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 statement (IDS) submitted on 2/24/2025 and 08/11/2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
Claims 1-4, 7-9, 12, 14-18, and 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Jung et al. (US 20260113799 A1, hereinafter, Jung). Jung teaches all of the limitations of the specified claim with the following reasoning that follows.
Regarding Claim 1, Jung discloses a method comprising:
receiving, by a wireless device (Fig. 1F, UAV UE 1f-01 ) from a network (Fig. 1F, NR cell 1e-02), at least one access barring configuration, wherein each of the at least one access barring configuration is associated with one or more location ranges (Fig. 1F, see also, ¶0133 recites, In operation 1f-10, the UAV UE 1f-01 in the RRC idle mode or the RRC inactive state may acquire essential system information and other system information (SIB2, SIB3, etc.) from the NR cell 1f-02...The disclosure proposes broadcasting, via SIB1 or other system information by the NR cell, a height threshold value indicating whether the UAV UE 1f-01 applies the cellBarred-UAV and/or intraFreqReselction-UAV. According to an embodiment of the disclosure, when the height of the UAV UE 1f-01 is equal to or greater than the height threshold value, the UAV UE 1f-01 may apply the cellBarred-UAV and/or intraFreqReselection-UAV.”); Here the height threshold value (equal to or greater) is the location range.
determining, by the wireless device, a certain access barring configuration associated with a certain location range to which a current location of the wireless device belongs (¶0134 recites, “…In operation 1f-15, the UAV UE 1f-01 in the RRC idle mode or the RRC inactive state may select a cell or reselect a cell by applying the cellBarred-UAV broadcasted in SIB1 or other system information when i) flight is performed at the height higher than the height threshold value broadcasted via the system information, or ii) flight is performed at the same height as the height threshold value. When the UAV UE flies at the height lower than the height threshold value broadcasted via the system information, the UAV UE may select or reselect a cell by applying the conventional parameter (cellBarred in MIB) broadcasted in the MIB. According to an embodiment of the disclosure, when the UAV UE flies at the height equal to or lower than the height threshold value, the UAV UE may select or reselect a cell by applying the conventional parameter (cellBarred in MIB) broadcasted via the MIB. The UE operation of selecting or reselecting the cell may follow the above-described embodiment. For reference, the height threshold value may be broadcasted via the system information or may be determined in the UE by itself. When the height threshold value is determined in the UE by itself, it may mean that the UE itself may determine the height threshold value and determine whether to apply a new parameter (cellBarred-UAV)...”, see also, ¶0146 recites, "...the new access identity may mean an access identity applied to the UAV UE, or may mean an access identity applied to a UE capable of flying when the height at which the UE capable of flying is equal to or greater than a specific height threshold...", see also ¶0224); Here, UE determines its location by determining it’s height and if the height is lower, equal or higher than the height threshold. and
PNG
media_image1.png
622
516
media_image1.png
Greyscale
performing, by the wireless device, an access barring check based on the certain access barring configuration (¶0221 recites, "The AS determines, using corresponding barring configuration information received from the network and the access identity and access category information mapped by the NAS, whether a service request is allowed (operation 1k-45). In the disclosure, an operation of determining whether the service request is allowed is called barring check. In the disclosure, an operation of performing barring check by the UE AS according to new barring configuration information when the UAV UE files at the height equal to or greater than a height threshold value. The UAV UE receives system information including access control configuration information and stores access control configuration information...").
PNG
media_image2.png
742
576
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 2, Jung discloses the method of claim 1.
Jung further discloses, wherein the method further comprises, receiving, by the wireless device from the network, (i) information on a list of the at least one access barring configuration (¶0148 recites, "...A base station 1h-20 provides, by using system information, UEs with barring configuration information corresponding to each category and a category list of providing the barring configuration information. A UE 1h-05 includes logical blocks of a NAS 1h-10 and an AS 1h-15.”), (ii) information on a list of the one or more location ranges (¶0209 recites, "...As in the above-described embodiment, the AS receives barring configuration information from system information broadcasted via a network (operation 1k-35). The disclosure proposes broadcasting, via system information, a new access category (for example, a new access category mapped to a UAC service) applicable to the UAV UE flying at the height equal to or greater than a height threshold value, a new access identity (for example, a new access identity mapped to the UAC service), and new barring configuration information thereof...", see also, ¶0224 recites, "In the disclosure, the UAC UE may fly at the height equal to or greater than a height threshold value and perform access control according to new configuration information. When the UAC UE flies at the height lower than the height threshold value, access control may be performed according to the conventional configuration information. According to an embodiment of the disclosure, when the UAC UE flies at the height lower than the height threshold value or flies at the height equal to the height threshold value, access control may be performed according to the conventional configuration information."), and (iii) mapping information between each of the at least one access barring configuration and the one or more location ranges (¶0209 recites, "...The disclosure proposes broadcasting, via system information, a new access category (for example, a new access category mapped to a UAC service) applicable to the UAV UE flying at the height equal to or greater than a height threshold value, a new access identity (for example, a new access identity mapped to the UAC service), and new barring configuration information thereof. For example, if the height at which the UAV UE flies is equal to or greater than a height threshold value, the UAV UE may apply new barring configuration information, and if not, the UAV UE may apply the conventional barring configuration information...", see also, 0221 recites, The AS determines, using corresponding barring configuration information received from the network and the access identity and access category information mapped by the NAS, whether a service request is allowed (operation 1k-45). In the disclosure, an operation of determining whether the service request is allowed is called barring check. In the disclosure, an operation of performing barring check by the UE AS according to new barring configuration information when the UAV UE files at the height equal to or greater than a height threshold value. The UAV UE receives system information including access control configuration information and stores access control configuration information..."). Also, examiner interprets that one of the claimed features to be mapped, because of the presence of “at least one” or “one or more”, or “each of the at least one” in the limitation.
Regarding Claim 3, Jung discloses the method of claim 1.
Jung also discloses, wherein each of the one or more location ranges includes (i) at least one height range and/or (ii) at least one zone (¶0134 recites, "...In operation 1f-15, the UAV UE 1f-01 in the RRC idle mode or the RRC inactive state may select a cell or reselect a cell by applying the cellBarred-UAV broadcasted in SIB1 or other system information when i) flight is performed at the height higher than the height threshold value broadcasted via the system information, or ii) flight is performed at the same height as the height threshold value. When the UAV UE flies at the height lower than the height threshold value broadcasted via the system information, the UAV UE may select or reselect a cell by applying the conventional parameter (cellBarred in MIB) broadcasted in the MIB. According to an embodiment of the disclosure, when the UAV UE flies at the height equal to or lower than the height threshold value, the UAV UE may select or reselect a cell by applying the conventional parameter (cellBarred in MIB) broadcasted via the MIB..."). Here the lower and higher value of the height gives the height range. Also, examiner interprets that one of the claimed features to be mapped, because of the presence of “and/or” in the limitation.
Regarding Claim 4, Jung discloses the method of claim 3.
Jung also disclose, wherein the one or more location ranges includes a first location range consisting of a height range (¶0134 recites, "...In operation 1f-15, the UAV UE 1f-01 in the RRC idle mode or the RRC inactive state may select a cell or reselect a cell by applying the cellBarred-UAV broadcasted in SIB1 or other system information when i) flight is performed at the height higher than the height threshold value broadcasted via the system information, or ii) flight is performed at the same height as the height threshold value. When the UAV UE flies at the height lower than the height threshold value broadcasted via the system information, the UAV UE may select or reselect a cell by applying the conventional parameter (cellBarred in MIB) broadcasted in the MIB. According to an embodiment of the disclosure, when the UAV UE flies at the height equal to or lower than the height threshold value, the UAV UE may select or reselect a cell by applying the conventional parameter (cellBarred in MIB) broadcasted via the MIB...").
Regarding Claim 7, Jung discloses the method of claim 1.
Jung also discloses, wherein the at least one access barring configuration includes one or more barring parameters associated with the one or more location ranges (¶0146 recites, “The access identity is indication information defined in the 3GPP, i.e., specified in the standard document. The access identity is used to indicate a specific access as in the table below. The disclosure proposes a new access identity. According to an embodiment of the disclosure, the new access identity may mean an access identity applied to the UAV UE, or may mean an access identity applied to a UE capable of flying when the height at which the UE capable of flying is equal to or greater than a specific height threshold. The new access identity may mean one of 3 to 10 in Table 2 below.", see also, ¶0147 recites, "...According to an embodiment of the disclosure, the new standardized access category may mean a standardized access category applied to the UAV UE, or may mean a standardized access category applied to a UE capable of flying when the height of the UE capable of flying is equal to or greater than a specific height threshold. The new standardized access category may mean one of categories 8-31 in Table 3 below."). Also, examiner interprets that one of the claimed features to be mapped, because of the presence of “one or more” in the limitation.
Regarding Claim 8, Jung discloses the method of claim 7.
Jung also discloses, wherein the one or more barring parameters include a barring factor, a barring time, and/or one or more allowed access identities to access associated with an access category (¶0188 recites, "The AS determines, using corresponding barring configuration information received from the network and the access identity and access category information mapped by the NAS, whether a service request is allowed (operation 1i-45). In the disclosure, an operation of determining whether the service request is allowed is called barring check. The UE receives system information including access control configuration information and stores barring configuration information..."). Also, examiner interprets that one of the claimed features to be mapped, because of the presence of “and/or one or more” in the limitation.
Regarding Claim 9, Jung discloses the method of claim 1.
Jung further teaches, wherein the at least one access barring configuration includes information on one or more access categories associated with the one or more location ranges (¶0221 recites, "The AS determines, using corresponding barring configuration information received from the network and the access identity and access category information mapped by the NAS, whether a service request is allowed (operation 1k-45). In the disclosure, an operation of determining whether the service request is allowed is called barring check. In the disclosure, an operation of performing barring check by the UE AS according to new barring configuration information when the UAV UE files at the height equal to or greater than a height threshold value. The UAV UE receives system information including access control configuration information and stores access control configuration information.").
Regarding Claim 12, Jung discloses the method of claim 1.
Jung further discloses, wherein the at least one access barring configuration includes information on one or more access identities associated with the one or more location ranges (¶0146 recites, The access identity is indication information defined in the 3GPP, i.e., specified in the standard document. The access identity is used to indicate a specific access as in the table below. The disclosure proposes a new access identity. According to an embodiment of the disclosure, the new access identity may mean an access identity applied to the UAV UE, or may mean an access identity applied to a UE capable of flying when the height at which the UE capable of flying is equal to or greater than a specific height threshold. The new access identity may mean one of 3 to 10 in Table 2 below.” See also, ¶0209 recites "... a new access identity (for example, a new access identity mapped to the UAC service), and new barring configuration information thereof. For example, if the height at which the UAV UE flies is equal to or greater than a height threshold value, the UAV UE may apply new barring configuration information, and if not, the UAV UE may apply the conventional barring configuration information. The height threshold value may be broadcasted via system information, or may be determined in the UAV UE itself…”). Also, examiner interprets that one of the claimed features to be mapped, because of the presence of “at least one/ one or more” in the limitation.
Regarding Claim 14, Jung discloses the method of claim 1.
Jung also discloses, wherein the wireless device is in communication with at least one of a user equipment (Fig. 1A, Element UE 1a-35), a network (Fig. 1A, Element ENB 1a-05), or an autonomous vehicle (Fig. 1E, UAV UE 1e-01) other than the wireless device.
Regarding Claim 15, Jung discloses a wireless device comprising:
a transceiver (Fig. 1N, RF processor, 1n-10); a memory (Fig. 1N, Storage, 1n-40; and
at least one processor (Fig. 1N, Multi-connection Processor, 1n-52) operatively coupled to the transceiver and the memory, and adapted to:
control the transceiver to receive, from a network (Fig. 1F, NR cell 1e-02), at least one access barring configuration, wherein each of the at least one access barring configuration is associated with one or more location ranges (Fig. 1F, see also, ¶0133 recites, In operation 1f-10, the UAV UE 1f-01 in the RRC idle mode or the RRC inactive state may acquire essential system information and other system information (SIB2, SIB3, etc.) from the NR cell 1f-02...The disclosure proposes broadcasting, via SIB1 or other system information by the NR cell, a height threshold value indicating whether the UAV UE 1f-01 applies the cellBarred-UAV and/or intraFreqReselction-UAV. According to an embodiment of the disclosure, when the height of the UAV UE 1f-01 is equal to or greater than the height threshold value, the UAV UE 1f-01 may apply the cellBarred-UAV and/or intraFreqReselection-UAV.”); Here the height threshold value (equal to or greater) is the location range.
determine a certain access barring configuration associated with a certain location range to which a current location of the wireless device belongs (¶0134 recites, “…In operation 1f-15, the UAV UE 1f-01 in the RRC idle mode or the RRC inactive state may select a cell or reselect a cell by applying the cellBarred-UAV broadcasted in SIB1 or other system information when i) flight is performed at the height higher than the height threshold value broadcasted via the system information, or ii) flight is performed at the same height as the height threshold value. When the UAV UE flies at the height lower than the height threshold value broadcasted via the system information, the UAV UE may select or reselect a cell by applying the conventional parameter (cellBarred in MIB) broadcasted in the MIB. According to an embodiment of the disclosure, when the UAV UE flies at the height equal to or lower than the height threshold value, the UAV UE may select or reselect a cell by applying the conventional parameter (cellBarred in MIB) broadcasted via the MIB. The UE operation of selecting or reselecting the cell may follow the above-described embodiment. For reference, the height threshold value may be broadcasted via the system information or may be determined in the UE by itself. When the height threshold value is determined in the UE by itself, it may mean that the UE itself may determine the height threshold value and determine whether to apply a new parameter (cellBarred-UAV)...”, see also, ¶0146 recites, "...the new access identity may mean an access identity applied to the UAV UE, or may mean an access identity applied to a UE capable of flying when the height at which the UE capable of flying is equal to or greater than a specific height threshold...", see also ¶0224); Here, UE determines its location by determining it’s height and if the height is lower, equal or higher than the height threshold; and
PNG
media_image1.png
622
516
media_image1.png
Greyscale
perform an access barring check based on the certain access barring configuration (¶0221 recites, "The AS determines, using corresponding barring configuration information received from the network and the access identity and access category information mapped by the NAS, whether a service request is allowed (operation 1k-45). In the disclosure, an operation of determining whether the service request is allowed is called barring check. In the disclosure, an operation of performing barring check by the UE AS according to new barring configuration information when the UAV UE files at the height equal to or greater than a height threshold value. The UAV UE receives system information including access control configuration information and stores access control configuration information...").
PNG
media_image2.png
742
576
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 16 “Wireless Device”, is rejected under the same reasoning as Claim 2 “method”, where Jung teaches both method/ Wireless Device.
Regarding Claim 17 “Wireless Device”, is rejected under the same reasoning as Claim 3 “method”, where Jung teaches both method/ Wireless Device.
Regarding Claim 18 “Wireless Device”, is rejected under the same reasoning as Claim 4 “method”, where Jung teaches both method/ Wireless Device.
Regarding Claim 32 “Base Station”, is rejected under the same reasoning as Claim 15 “Wireless Device”, where Jung teaches both Base Station / Wireless Device.
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.
In 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 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 factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung, in view of Zhang et al. (US 20200245175 A1, hereinafter, Zhang) as mentioned in IDS.
Regarding Claim 5, Jung discloses the method of claim 3.
Jung explicitly doesn’t disclose, wherein the one or more location ranges includes a second location range consisting of a zone.
Zhang in related art relates, wherein the one or more location ranges includes a second location range consisting of a zone (¶0097 recites, As shown in FIG. 2A, a base station BS1 and a base station BS2 have different sizes and heights, so that height thresholds ThresUAVHeight1 (BS1) to ThresUAVHeightN (BS1) determined for a user equipment within coverage of the base station BS1 and height thresholds ThresUAVHeight1 (BS2) to ThresUAVHeightN (BS2) determined for a user equipment within coverage of the base station BS2 may be different in size, number, and/or interval between the height thresholds..", see also, ¶0173 recites, “ As shown in FIG. 14, the out-of-coverage user equipment UAV4 and UAV5 are both connected to the in-coverage user equipment UAV2. Since the user equipment UAV4 and the user equipment UAV5 cannot receive the configuration information regarding the height threshold from the base station, the user equipment UAV4 and the user equipment UAV5 may each transmits a request (for example, a broadcast request or a multicast request) to a surrounding user equipment to obtain the configuration information regarding the height threshold, so that the in-coverage user equipment UAV2 with which it is connected may determine, configure and/or update, after receiving the request, the height threshold for the user equipments UAV4 and UAV5 according to the configuration information received from the base station or independently.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the teaching of Jung with the idea of using one of more location ranges that includes a second location range consisting of a zone as disclosed by Zhang. The main advantage of configuring a second location range to consist solely of a zone is to increase operational flexibility through variable granularity.
Regarding Claim 6, Jung discloses the method of claim 3.
Jung doesn’t explicitly disclose, wherein the one or more location ranges includes a third location range consisting of both a height range and a zone.
Zhang in related art relates, wherein the one or more location ranges includes a third location range consisting of both a height range and a zone (¶0097 recites, "...On the other hand, although the base station BS2 and the base station BS3 have the same size, the base station BS2 and the base station BS3 may have different heights since the two base stations are in different positions (for example, the base station BS2 is located on the ground and the base station BS3 is located on a high building). Therefore, height thresholds ThresUAVHeight1 (BS2) to ThresUAVHeightN (BS2) determined for a user equipment within coverage of the base station BS2 and height thresholds ThresUAVHeight1 (BS3) to ThresUAVHeightN (BS3) determined for a user equipment within coverage of the base station BS3 may be different in size, number, and/or interval between the height thresholds.", see also, ¶0173 recites, “ As shown in FIG. 14, the out-of-coverage user equipment UAV4 and UAV5 are both connected to the in-coverage user equipment UAV2. Since the user equipment UAV4 and the user equipment UAV5 cannot receive the configuration information regarding the height threshold from the base station, the user equipment UAV4 and the user equipment UAV5 may each transmits a request (for example, a broadcast request or a multicast request) to a surrounding user equipment to obtain the configuration information regarding the height threshold, so that the in-coverage user equipment UAV2 with which it is connected may determine, configure and/or update, after receiving the request, the height threshold for the user equipments UAV4 and UAV5 according to the configuration information received from the base station or independently.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the teaching of Jung with the idea of using the one or more location ranges includes a third location range consisting of both a height range and a zone as disclosed by Zhang. The primary advantage of defining a location range that consists of both a height range and a zone is precision and granular spatial control.
Claims 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung, in view of Poscher et al. (US 20230081924 A1, hereinafter, Poscher) as mentioned in IDS.
Regarding Claim 10, Jung discloses the method of claim 9.
Jung doesn’t explicitly disclose, wherein the information on one or more access categories includes information on a specific access category which is barred for a first location range and is not barred for a second location range.
Poscher in related art relates, wherein the information on one or more access categories includes information on a specific access category which is barred for a first location range and is not barred for a second location range (¶0145 recites, "As shown above, each UAV may be categorized into a particular category. Here, three categories are shown as indicated with the numbers “A”, “B” and “C”. For each UAV category, multiple access categories may exist. Each access category is coupled to a particular requirement that is associated with the UAV, for example “cell allowed”, “limited bandwidth per bearer”, “cell not allowed”, etc. The particular requirement may thus be deduced, or retrieved, from the access information that is broadcasted by the radio base station A 42.").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the teaching of Jung with the idea of adding specific limitations regarding access barring configurations and geographic location ranges as disclosed by Poscher. The rationale for doing this is providing granular, location-aware network congestion control so that non-essential device traffic can be blocked in busy or restricted areas while still working normally in other regions.
Regarding Claim 11, Jung discloses the method of claim 9.
Jung doesn’t explicitly disclose, wherein the information on one or more access categories includes information on a specific access category which has a barring factor with higher probability of access attempt for a first location range and a barring factor with lower probability of access attempt for a second location range.
Poscher in related art relates, wherein the information on one or more access categories includes information on a specific access category which has a barring factor with higher probability of access attempt for a first location range and a barring factor with lower probability of access attempt for a second location range (¶0144 recites, “Based on the received notification 49, the UAV control module 46 is arranged to determine an action 50 to be performed based on the at least one barred service. The table below represent a table mapping that may be used by the UAV control module 46 for performing such a translation.” See also, ¶0145 recites, “As shown above, each UAV may be categorized into a particular category. Here, three categories are shown as indicated with the numbers “A”, “B” and “C”. For each UAV category, multiple access categories may exist. Each access category is coupled to a particular requirement that is associated with the UAV, for example “cell allowed”, “limited bandwidth per bearer”, “cell not allowed”, etc. The particular requirement may thus be deduced, or retrieved, from the access information that is broadcasted by the radio base station A 42”.). These “cell allowed”, “limited bandwidth per bearer”, or “cell not allowed”, gives the indication of higher or lower probability of access attempt for a certain location range.
PNG
media_image3.png
294
418
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the teaching of Jung with the teaching where for the exact same network service or priority level (the "specific access category"), the network makes it easier to connect in one area and harder to connect in another area as disclosed by Poscher. The rational for varying the barring factor by location is that it allows network operators to precisely control traffic congestion and device connection attempts based on where a device is physically located.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung, in view of Han et al. (US 20210144626 A1, hereinafter, Han) as mentioned in IDS.
Regarding Claim 13, Jung discloses the method of claim 12.
Jung does not explicitly disclose, wherein the information on one or more access identities includes information on a specific access identity which is allowed for a first location range and is barred for a second location range.
Han in related art relates, wherein the information on one or more access identities includes information on a specific access identity which is allowed for a first location range and is barred for a second location range (¶0032 recites, "...In step 302, aerial cell bar parameters associated with the cell 16 are received. For example, aerial cell bar parameters associated with cell 16a broadcasted by the base station 10a via SIB are also received by UE 12a. In step 304, whether an aerial UE 12 may be subjected to an aerial cell bar scheme supported by the cell may be determined. For example, UE 12a may determine whether to subject itself to an aerial cell bar scheme supported by cell 16a based on received aerial cell bar parameters associated with cell 16a. More details about the process of determining whether an aerial UE 12 may be subjected to an aerial cell bar scheme supported by the cell 16 may be recited as follows combining with various embodiments of the disclosure." see also, ¶0037 recites, As shown in FIG. 4, in step 400, the aerial UE 12 may determine whether the first timer is running, which is initiated when the aerial UE 12 receives a signal that the cell 16 refuses a RRC connection requested by the aerial UE 12. When the first timer is running, the aerial UE 12 may determine access to the cell 16 as being barred in step 402. Otherwise, in step 404 the aerial UE 12 may perform the evaluation based on whether the aerial cell bar parameters include bar factors and bar times..."). Here aerial cell bar parameters are the barring parameters which have the access identity.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the teaching of Jung with the teaching where specific access identity (like a specific profile, slice ID, or user category) that changes its network permissions depending on geography as disclosed by Han. The primary advantage of allowing a specific access identity to be allowed for a first location range and barred for a second location range is granular, location-dependent traffic steering and network congestion management.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
3GPP TSG-RAN WG2 Meeting #116 electronic R2-2111260 (Revision of R2-2109718)
Online, November, 2021; Source: KDDI Corporation, Ericsson, China Unicom, Samsung, Qualcomm Inc., Telecom Italia; Title: UE’s height location measurement for LTE MDT
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MUHAMMAD AINUL HUDA whose telephone number is (703)756-1594. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 - 6:30 ET.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, HASSAN PHILLIPS can be reached on (571)272-3940. 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.
/MUHAMMAD AINUL HUDA/Examiner, Art Unit 2467
/HASSAN A PHILLIPS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2467
Prosecution Insights