the source network-side device that is accessed by the terminal before performing inter-system voice fallback comprises:
parsing the first relevant information to determine that a failure type of the access failure of the terminal is handover to a wrong cell (Ma: [0058-0069] – the IMS voice fallback information includes an indication of ([0069]) “…a report type, indicating a problem that occurs in the IMS voice related process (hereinafter, also referred to as “IMS voice fallback process”), for example, it may be that an IMS voice fallback handover is too early, or an IMS voice fallback handover is a handover to a wrong cell, or IMS voice fallback redirection fails, or IMS voice fallback redirection is redirection to a wrong cell, or handover is successful, or an IMS voice fallback handover is successful, or an emergency fallback fails, or a secondary cell is added too early due to an IMS voice service configuration process, or a wrong secondary cell is added due to an IMS voice service configuration process.”); and
transmitting the third relevant information to the source network-side device, wherein the third relevant information comprises indication information indicating that the failure type is handover to the wrong cell (Ma: Figure 8 with [0734] – “The MME updates the stored IMS voice fallback related information with the related information of the reconnected cell and/or the determined report type. The MME may generate a report type indicating the problem that occurs in the IMS voice fallback process.”. This corresponds as part of the process where the target eNB communicates to the source gNB the IMS voice fallback information.).
Regarding Claim 18, Ma discloses the method according to claim 16, wherein the transmitting, according to the first relevant information, the third relevant information of the access failure of the terminal to the source network-side device that is accessed by the terminal before performing inter-system voice fallback comprises:
parsing the first relevant information to determine that a failure type of the access failure of the terminal is inter-system mobility failure during voice fallback (Ma: [0058-0069] – the IMS voice fallback information includes an indication of ([0069]) “…a report type, indicating a problem that occurs in the IMS voice related process (hereinafter, also referred to as “IMS voice fallback process”), for example, it may be that an IMS voice fallback handover is too early, or an IMS voice fallback handover is a handover to a wrong cell, or IMS voice fallback redirection fails, or IMS voice fallback redirection is redirection to a wrong cell, or handover is successful, or an IMS voice fallback handover is successful, or an emergency fallback fails, or a secondary cell is added too early due to an IMS voice service configuration process, or a wrong secondary cell is added due to an IMS voice service configuration process.”); and
transmitting the third relevant information to the source network-side device, wherein the third relevant information comprises indication information indicating that the failure type is inter-system mobility failure during voice fallback (Ma: Figure 8 with [0734] – “The MME updates the stored IMS voice fallback related information with the related information of the reconnected cell and/or the determined report type. The MME may generate a report type indicating the problem that occurs in the IMS voice fallback process.”. This corresponds as part of the process where the target eNB communicates to the source gNB the IMS voice fallback information.).
Regarding Claim 19, Ma discloses the method according to claim 16, wherein the receiving the first relevant information transmitted by the second target network-side device comprises:
receiving a failure indication transmitted by the second target network-side device, wherein the failure indication comprises the first relevant information (Ma: [0058-0069] – the IMS voice fallback information includes an indication of ([0069]) “…a report type, indicating a problem that occurs in the IMS voice related process (hereinafter, also referred to as “IMS voice fallback process”), for example, it may be that an IMS voice fallback handover is too early, or an IMS voice fallback handover is a handover to a wrong cell, or IMS voice fallback redirection fails, or IMS voice fallback redirection is redirection to a wrong cell, or handover is successful, or an IMS voice fallback handover is successful, or an emergency fallback fails, or a secondary cell is added too early due to an IMS voice service configuration process, or a wrong secondary cell is added due to an IMS voice service configuration process.”).
Claims 20-24, directed to an apparatus embodiment of claims 1-5, recite similar features as claims 1-5, respectively, and are therefore rejected upon the same grounds as claims 1-5. Please see above rejections of claims 1-5. Ma further discloses the apparatus as a terminal device comprising a memory, a transceiver, and a processor in at least Figure 15 with [0039] and [1203-1208].
Claims 25-26, directed to an apparatus embodiment of claims 6-7, recite similar features as claims 6-7, respectively, and are therefore rejected upon the same grounds as claims 6-7. Please see above rejections of claims 6-7. Ma discloses the apparatus as a network device comprising a memory, transceiver, and a processor in at least Figure 14 with [0038] and [1201-1202].
Claims 35-36, directed to an apparatus embodiment of claims 16-17, recite similar features as claims 16-17, respectively, and are therefore rejected upon the same grounds as claims 16-17. Please see above rejections of claims 16-17. Ma discloses the apparatus as a network device comprising a memory, transceiver, and a processor in at least Figure 14 with [0038] and [1201-1202].
Conclusion
12. Applicant is encouraged to submit a written authorization for Internet communications (PTO/SB/439, http://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/sb0439.pdf) in the instant patent application to authorize the examiner to communicate with the applicant via email. The authorization will allow the examiner to better practice compact prosecution. The written authorization can be submitted via one of the following methods only: (1) Central Fax which can be found in the Conclusion section of this Office action; (2) regular postal mail; (3) EFS WEB; or (4) the service window on the Alexandria campus. EFS web is the recommended way to submit the form since this allows the form to be entered into the file wrapper within the same day (system dependent). Written authorization submitted via other methods, such as direct fax to the examiner or email, will not be accepted. See MPEP § 502.03.
13. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN H ELLIOTT IV whose telephone number is (571)270-7163. The examiner can normally be reached M, T, R, F 5:00 AM-5:00 PM, W 5:00 AM-3:00 PM (EDT).
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, Michael Thier can be reached at (571) 272-2832. 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.
BENJAMIN H. ELLIOTT IV
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2474
/BENJAMIN H ELLIOTT IV/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2474 September 15, 2026
Prosecution Insights