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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements filed on 08/20/2025 and 11/26/2024 comply with all application rules and regulations. Therefore, the information referred to therein have been considered.
Specification Objection
The use of the term Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, WiMAX, Zigbee or Z-Wave which is a trade name or a mark used in commerce, has been noted in this application. The term should be accompanied by the generic terminology; furthermore, the term should be capitalized wherever it appears or, where appropriate, include a proper symbol indicating use in commerce such as ™, SM , or ® following the term.
Although the use of trade names and marks used in commerce (i.e., trademarks, service marks, certification marks, and collective marks) are permissible in patent applications, the proprietary nature of the marks should be respected and every effort made to prevent their use in any manner which might adversely affect their validity as commercial marks.
Claim Objections
Claims 5, 18, and 34 objected to because of the following informalities:
• Claim 5, line 8, “being not” should be “not being”.
• Claim 18, line 4, “a NTN-capable” should be “an NTN-capable”.
• In claim 34, line 3, “a NTN-capable” should be “an NTN-capable”.
Appropriate correction is 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 1-2, 8-9, 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Matsuda et al. (WO-2020026734-A1), (for purposes of examination, Examiner cites to English language equivalent U.S. Pub. (US-20210219228-A1), hereinafter referred to as “Matsuda”).
Regarding claim 1 (Currently Amended), Matsuda teaches a wireless connection maintenance method, executed by a terminal device, comprising (Figs. 1-4, [0001], [0053], [0076]-[0077], and [0143] describe the method for maintaining/switching wireless connection that can performed by terminal/UE whether the BS is ground based or non-ground based. [0047] and [0060] provide the method can be applied for both TN and NTN, see also [0189]-[0216]):
in response to a situation wherein the terminal device is in a first specific state and the terminal device has not obtained first system information, determining that a target cell is forbidden and/or performing a cell reselection ([0127], [0134] and [0151] describe the situation of the transition among the three states: RRC_idle, RRC_inactive and RRC_connected states, where one of them could be the specific state. [0128] provide that at idle state the UE can perform cell selection. Fig. 10 also showed how the UE detects the synchronization signal of the cell (Step S101), and after establishment of the synchronization of the downlink, the UE attempts decoding of the PBCH to acquire a master information block (MIB) as part of the system information (Step S102). That implies the UE in the specific state and hasn’t obtained yet the system information. The system information includes the MIB and a system information block (SIB), and system information includes information on access to the cell, information on cell selection, see [0129]. [0130]-[0133] illustrate that the SBI includes information for cell selection, connection forbidding information, maximum uplink transmission power information, TDD configuration information,… [0133] states “When all the first system information and the second system information have been unable to be acquired, for example, the controller 55 determines that access to the cell is forbidden” that implies the UE can determine target cell is forbidden).
Regarding claim 2 (Currently Amended), Matsuda teaches the wireless connection maintenance method of claim 1, wherein the determining that the target cell is forbidden and/or performing the cell reselection comprises at least one of:
Matsuda further teaches determining that the target cell is forbidden and/or performing the cell reselection in response to the terminal device being in the first specific state, the terminal device initiating a Radio Resource Control (RRC) connection and the terminal device having not obtained the first system information ([0127]-[0133] explicitly describe this scenario when the UE having (not) obtained the SIB in detail. [0127] states “The initial connection processing is processing for causing the communication apparatus 50 to transition from an idle state (RRC_IDLE), in which the communication apparatus 50 is not connected to any cells, to a connected state (RRC_CONNECTED), in which the communication apparatus 50 has established connection with any cell” and [0128] illustrates how the UE perform the cell search at the idle state to initiate the connection with a cell, as shown in Fig. 10, by acquire a master information block (MIB) as part of the system information (Step S102), which implies the UE has not obtain yet the system information. [0133] states “When the controller 55 has been unable to acquire the system information required for establishment of link, the controller 55 within the communication apparatus 50 determines that access to the cell is forbidden. When all the first system information and the second system information have been unable to be acquired, for example, the controller 55 determines that access to the cell is forbidden. In this case, the controller 55 ends the initial connection processing” that means if the UE cannot obtain the necessary SIB/MIB, it will then mark the target cell as forbidden and will not proceed with connection establishment.);
or
re-obtaining the first system information in response to the terminal device being in the first specific state, the terminal device initiating an RRC connection and the terminal device having not obtained the first system information, and in response to the first system information being not re-obtained within a predetermined duration, determining that the target cell is forbidden or performing the cell reselection;
or
determining that the target cell is forbidden and/or performing the cell reselection in response to the terminal device being in the first specific state, and the terminal device having not obtained the first system information before the terminal device initiates an RRC connection recovery procedure or in a case that the terminal device initiates the RRC connection recovery procedure.
(we don't give these limitations patentable weight due to the use of "or" which means the limitations are written in the alternative.)
Regarding claim 8 (Currently Amended), Matsuda teaches the wireless connection maintenance method of claim 2 further comprising at least one of:
Matsuda further teaches determining the predetermined duration based on a Master Information Block (MIB) or a System Information Block (SIB) sent by a network side device, wherein the MIB carries a duration configuration, and the SIB carries the duration configuration ([0129] and [0247] describe the receiving the MIB, and the SIB from the base station (the non-ground station 20) in the idle state (Step S401), for example, the communication apparatus 50 detects the connected base station (Step S401A), where the MIB include parameters for scheduling information of the SIB . [0132] provides the UE acquires the second system information based on the MIB (that is, the first system information) (Step S103). The SIB1 includes cell access information, cell selection information, maximum uplink transmission power information, TDD configuration information, the cycle of the system information, mapping information of the system information, and the length of a system information (SI) window. The SIB2 includes connection forbidding information, radio resource configuration information common to cells (radio resource configuration common), and uplink carrier information, which includes configuration information of PRACH and RACH common to cells. Examples in [0136] that describes the guard time/ duration of the random access timing and [0223] which define the window size, in addition to the SI window length for the duration of the system information window);
or determining the predetermined duration based on a system agreement (we don't give this limitation patentable weight due to the use of "or" which means the limitation is written in the alternative.)
Regarding claim 9 (Original), Matsuda teaches the wireless connection maintenance method of claim 1, further comprising:
Matsuda further teaches determining that the target cell is forbidden and/or performing the cell reselection in response to the terminal device being a Non-Terrestrial Network (NTN)-capable UE and the terminal device having not obtained the first system information (Figs. 2-4, [0047] and [0060]-[0065] provide the method can be applied for both TN and NTN, see also [0189]-[0216]. [0063]and [0069] illustrate that the UE may operate with both ground and non -ground /satellite/NTN base stations. [0129]-[0133] describes when the system information have been unable to be acquired from the BS, ( whether it is TN or NTN BS), for establishment the link, for example, the controller 55 /the UE determines that access to the cell is forbidden” that implies the UE can determine target cell is forbidden, means that can be applied for both, see also [0148] states “the base station may be the non-ground station 20 or the ground station 30. In the following description, it is assumed that the base station to which the controller 55 transmits the random access preamble is the non-ground station 20” and [0154] it is assumed that the base station is the non-ground station 20; however, the base station may be the ground station 30).
As to claim 25, see similar rejection to claim 1, the apparatus teaches the method.
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 5-6, 10-12, 14-19, 26, 34-35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsuda et al. (WO-2020026734-A1), (for purposes of examination, Examiner cites to English language equivalent U.S. Pub. (US-20210219228-A1), hereinafter referred to as “Matsuda”) in view of Kim (WO-2021225314-A1), hereinafter referred to as “Kim”.
Regarding claim 5 (Original) Matsuda teaches the wireless connection maintenance method of claim 1, wherein the determining that the target cell is forbidden and/or performing the cell reselection in response to the terminal device having not obtained the first system information comprises:
Matsuda fails to teach re-obtaining the first system information in response to the terminal device being in the first specific state and the terminal device having not obtained the first system information before the terminal device initiates a connection recovery procedure
However, Kim teaches re-obtaining the first system information in response to the terminal device being in the first specific state and the terminal device having not obtained the first system information before the terminal device initiates a connection recovery procedure ([0313]-[0317] describe that before starting the connection recovery procedure (which means after the beam group change), the UE may attempt to re-obtain the system information SIB, from the current (target) cell, see also [0276], [0316]-[0317] and claims 1 and 11, that describe when the UE detect the changing in beam group, initiate the system information acquisition procedure before proceeding with connection recovery, attempt to read the SIBs , and if the system information is different , it will update its stored information, [0339], claim 12. [0012], Fig. 12, and [0300] that show changing in the serving beam and its prerequisite step before any recovery/mobility actions)
or in a case that the terminal device initiates a connection procedure (we don't give this limitation patentable weight due to the use of "or" which means the limitation is written in the alternative.)
; and in response to the first system information being not re-obtained within a predetermined duration, determining that the target cell is forbidden and/or performing the cell reselection ([0241]-[0252] provide the procedure if the essential system information missing/not obtained. [0175]-[0194] illustrate how the UE can determine the start of SI window for acquiring an SI message. If the SIB is not received within the SI-window or after repeated attempt, then the UE marks the cell as barred/forbidden [0252], [0191]. [0194] “If the concerned SI message was not received in the current modification period, handling of SI message acquisition is left to UE implementation”, which means the UE will consider cell re-selection to other cells on the same frequency as the barred cell as allowed. That confirms the method can handle the scenario where SIB acquisition failure by the mentioned steps of procedure).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Matsuda to incorporate the teachings of Kim (in analogous art) by in response to the system information being not re-obtained within a predetermined duration, determining that the target cell is forbidden and/or performing the cell reselection. That’s would help to optimize network /system information depending on a location of the wireless device and minimize the power consumption for acquiring the system information (Kim, [0016]-[0017], [0390]).
Regarding claim 6 (Currently Amended), Matsuda teaches the wireless connection maintenance method of claim 1, wherein the determining that the target cell is forbidden and/or performing the cell reselection in response to the terminal device being in the first specific state and the terminal device having not obtained the first system information comprises at least one of:
Matsuda fails to teach determining that the target cell is forbidden and/or performing the cell reselection in response to the terminal device being in the first specific state, an uplink synchronization validity timer associated with the first system information expired and the terminal device having not obtained the first system information.
However, Kim teaches determining that the target cell is forbidden and/or performing the cell reselection in response to the terminal device being in the first specific state, an uplink synchronization validity timer associated with the first system information expired and the terminal device having not obtained the first system information ( [0161]-[0164] describe the timer T311 which is refers to the UL synchronization validity timer. During this period, the UE should receive the MIB/SIB. [0243]-[0249] provide the scenario if the UE is unable to acquire the MIB during the T311, and upon to the expiration of this period, consider the cell as barred; and perform barring as if intraFreqReselection is set to allowed; else if the UE is unable to acquire the SIB1: consider the cell as barred. That confirm that the UE will mark the current cell as forbidden when the UE in a specific state (RRC_idle, RRC_inactive, or RRC_connected with T311 running) and the UL synchronization validity timer is expired without getting the system information); or
determining that the target cell is forbidden and/or performing the cell reselection in response to the terminal device being in the first specific state, and the terminal device having not obtained the first system information within a predetermined duration after an uplink synchronization validity timer associated with the first system information expires. (we don't give this limitation patentable weight due to the use of "or" which means the limitation is written in the alternative.)
Regarding claim 10 (Currently Amended), Matsuda teaches the wireless connection maintenance method of claim 1, wherein the determining that the target cell is forbidden and/or performing the cell reselection in response to the terminal device being in the first specific state and the terminal device not obtaining the first system information comprises at least one of:
Matsuda fails to teach selecting or reselecting a cell at a same frequency as the target cell;
However, Kim teaches selecting or reselecting a cell at a same frequency as the target cell ([0249]-[0252] that describe when the selecting or reselecting a cell at a same frequency as the target cell is allowed, as states “ if the cell operates in licensed spectrum and intraFreqReselection in MIB is set to notAllowed: 4> consider cell re-selection to other cells on the same frequency as the barred cell as not allowed. 3> else: 4> consider cell re-selection to other cells on the same frequency as the barred cell as allowed. “);
determining that the target cell is forbidden within a predetermined duration in response to the terminal device being in the first specific state and the terminal device having not obtained the first system information, or
determining that the target cell and other cells at a same frequency as the target cell are all forbidden within a predetermined duration and performing the cell reselection in response to the terminal device being in the first specific state and the terminal device having not obtained the first system information.
(we don't give these limitations patentable weight due to the use of "or" which means the limitations are written in the alternative.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Matsuda to incorporate the teachings of Kim (in analogous art) by in response to the system information being not re-obtained within a predetermined duration, determining that the target cell is forbidden and/or performing the cell reselection. That’s would help to optimize network /system information depending on a location of the wireless device and minimize the power consumption for acquiring the system information (Kim, [0016]-[0017], [0390]).
Regarding claim 11 (Original), Matsuda and Kim teach the wireless connection maintenance method of claim 10, wherein the determining that the target cell is forbidden within the predetermined duration in response to the terminal device being in the first specific state and the terminal device having not obtained the first system information comprises:
Matsuda fails to teach in response to a cell system message indicating that an intraFreq Reselection is allowed, determining that the target cell is forbidden within the predetermined duration in response to the terminal device being in the first specific state and the terminal device having not obtained the first system information.
However, Kim teaches in response to a cell system message indicating that an intraFreq Reselection is allowed, determining that the target cell is forbidden within the predetermined duration in response to the terminal device being in the first specific state and the terminal device having not obtained the first system information ([0242]-[0246] provide the UE shall consider the cell as barred; and perform barring as if intraFreqReselection is set to allowed, when the UE in RRC_IDLE or in RRC_INACTIVE or in RRC_CONNECTED while T311 is running and the UE is unable to acquire the MIB).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Matsuda to incorporate the teachings of Kim (in analogous art) by in response to the system information being not re-obtained within a predetermined duration, determining that the target cell is forbidden and/or performing the cell reselection. That’s would help to optimize network /system information depending on a location of the wireless device and minimize the power consumption for acquiring the system information (Kim, [0016]-[0017], [0390]).
Regarding claim 12 (Original), Matsuda and Kim teach the wireless connection maintenance method of claim 10, wherein the determining that the target cell is forbidden within the predetermined duration in response to the terminal device having not obtained the first system information comprises:
Matsuda fails to teach in response to a cell system message indicating that an intraFreq Reselection is allowed or the cell system message indicates that the intraFreq Reselection is not allowed, determining that the target cell is forbidden within the predetermined duration in response to the terminal device being in the first specific state and the terminal device having not obtained the first system information.
However, Kim teaches in response to a cell system message indicating that an intraFreq Reselection is allowed or the cell system message indicates that the intraFreq Reselection is not allowed, determining that the target cell is forbidden within the predetermined duration in response to the terminal device being in the first specific state and the terminal device having not obtained the first system information ([0242]-[0248] provide the UE shall consider the cell as barred; and perform barring as if intraFreqReselection is set to allowed, when the UE in RRC_IDLE or in RRC_INACTIVE or in RRC_CONNECTED while T311 is running ( which is a predetermined duration) and the UE is unable to acquire the MIB, else if the UE is unable to acquire the SIB1: consider the cell as barred.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Matsuda to incorporate the teachings of Kim (in analogous art) by in response to the system information being not re-obtained within a predetermined duration, determining that the target cell is forbidden and/or performing the cell reselection. That’s would help to optimize network /system information depending on a location of the wireless device and minimize the power consumption for acquiring the system information (Kim, [0016]-[0017], [0390]).
Regarding claim 14 (Currently Amended), Matsuda and Kim teach the wireless connection maintenance method of claim 10, wherein the determining that the target cell and the other cells at the same frequency as the target cell are all forbidden within the predetermined duration and performing the cell reselection in response to the terminal device being in the first specific state and the terminal device having not obtained the first system information comprises:
Matsuda fails to teach in response to a cell system message indicating that an intraFreq Reselection is allowed, determining that the target cell and the other cells at the same frequency as the target cell are all forbidden within the predetermined duration and performing the cell reselection in response to the terminal device being in the first specific state and the terminal device having not obtained the first system information.
However, Kim teaches in response to a cell system message indicating that an intraFreq Reselection is allowed, determining that the target cell and the other cells at the same frequency as the target cell are all forbidden within the predetermined duration and performing the cell reselection in response to the terminal device being in the first specific state and the terminal device having not obtained the first system information ([0242]-[0252] describe the flowchart for the UE shall consider [0252] cell re-selection to other cells on the same frequency as the barred cell as allowed if in RRC_IDLE or in RRC_INACTIVE or in RRC_CONNECTED while T311 is running [0243] and [0244] if the UE is unable to acquire the MIB: [0245] consider the cell as barred; and [0246] perform barring as if intraFreqReselection is set to allowed; [0251] else (when the condition in [0249] not satisfied), then the UE [0252] cell re-selection to other cells on the same frequency as the barred cell as allowed).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Matsuda to incorporate the teachings of Kim (in analogous art) by in response to the system information being not re-obtained within a predetermined duration, determining that the target cell is forbidden and/or performing the cell reselection. That’s would help to optimize network /system information depending on a location of the wireless device and minimize the power consumption for acquiring the system information (Kim, [0016]-[0017], [0390]).
Regarding claim 15 (Currently Amended), Matsuda and Kim teach the wireless connection maintenance method of claim 11,
Matsuda does not explicitly teaches wherein the cell system message is an MIB.
However, Kim teaches wherein the cell system message is an MIB ([0130-[0132] states “System information are described. Section 5.2 of 3GPP TS 38.331 v16.0.0 may be referred. [0131] System Information (SI) is divided into the MIB and a number of SIBs and posSIBs where: the MIB is always transmitted on the BCH with a periodicity of 80 ms and repetitions made within 80 ms and it includes parameters that are needed to acquire SIB1 from the cell. The first transmission of the MIB is scheduled in subframes and repetitions are scheduled according to the period of SSB” that confirms the cell system message is an MIB).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Matsuda to incorporate the teachings of Kim (in analogous art) by in response to the system information being not re-obtained within a predetermined duration, determining that the target cell is forbidden and/or performing the cell reselection. That’s would help to optimize network /system information depending on a location of the wireless device and minimize the power consumption for acquiring the system information (Kim, [0016]-[0017], [0390]).
Regarding claim 16 (Currently Amended), Matsuda teaches the wireless connection maintenance method of claim 1, wherein the terminal device being in the first specific state comprises at least one of:
Matsuda does not explicitly teach the terminal device being in an idle state; the terminal device being in an inactive state ; or the terminal device being in a connected state in a case that a timer T311 operates.
However, Kim teaches the terminal device being in an idle state; the terminal device being in an inactive state ; or the terminal device being in a connected state in a case that a timer T311 operates ([0140] states “the procedure applies to UEs in RRC_IDLE, in RRC_INACTIVE and in RRC_CONNECTED. [0242]-[243] provides the UE may be any state of RRC_IDLE or in RRC_INACTIVE or in RRC_CONNECTED while T311 is running to acquire the MIB).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Matsuda to incorporate the teachings of Kim (in analogous art) by in response to the system information being not re-obtained within a predetermined duration, determining that the target cell is forbidden and/or performing the cell reselection. That’s would help to optimize network /system information depending on a location of the wireless device and minimize the power consumption for acquiring the system information (Kim, [0016]-[0017], [0390]).
Regarding claim 17 (Original), Matsuda teaches a wireless connection maintenance method, executed by a terminal device, comprising (Figs. 1-4, [0001], [0053], [0076]-[0077], and [0143] describe the method for maintaining/switching wireless connection that can performed by terminal/UE whether the BS is ground based or non-ground based. [0047] and [0060] provide the method can be applied for both TN and NTN, see also [0189]-[0216]):
Matsuda fails to teach determining that there is valid second system information before initiating a connection establishment procedure or a connection recovery procedure in response to the terminal device being in a second specific state.
However, Kim teaches determining that there is valid second system information before initiating a connection establishment procedure or a connection recovery procedure in response to the terminal device being in a second specific state ([0141]-[0143], [0282], [0316]-[0318] provide the UE may check whether the SIBs have stored is valid for the new beam group/new cell by comparing the tags value/areaScop/location identifier in the newer SIB with those that already stored from previous beam group, “The UE in RRC_IDLE and RRC_INACTIVE shall ensure having a valid version of (at least) the MIB, SIB1 through SIB4, SIB5 (if the UE supports E-UTRA) and SIB11 (if the UE is configured for idle/inactive measurements). “ and “upon initiation of the system information acquisition, the UE may read SIB1 and check the value tag in SIB1 for each SIB, if the value tag included in the received SIB1 for a SIB is identical to the value tag associated with the stored version of that SIB, UE may consider the stored SIB as valid within the current beam group.” . [0146]-[0159] illustrate the flowchart/procedure for performing the validity of the system information before establish/recover the connection, see also [0300]-[0301] and claims 10 and 27).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Matsuda to incorporate the teachings of Kim (in analogous art) by in response to the system information being not re-obtained within a predetermined duration, determining that the target cell is forbidden and/or performing the cell reselection. That’s would help to optimize network /system information depending on a location of the wireless device and minimize the power consumption for acquiring the system information (Kim, [0016]-[0017], [0390]).
Regarding claim 18 (Original), Matsuda and Kim teach the wireless connection maintenance method of claim 17, wherein the determining that there is the valid second system information before initiating the connection establishment procedure or the connection recovery procedure comprises:
Matsuda fails to teach in response to the terminal device being a NTN-capable UE, determining that there is the valid second system information before initiating the connection establishment procedure or the connection recovery procedure.
However, Kim teaches in response to the terminal device being a NTN-capable UE, determining that there is the valid second system information before initiating the connection establishment procedure or the connection recovery procedure ((Figs. 2-4, [0047] and [0060]-[0065] provide the method can be applied for both TN and NTN, see also [0189]-[0216]. [0063] and [0069] illustrate that the UE may operate with both ground and non -ground /satellite/NTN base stations. [0129]-[0133] describes when the system information have been unable to be acquired from the BS, ( whether it is TN or NTN BS), for establishment the link, for example, the controller 55 /the UE determines that access to the cell is forbidden” that implies the UE can determine target cell is forbidden, means that all the procedures here can be applied for both ground and non-ground BSs, see also [0148] states “the base station may be the non-ground station 20 or the ground station 30. In the following description, it is assumed that the base station to which the controller 55/UE transmits the random access preamble is the non-ground station 20” and [0154] it is assumed that the base station is the non-ground station 20; however, the base station may be the ground station 30). That implies the procedure described in [0141]-[0143] can be also valid for the NTN-capable UE, see also [0316]-[0317] and claims 14 and 29 which state that the method and apparatus apply when the cell includes a NTN cell).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Matsuda to incorporate the teachings of Kim (in analogous art) by in response to the system information being not re-obtained within a predetermined duration, determining that the target cell is forbidden and/or performing the cell reselection. That’s would help to optimize network /system information depending on a location of the wireless device and minimize the power consumption for acquiring the system information (Kim, [0016]-[0017], [0390]).
Regarding claim 19 (Original), Matsuda and Kim teach the wireless connection maintenance method of claim 17, wherein the terminal device being in the second specific state comprises at least one of:
Matsuda fails to teach the terminal device being in an idle state; or the terminal device being in an inactive state.
However, Kim teaches the terminal device being in an idle state; or the terminal device being in an inactive state ([0140]-[0142] provide that the UE applies the SI acquisition procedure to acquire the AS, NAS- and positioning assistance data information. The procedure applies to UEs in RRC_IDLE, in RRC_INACTIVE and in RRC_CONNECTED. The UE in RRC_IDLE and RRC_INACTIVE shall ensure having a valid version of (at least) the MIB, SIB1 through SIB4, SIB5 and SIB11 and the procedure related to SIB validity and need to (re)-acquire SIB is described. That confirms the UE being in an idle state; or the terminal device being in an inactive state).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Matsuda to incorporate the teachings of Kim (in analogous art) by in response to the system information being not re-obtained within a predetermined duration, determining that the target cell is forbidden and/or performing the cell reselection. That’s would help to optimize network /system information depending on a location of the wireless device and minimize the power consumption for acquiring the system information (Kim, [0016]-[0017], [0390]).
Regarding claim 26 (Currently Amended), Matsuda teaches a terminal device, comprising a processor and a memory, wherein the memory is configured to store therein a computer program, and the processor is configured to (Figs. 13-14, [0090], [0102], [0125] [0188]-[0189] provide that the UE controller is implemented by a processor such as a central processing unit (CPU) or a micro processing unit (MPU), for example. The controller 13 is implemented by executing various kinds of computer programs stored in the storage apparatus within the management apparatus 10 by the processor with a random access memory (RAM) or the like as a working area and the computer program is installed in a computer, and the processing described is executed to perform the method steps):
Matsuda fails to teach determine that there is valid second system information before initiating a connection establishment procedure or a connection recovery procedure in response to the terminal device being in a second specific state.
However, Kim teaches determine that there is valid second system information before initiating a connection establishment procedure or a connection recovery procedure in response to the terminal device being in a second specific state ([0141]-[0143], [0282], [0316]-[0318] provide the UE may check whether the SIBs have stored is valid for the new beam group/new cell by comparing the tags value/areaScop/location identifier in the newer SIB with those that already stored from previous beam group, “The UE in RRC_IDLE and RRC_INACTIVE shall ensure having a valid version of (at least) the MIB, SIB1 through SIB4, SIB5 (if the UE supports E-UTRA) and SIB11 (if the UE is configured for idle/inactive measurements). “ and “upon initiation of the system information acquisition, the UE may read SIB1 and check the value tag in SIB1 for each SIB, if the value tag included in the received SIB1 for a SIB is identical to the value tag associated with the stored version of that SIB, UE may consider the stored SIB as valid within the current beam group.” . [0146]-[0159] illustrate the flowchart/procedure for performing the validity of the system information before establish/recover the connection, see also [0300]-[0301] and claims 10 and 27).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Matsuda to incorporate the teachings of Kim (in analogous art) by in response to the system information being not re-obtained within a predetermined duration, determining that the target cell is forbidden and/or performing the cell reselection. That’s would help to optimize network /system information depending on a location of the wireless device and minimize the power consumption for acquiring the system information (Kim, [0016]-[0017], [0390]).
Regarding claim 34 (New), Matsuda and Kim teach the wireless connection maintenance method of claim 17, wherein the processor is configured to:
Matsuda fails to teach in response to the terminal device being a NTN-capable UE, determine that there is the valid second system information before initiating the connection establishment procedure or the connection recovery procedure.
However, Kim teaches in response to the terminal device being a NTN-capable UE, determine that there is the valid second system information before initiating the connection establishment procedure or the connection recovery procedure ((Figs. 2-4, [0047] and [0060]-[0065] provide the method can be applied for both TN and NTN, see also [0189]-[0216]. [0063] and [0069] illustrate that the UE may operate with both ground and non -ground /satellite/NTN base stations. [0129]-[0133] describes when the system information have been unable to be acquired from the BS, ( whether it is TN or NTN BS), for establishment the link, for example, the controller 55 /the UE determines that access to the cell is forbidden” that implies the UE can determine target cell is forbidden, means that all the procedures here can be applied for both ground and non-ground BSs, see also [0148] states “the base station may be the non-ground station 20 or the ground station 30. In the following description, it is assumed that the base station to which the controller 55/UE transmits the random access preamble is the non-ground station 20” and [0154] it is assumed that the base station is the non-ground station 20; however, the base station may be the ground station 30). That implies the procedure described in [0141]-[0143] can be also valid for the NTN-capable UE, see also [0316]-[0317] and claims 14 and 29 which state that the method and apparatus apply when the cell includes a NTN cell).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Matsuda to incorporate the teachings of Kim (in analogous art) by in response to the system information being not re-obtained within a predetermined duration, determining that the target cell is forbidden and/or performing the cell reselection. That’s would help to optimize network /system information depending on a location of the wireless device and minimize the power consumption for acquiring the system information (Kim, [0016]-[0017], [0390]).
Regarding claim 35 (New), Matsuda and Kim teach the wireless connection maintenance method of claim 17, wherein the terminal device being in the second specific state comprises at least one of:
Matsuda fails to teach the terminal device being in an idle state; or the terminal device being in an inactive state.
However, Kim teaches the terminal device being in an idle state; or the terminal device being in an inactive state ([0140]-[0142] provide that the UE applies the SI acquisition procedure to acquire the AS, NAS- and positioning assistance data information. The procedure applies to UEs in RRC_IDLE, in RRC_INACTIVE and in RRC_CONNECTED. The UE in RRC_IDLE and RRC_INACTIVE shall ensure having a valid version of (at least) the MIB, SIB1 through SIB4, SIB5 and SIB11 and the procedure related to SIB validity and need to (re)-acquire SIB is described. That confirms the UE being in an idle state; or the terminal device being in an inactive state).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Matsuda to incorporate the teachings of Kim (in analogous art) by in response to the system information being not re-obtained within a predetermined duration, determining that the target cell is forbidden and/or performing the cell reselection. That’s would help to optimize network /system information depending on a location of the wireless device and minimize the power consumption for acquiring the system information (Kim, [0016]-[0017], [0390]).
Relevant Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's
disclosure.
Bai et al. (US-20210314853-A1), Agiwal et al. (US-20210160760-A1), Loehr et al. (US-20210006362-A1), Jia et al. (US-20220256425-A1), and Chen et al. (US-20200374782-A1) teach methods involved acquiring the system information to improve the mobility in a wireless communication systems.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SANAA S AL SAMAHI whose telephone number is (571)272-4171. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5 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, Asad Nawaz can be reached at (571) 272-3988. 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.
/SANAA AL SAMAHI/Examiner, Art Unit 2463
/ASAD M NAWAZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2463
Prosecution Insights