DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim 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 1-15 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yi et al. (US 2019/0357264 A1), hereinafter “YI”.
Regarding claim 1, YI teaches, ‘A method at a wireless transmit/receive unit, WTRU, the method comprising:’ (Paragraph [0009]: In an aspect, a method for transmitting a physical random access channel (PRACH) by a user equipment (UE) in a wireless communication system is provided):
‘performing a cell search in a wireless communications system;’ (Paragraph [0074]: In the frequency spectrum where NR and LTE may coexist, a UE may perform both LTE and NR cell search
algorithms. As there may be LTE and NR synchronization signals in the same frequency, the UE may attempt to start initial access towards either LTE or NR; FIG. 6: “Cell search (Priority List)” (branching logic for “NR detected” and “LTE detected”));
‘obtaining first information indicative of whether spectrum sharing is configured in a cell discovered in the cell search and of available radio access technologies, RATs, in the discovered cell;’ (Paragraphs [0081]-[0084]: (2) PBCH reading: When the same cell search signals are used, the same PBCH transmission may also be used. In this case, legacy PBCH may include RAT type by utilizing reserved bits or reshuffling the PBCH entries… (3) SIB reading: Based on PBCH, either NR-SIB or SIB may be read. In NR-SIB, if the network wants to detour UEs to LTE carrier, the network may signal LTE center frequency. Then, the UE may switch to the LTE center frequency and starts LTE cell association… In SIB, different PRACH configurations may be given. In NR, PRACH resources for LTE may be configured. If the UE selects LTE PRACH resources, the corresponding cell association may be done based on LTE procedure… In other words, each PRACH resource may include optional field of RAT indication and overloading indication so that UEs supporting both RATs may utilize those information for better selection of RAT and PRACH resource. Though the network may be able to dynamically change the frequency portion of each RAT, dynamic loading may also be used to balance between different RATs);
‘in case the first information indicates that spectrum sharing is configured in the discovered cell, determining a RAT to access among the available RATs;’ (Paragraph [0084]: each PRACH resource may include optional field of RAT indication and overloading indication so that UEs supporting both RATs may utilize those information for better selection of RAT and PRACH resource… Furthermore, a UE may select different RAT based on its application characteristics or requirements; FIG. 6: “Read SIB” (“trigger NR”), “Read NR-SIB” (“trigger LTE”), or “reject or detour” (to switch RATs));
‘obtaining access configuration parameters for the determined RAT;’ (Paragraph [0083]: In SIB, different PRACH configurations may be given. In NR, PRACH resources for LTE may be configured. If the UE selects LTE PRACH resources, the corresponding cell association may be done based on LTE procedure. In this case, PBCH/SIB for LTE may be UE-specifically signaled, instead that a UE needs to read broadcasted PBCH/SIB transmissions. In other words, though the cell supports both RATs, the cell may broadcast either LTE or NR related common signals for PBCH/SIB. In terms of switching UEs from different RATs, those information may be given via UE-specific signaling);
‘and performing, using the access configuration parameters, a random-access procedure to access the RAT.’ (Paragraphs [0085]-[0086]: (4) RACH procedure: Based on PRACH resource selection, different RAR and RACH procedure may be expected. In NR, additional PRACH resource for LTE may be configured which are then responded with either NR-Msg3 or legacy Msg3. When the UE starts from legacy signals, the UE may initiate with legacy RACH procedure, which may be detoured when Msg 4 is received or via RAR: FIG. 6: (random access steps) “PRACH” / “NR-PRACH”, (followed by) “RAR” / “NR-RAR” (and) “Msg4” / “NR-Msg4”).
Regarding claims 2 and 9, YI teaches, The method of claim 1, ‘wherein the WTRU acquires at least one synchronization signal’ (Paragraph [0074]: In the frequency spectrum where NR and LTE may
coexist, a UE may perform both LTE and NR cell search algorithms. As there may be LTE and NR synchronization signals in the same frequency, the UE may attempt to start initial access towards either LTE or NR; Paragraphs [0078]-[0079]: (1) Cell search: The following two cases may be
considered. Cell search signals such as PSS/SSS may be common in LTE and NR. When a cell supports both RATs, a common cell search signals may be transmitted… In NR, no DC tone may be used for at least data transmission. To enable the same logics between NR and LTE, at least for initial signal
detection (e.g. PSS), DC tone (NULL tone) may be assumed at the center of UE receiver: FIG. 6: “Cell search (priority List)” (detecting synchronization signals) “NR detected” / “LTE detected”)
‘and access information in the cell search.’ (Paragraphs [0081]-[0083]: (2) PBCH reading: When the same cell search signals are used, the same PBCH transmission may also be used. In this case, legacy PBCH may include RAT type by utilizing reserved bits or reshuffling the PBCH entries… (3) SIB reading: Based on PBCH, either NR-SIB or SIB may be read. In NR-SIB, if the network wants to detour
UEs to LTE carrier, the network may signal LTE center frequency. Then, the UE may switch to the LTE center frequency and starts LTE cell association. In SIB, different PRACH configurations may be
given. In NR, PRACH resources for LTE may be configured. If the UE selects LTE PRACH resources, the corresponding cell association may be done based on LTE procedure. In this case, PBCH/SIB for LTE may be UE-specifically signaled, instead that a UE needs to read broadcasted PBCH/SIB transmissions).
Regarding claims 3 and 10, YI teaches, The method of claim 1, ‘wherein the first information is obtained from at least one of a received synchronization signal, obtained cell access information and obtained system information.’ (Paragraphs [0064]-[0065]: These information may be forwarded by synchronization signals and/or MIB and/or SIB… Between minimum system bandwidth (min_SBW)
and minimum system bandwidth (max_SBW), any cell-common signals, such as synchronization signals, physical broadcast channel (PBCH), and potentially SIB, may be transmitted within min_SBW; Paragraphs [0081]-[0084]: (2) PBCH reading: When the same cell search signals are used, the same PBCH transmission may also be used. In this case, legacy PBCH may include RAT type by utilizing reserved bits or reshuffling the PBCH entries… (3) SIB reading: Based on PBCH, either NR-SIB or SIB may be read. In NR-SIB, if the network wants to detour UEs to LTE carrier, the network may signal LTE center frequency. Then, the UE may switch to the LTE center frequency and starts LTE cell association… In SIB, different PRACH configurations may be given. In NR, PRACH resources for LTE may be configured. If the UE selects LTE PRACH resources, the corresponding cell association may be done based on LTE procedure. In this case, PBCH/SIB for LTE may be UE-specifically signaled, instead that a UE needs to read broadcasted PBCH/SIB transmissions. In other words, though the cell supports both RATs, the cell may broadcast either LTE or NR related common signals for PBCH/SIB. In terms of switching UEs from different RATs, those information may be given via UE-specific signaling… In other words, each PRACH resource may include optional field of RAT indication and overloading indication so that UEs supporting both RATs may utilize those information for better selection of RAT and PRACH resource).
Regarding claims 4 and 11, YI teaches, The method of claim 1, further comprising: ‘determining, based on at least one value obtained by measuring at least one synchronization signal obtained during the cell search’ (Paragraph [0074]: In the frequency spectrum where NR and LTE may coexist, a UE may perform both LTE and NR cell search algorithms. As there may be LTE and NR synchronization signals in the same frequency, the UE may attempt to start initial access towards either LTE or NR; Paragraphs [0078]-[0079]: (1) Cell search: The following two cases may be considered. Cell search signals such as PSS/SSS may be common in LTE and NR. When a cell supports both RATs, a common cell search signals may be transmitted… In NR, no DC tone may be used for at least data transmission. To enable the same logics between NR and LTE, at least for initial signal detection (e.g. PSS), DC tone (NULL tone) may be assumed at the center of UE receiver: Paragraph [0179]: UE reference signal received power (RSRP) measurement: If RSRP is low (compared to a threshold), the UE may select f3 for better coverage. Otherwise, the UE may select f2 for less complexity)
‘and network information obtained per available RAT,’ (Paragraphs [0081]-[0084]: (2) PBCH reading: When the same cell search signals are used, the same PBCH transmission may also be used. In this case, legacy PBCH may include RAT type by utilizing reserved bits or reshuffling the PBCH entries… (3) SIB reading: Based on PBCH, either NR-SIB or SIB may be read. In NR-SIB, if the network wants to detour UEs to LTE carrier, the network may signal LTE center frequency. Then, the UE may switch to the LTE center frequency and starts LTE cell association… In SIB, different PRACH configurations may be given. In NR, PRACH resources for LTE may be configured. If the UE selects LTE PRACH resources, the corresponding cell association may be done based on LTE procedure… In other words, each PRACH resource may include optional field of RAT indication and overloading indication so that UEs supporting both RATs may utilize those information for better selection of RAT and PRACH resource. Though the network may be able to dynamically change the frequency portion of each RAT, dynamic loading may also be used to balance between different RATs),
‘whether the WTRU is capable of accessing the cell.’ (Paragraph [0082]: (3) SIB reading:… If the UE does not support LTE, the UE may ignore the field and proceed with NR cell association; Paragraph [0084]: When the network receives NR-PRACH and there are many NR UEs, the network may transmit reject signals so that LTE-supporting UEs can be detoured to LTE. The reject signals may carry an overloading indication in each PRACH resource so that UEs supporting both RATs can select one PRACH resource based on loading conditions of each RAT).
Regarding claims 5 and 12, YI teaches, The method of claim 1, ‘wherein the access configuration parameters for more than one RAT are obtained together.’ (Paragraph [0009]: A user equipment (UE) receiving multiple PRACH configurations which include a first PRACH configuration for new radio access technology (NR) downlink/uplink (DL/UL) carrier in a NR band and a second PRACH configuration for a supplemental UL carrier in a long-term evolution (LTE) band; Paragraph [0083]: In SIB, different PRACH configurations may be given. In NR, PRACH resources for LTE may be configured. If the UE selects LTE PRACH resources, the corresponding cell association may be done based on LTE procedure; Paragraph [0172]: Assuming there are UEs supporting only Band X or Band Y, PRACH resource on both f2 and f3 may be necessary. In other words, multiple PRACH configurations in different uplink frequency may be needed).
Regarding claims 6 and 13, YI teaches, The method of claim 1, further comprising: ‘transmitting second information indicative of a capability of the WTRU to operate with a plurality of RATs.’ (Paragraph [0074]: In the frequency spectrum where NR and LTE may coexist, a UE may perform both LTE and NR cell search algorithms… When a UE is associated with either LTE or NR, after capability signaled, it may be reconfigured or handed over to the NR or LTE (i.e. different RAT). For this, the physical random access channel (PRACH) resource configuration may also signal PRACH resources which may also be used for NR UEs. In other words, one or more PRACH resources may be signaled which may be used for UEs supporting both NR and LTE; Paragraph [0142]: In order not to mandate a UE to support corresponding DL carrier for UL spectrum sharing, another approach is to allow a UE to support other DL carrier if the network also supports the DL carrier. Based on the supported capability from a UE, the network may determine reference DL carrier which may be same or different from corresponding DL carrier for a UL carrier).
Regarding claims 7 and 14, YI teaches, The method of claim 1, further comprising: ‘receiving a downlink, DL, message comprising redirection configuration information indicating a further RAT to access, the further RAT different from the determined RAT to access;’ (Paragraphs [0074]-[0075]: When a UE is associated with either LTE or NR, after capability signaled, it may be reconfigured or handed over to the NR or LTE (i.e. different RAT)… (1) When the network transmits random access response (RAR), the network may signal the frequency of NR to hand over the UE to NR. The network may also signal the frequency of LTE. Or, it may be configured by RRC signals in Msg4. The information may include frequency, bandwidth, and/or the RAT type; Paragraph [0082]: (3) SIB reading: Based on PBCH, either NR-SIB or SIB may be read. In NR-SIB, if the network wants to detour UEs to LTE carrier, the network may signal LTE center frequency. Then, the UE may switch to the LTE center frequency and starts LTE cell association; Paragraph [0084]: When the network receives NR-PRACH and there are many NR UEs, the network may transmit reject signals so that LTE-supporting UEs can be detoured to LTE. The reject signals may carry an overloading indication in each PRACH resource so that UEs supporting both RATs can select one PRACH resource based on loading conditions of each RAT);
‘and accessing the further RAT.’ (Paragraph [0076]: From the transmission of RAR, the network
may signal or transmit all RS/data based on NR format… In this sense, the network may form LTE and NR in the same spectrum, and LTE UE and NR UE may be multiplexed; Paragraph [0082]: In NR-SIB, if the network wants to detour UEs to LTE carrier, the network may signal LTE center frequency. Then, the UE may switch to the LTE center frequency and starts LTE cell association; FIG. 6: (downlink response/message) “RAR” or “NR-RAR” (triggers a redirection/detour) “detour to NR” or “reject or detour” (leading the UE to execute random access) “PRACH” / “Msg4” (and establish access on the indicated further RAT)).
Regarding claim 8, the claim includes features identical to the subject matter mentioned in the rejection to claim 1. The claim is mere reformulation of claim 1 in order to define the corresponding apparatus, and the rejection to claim 1 are applied hereto.
YI teaches, ‘A wireless transmit/receive unit, WTRU, comprising at least one processor configured to: perform a cell search in a wireless communications system;’ (Paragraph [0010]: In another aspect, a user equipment (UE) in a wireless communication system is provided. The UE
includes a memory, a transceiver, and a processor, operably coupled to the memory and the transceiver that controls the transceiver; Paragraph [0264]: A UE 900 includes a processor 910, a memory 920 and a transceiver 930. The processor 910 may be configured to implement proposed functions, procedures and/or methods described in this description);
Regarding claim 15, YI teaches, The WTRU of claim 8, the at least one processor is further configured to: ‘receive redirection information provided by acquired system information;’ (Paragraphs [0082]-[0084]: (3) SIB reading: Based on PBCH, either NR-SIB or SIB may be read. In NR-SIB, if the network wants to detour UEs to LTE carrier, the network may signal LTE center frequency. Then, the UE may switch to the LTE center frequency and starts LTE cell association… In SIB, different PRACH configurations may be given. In NR, PRACH resources for LTE may be configured. If the UE selects LTE PRACH resources, the corresponding cell association may be done based on LTE procedure… In other words, each PRACH resource may include optional field of RAT indication and overloading indication so that UEs supporting both RATs may utilize those information for better selection of RAT and PRACH resource);
‘and determine, based on the redirection information, whether to select a different RAT than the determined RAT or not.’ (Paragraph [0082]: (3) SIB reading:… In NR-SIB, if the network wants to detour UEs to LTE carrier, the network may signal LTE center frequency. Then, the UE may switch to the LTE center frequency and starts LTE cell association; Paragraph [0084]: When the network receives NR-PRACH and there are many NR UEs, the network may transmit reject signals so that LTE-supporting UEs can be detoured to LTE… each PRACH resource may include optional field of RAT indication and overloading indication so that UEs supporting both RATs may utilize those information for better selection of RAT and PRACH resource; FIG. 6: (reading SIB / NR-SIB, determining whether a detour or reject signal is received) “reject or detour” / “detour request” (and making the choice to select/switch RATs) “trigger LTE” (vs.) “trigger NR”).
Regarding claim 20, YI teaches, A node in a cell in a wireless communications system, the node comprising at least one processor configured to:’ (Paragraph [0263]: A network node 800 includes a processor 810, a memory 820 and a transceiver 830. The processor 810 may be configured to implement proposed functions, procedures and/or methods described in this description; Paragraph [0030]: The 3rd generation partnership project (3GPP) long-term evolution (LTE) system 10 includes at least one eNodeB (eNB) 11. Respective eNBs 11 provide a communication service to particular geographical areas 15a, 15b, and 15c (which are generally called cells)):
‘provide, to a wireless transmit/receive unit, WTRU, information indicative of whether spectrum sharing is configured in the cell and of available radio access technologies, RATs, in the cell.’ (Paragraph [0008]: The present invention provides a method and apparatus for sharing a spectrum between 3rd generation partnership project (3GPP) long-term evolution (LTE) and a new radio access technology (NR) in a wireless communication system. The present invention discusses spectrum sharing mechanisms between LTE and NR in the same frequency, at least for initial deployment of NR; Paragraph [0074]: In the frequency spectrum where NR and LTE may coexist, a UE may perform both LTE and NR cell search algorithms. As there may be LTE and NR synchronization signals in the same frequency, the UE may attempt to start initial access towards either LTE or NR; Paragraphs [0083]-[0084]: In SIB, different PRACH configurations may be given. In NR, PRACH resources for LTE may be configured… each PRACH resource may include optional field of RAT indication and overloading indication so that UEs supporting both RATs may utilize those information for better selection of RAT and PRACH resource. Though the network may be able to dynamically change the frequency portion of each RAT, dynamic loading may also be used to balance between different RATs; Paragraphs [0171]-[0172]: To support initial access at f3, PRACH configuration
may include resources… multiple PRACH configurations in different uplink frequency may be needed: Paragraph [0256]: In step S100, the UE receives multiple PRACH configurations which include a first PRACH configuration for NR DL/UL carrier in a NR band and a second PRACH configuration for a supplemental UL carrier in a LTE band).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over YI in view of Gupta et al. (US 2018/0063774 A1), hereinafter “GUPTA”.
Regarding claim 16, YI teaches, The WTRU of claim 8, the at least one processor is further configured to: YI does not explicitly teach but GUPTA teaches, ‘receive a public land mobile network, PLMN, information list for each RAT, the PLMN information list provided by acquired system information;’ (GUPTA – Paragraphs [0049]-[0050]: The PLMN selector list 400 includes a list of PLMN that the mobile communication device may acquire service from, listed in a priority ordering. Each PLMN entry in the PLMN selector list 400 may have a size of five bytes. The first three bytes may encode the PLMN identifier, while the last two bytes may encode the RAT identifier associated with the PLMN… The entries for each PLMN may include PLMN identifiers 402a-402n, which take up three bytes of memory, and RAT identifiers 404a-404n, which take up two bytes of memory. The RAT identifiers 404a-404n identify the RAT associated with each PLMN (e.g., 5G, 4G LTE, 3G CDMA2000, 2G GSM, etc.));
‘and determine, based on the PLMN information list, whether to select a different RAT than the determined RAT or not.’ (GUPTA – Paragraphs [0058]-[0059]: The mobile communication may conduct a scan on the 5G RAT(s) to obtain an available 5G PLMN list in block 604. After scanning for PLMNs on the 5G RAT(s), the mobile communication device may attempt registration on an available PLMN with the highest priority in block 606… If there are no available PLMNs on the 5G RAT, the mobile communication device may conduct PLMN searches for the remaining RATs that the mobile communication device supports; Paragraphs [0068]-[0072]: In block 712, the processor may select an allowed RAT for which network coverage is allowed by the network operator based on the obtained information… In block 714, the processor may conduct a PLMN search on the selected RAT… In determination block 716, the processor may determine whether there are any available PLMNs on the selected RAT… In response to determining that there are no available PLMNs on the selected RAT… the
processor may select another RAT for which network coverage is allowed by the network operator in block 712).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of GUPTA with YI because both are in the same/similar field of endeavor. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of GUPTA into YI is that GUPTA provides evaluating an operator’s allowed PLMN-per-RAT list before scanning, which enables a UE to bypass unsupported RATs, conserving battery power and shortening service acquisition time. Once the UE selects an allowed PLMN, it does not attempt reselection or redirection to another RAT for which the operator lacks roaming agreements or coverage licenses. Preventing these failed reselection attempts avoids unnecessary radio link drops and saves signaling overhead. Transmitting information regarding non-allowed or allowed RATs back to the network upon selection provides a technical feedback loop preventing the serving network node from attempting to redirect the UE to an incompatible or disallowed RAT (See paragraphs [0023]-[0024], [0058], [0076], GUPTA).
Regarding claim 17, YI teaches, The WTRU of claim 8, the at least one processor is further configured to: YI does not explicitly teach but GUPTA teaches, ‘receive access restriction information per RAT, the access restriction information provided by acquired system information;’ (GUPTA – Paragraph [0055]: Additional unused bits in the RAT identifier 500 may be used to encode information about domain services that are allowed by the network operator in each RAT. For example, bit 506 may indicate whether voice service is allowed by the network operator on the RAT indicated by the RAT identifier 500. For example, a "1" in the bit 506 may indicate that voice service is not allowed, while a "0" in the bit 506 may indicate that voice service is allowed. Likewise, bit 508 may indicate whether data service is allowed by the network operator on the RAT indicated by the RAT identifier 500. For example, a "1" in the bit 508 may indicate that data service is not allowed, while a "0" in the bit 508 may indicated that data service is allowed. Other unused bits in the RAT identifier 500 may be used to encode whether other domain services (e.g., text message service, emergency call service only, etc.) are allowed or not allowed by the network operator; Paragraph [0066]: the processor may obtain information about RATs for which network coverage is allowed by the network operator of the HPLMN in block 708… The information about RATs for which network coverage is allowed may be stored in memory of the mobile communication device… or in the USIM);
‘and determine, based on the access restriction information, whether to select a different RAT than the determined RAT or not.’ (GUPTA – Paragraphs [0067]-[0068]: In block 710, the processor may obtain information about availability of a plurality of mobile telephony services for each RAT for which network coverage is allowed by the network operator… In block 712, the processor may select an allowed RAT for which network coverage is allowed by the network operator based on the obtained information; Paragraphs [0070]-[0072]: In determination block 716, the processor may determine whether there are any available PLMNs on the selected RAT… In response to determining that there are no available PLMNs on the selected RAT… the processor may select another RAT for which network coverage is allowed by the network operator in block 712); Paragraph [0061]: The information about domain services that are allowed by the network operator may also be used to prevent unnecessary registration attempts during roaming… The mobile communication device may register for data service with the PLMN and not attempt to register for voice service based on the indicator flags, thereby preventing unnecessary registration rejections).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of GUPTA with YI because both are in the same/similar field of endeavor. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of GUPTA into YI is that GUPTA provides evaluating an operator’s allowed PLMN-per-RAT list before scanning, which enables a UE to bypass unsupported RATs, conserving battery power and shortening service acquisition time. Once the UE selects an allowed PLMN, it does not attempt reselection or redirection to another RAT for which the operator lacks roaming agreements or coverage licenses. Preventing these failed reselection attempts avoids unnecessary radio link drops and saves signaling overhead. Transmitting information regarding non-allowed or allowed RATs back to the network upon selection provides a technical feedback loop preventing the serving network node from attempting to redirect the UE to an incompatible or disallowed RAT (See paragraphs [0023]-[0024], [0058], [0076], GUPTA).
Regarding claim 18, YI teaches, The WTRU of claim 8, the at least one processor is further configured to: YI does not explicitly teach but GUPTA teaches, ‘receive access control information per RAT, the access control information provided by acquired system information;’ (GUPTA – Paragraph [0026]: By utilizing this information, the mobile communication device may acquire service more quickly by not conducting PLMN searches on RATs that are not allowed to provide network coverage by the network operator; Paragraph [0048]: The information about RATs and domain services that are allowed by the network operator may be stored, for example, in the USIM. Specifically, the information may be stored in the HPLMN selector list, or the
operator controlled and/or user controlled PLMN selector lists; Paragraph [0055]: Additional unused bits in the RAT identifier 500 may be used to encode information about domain services that are allowed by the network operator in each RAT. For example, bit 506 may indicate whether voice service is allowed by the network operator on the RAT indicated by the RAT identifier 500. For example, a "1" in the bit 506 may indicate that voice service is not allowed, while a "0" in the bit 506 may indicate that voice service is allowed. Likewise, bit 508 may indicate whether data service is allowed by the network operator on the RAT indicated by the RAT identifier 500. For example, a "1" in the bit 508 may indicate that data service is not allowed, while a "0" in the bit 508 may indicated that data service is allowed; Paragraph [0066]: the processor may obtain information about RATs for which network coverage is allowed by the network operator of the HPLMN in block 708… The USIM may also store information about RATs for which network coverage is allowed when in roaming in a user preferred PLMN selector file or an operator preferred PLMN selector file);
‘and determine, based on the access control information, whether to select a different RAT than the determined RAT or not.’ (GUPTA – Paragraphs [0058]-[0059]: After scanning for PLMNs on the 5G RAT(s), the mobile communication device may attempt registration on an available PLMN with the highest priority in block 606… If there are no available PLMNs on the 5G RAT, the mobile communication device may conduct PLMN searches for the remaining RATs that the mobile communication device supports; Paragraphs [0067]-[0068]: In block 710, the processor may obtain information about availability of a plurality of mobile telephony services for each RAT for which network coverage is allowed by the network operator… In block 712, the processor may select an allowed RAT for which network coverage is allowed by the network operator based on the obtained information; Paragraphs [0070]-[0072]: In determination block 716, the processor may determine whether there are any available PLMNs on the selected RAT… In response to determining that there are no available PLMNs on the selected RAT… the processor may select another RAT for which network coverage is allowed by the network operator in block 712; Paragraph [0061]: The information about domain services that are allowed by the network operator may also be used to prevent unnecessary registration attempts during roaming… The mobile communication device may register for data service with the PLMN and not attempt to register for voice service based on the indicator flags, thereby preventing unnecessary registration rejections).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of GUPTA with YI because both are in the same/similar field of endeavor. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of GUPTA into YI is that GUPTA provides evaluating an operator’s allowed PLMN-per-RAT list before scanning, which enables a UE to bypass unsupported RATs, conserving battery power and shortening service acquisition time. Once the UE selects an allowed PLMN, it does not attempt reselection or redirection to another RAT for which the operator lacks roaming agreements or coverage licenses. Preventing these failed reselection attempts avoids unnecessary radio link drops and saves signaling overhead. Transmitting information regarding non-allowed or allowed RATs back to the network upon selection provides a technical feedback loop preventing the serving network node from attempting to redirect the UE to an incompatible or disallowed RAT (See paragraphs [0023]-[0024], [0058], [0076], GUPTA).
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over YI in view of GUPTA in view of Du et al. (US 2009/0270104 A1), hereinafter “DU”.
Regarding claim 19, YI and GUPTA teach, The WTRU of claim 18, the at least one processor is further configured to: YI and GUPTA do not explicitly teach but DU teaches, ‘determine to select a different RAT based on a probability determined using the access control information.’ (DU – Paragraph [0009]: In addition, the persistent level is indicated by an AC barring parameter. The AC barring parameter comprises an Access probability parameter and an AC barring time parameter, and is used to control the load mapped to RACHs by normal UEs. In LTE, the AC barring parameter located in SIB2 and is broadcast to UEs by base stations; Paragraph [0011]: At step S203, the UE generates a value in the range of 0 to 1… At step S204, the generated value is compared with the read access probability. If compared result shows that the generated value is less than the access probability, the process proceeds to step S205… the AC barring check is successful… On the contrary, if the compared result at step S204 shows that the generated value is equal to or larger than the access probability… the AC barring check fails; Paragraph [0013]: 3) the UE reselects another cell during the timer is not zero, the UE may perform an AC barring check in the reselected cell and inefficient retrying due to too low access probability of the original serving cell can be avoid; Paragraph [0052]: In the formula (3), the calculation of the cell reselection value for the current serving cell is same as that in the formula (2). For the calculation of the cell reselection value for the adjacent cell, a value related with the access probability and adjusting factor of the adjacent cell is subtracted based on the method for calculating the cell reselection value for the adjacent cell in the prior art. The lower the access probability of the adjacent cell is, the bigger the subtracted value is. As a result, the probability that the UE reselects this adjacent cell is reduced; Paragraph [0066]: As shown in FIG. 9b, each base station sends the offsets, the access probability values and other cell reselection parameters of the current serving cell to a control unit. In addition, if one cell has UEs supporting other Radio Access Technology (RATs) besides the RAT used by the cell, the base station may further send load information for distinguishing the RATs to the control unit… Base on the information as described above, the base station may better adjust the cell reselection parameters and/or the handover parameters of the current serving cell with respect to adjacent cells with different RATs in order to implement a load balance).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of DU with YI and GUPTA because both are in the same/similar field of endeavor. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of DU into YI and GUPTA is that DU provides performing an access class barring check using a broadcast access probability parameter compared against a random number generated by the UE, where an access barring check failure or low access probability calculation triggers cell/RAT reselection and load balancing across multi-RAT networks. Upon determining a barred access probability, the UE selects a different available RAT directly, which prevents the UE from making repeated, failing initial access attempts on congested RATs, thereby saving battery power, reducing access latency, and optimizing multi-RAT network load balancing (See paragraph [0009], [0011], [0013], [0052], [0066], DU).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HAESHIL J CHOI whose telephone number is (703) 756-5409. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday 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, Jae Y Lee can be reached on 571-270-3936. 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.
/HAESHIL JESSICA CHOI/Examiner, Art Unit 2479 /JAE Y LEE/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2479
Prosecution Insights