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 .
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 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.
DETAILED ACTION
1. The application of Hathiramani et al. for the "METHODS AND APPARATUSES RELATING TO WIRELESS COMMUNICATION" filed 11/18/2024 has been examined. This application. This application claims foreign priority to 20236350, filed 12/08/2023 in Finland. Claims 1-18 are pending in the application.
2. The applicant should use this period for response to thoroughly and very closely proof read and review the whole of the application for correct correlation between reference numerals in the textual portion of the Specification and Drawings along with any minor spelling errors, general typographical errors, accuracy, assurance of proper use for Trademarks TM, and other legal symbols @, where required, and clarity of meaning in the Specification, Drawings, and specifically the claims (i.e., provide proper antecedent basis for “the'' and “said'' within each
claim). Minor typographical errors could render a Patent unenforceable and so the applicant is
strongly encouraged to aid in this endeavor.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
3. 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.
4. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims under 35 U.S.C. 103, the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned at the time any inventions covered therein were made absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and invention dates of each claim that was not commonly owned at the time a later invention was made in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 103 and potential 35 U.S.C. 102(e), (f) or (g) prior art under 35 U.S.C. 103.
5. Claims 1-2, 7-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. (US#11,871,287) in view of Sadek et al. (US#10,993,151).
Regarding claims 1, 12, the references disclose a method and apparatus for handover in wireless communication system, according to the essential features of the claims. Park et al. (US#11,871,287) discloses an apparatus comprising at least one processor, and at least one memory storing instructions (see Fig. 2 for the structure of device 200 includes processor 210, memory 220) that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the apparatus at least to perform: configuring the apparatus to use a first cell of a telecommunication network as a primary cell (PCell) based on a PCell configuration for the first cell, and to use a second cell of the telecommunication network as a secondary cell (SCell) based on an SCell configuration for the second cell (Fig. 5; Col. 13, line 50 to Col. 14, line 14: one or more target cells as a candidate PCell based on the one or more first configuration messages; and performing data transmission and reception with at least one cell among the first cell and the one or more candidate PCells); receiving configuration information indicative of: a post-swap PCell configuration for the second cell, a post-swap SCell configuration for the first cell (Fig. 5; Col. 14, line 15-46: the first terminal 501 may autonomously determine and perform release of some or all of one or more candidate PCells after the PCell swap operation, wherein the changing of the PCell comprises: switching the first cell to a candidate PCell; and changing a PCell of the first terminal from the first cell to the second cell), and responsive to the determination that the triggering condition is met, executing the PCell swap procedure from the first cell to the second cell by: configuring the apparatus to use the second cell as a PCell based on the post-swap PCell configuration for the second cell, and configuring the apparatus to use the first cell as an SCell based on the post-swap SCell configuration for the first cell (Fig. 8; Col. 23, lines 27 to Col. 24, line 27: The configuration information indicating the PCell swap operation of the first terminal 801 may refer to configuration information for the first terminal 801 to change the PCell from the first cell 802 to the second cell 803-1. The handover wherein the changing of the PCell comprises: switching the first cell to a candidate PCell; and changing a PCell of the first terminal from the first cell to the second cell).
Although Park reference does not disclose expressly wherein at least one triggering condition for autonomous execution by the apparatus of a PCell swap procedure from the first cell to the second cell; determining that a triggering condition is met. However, Park et al. (US#11,871,287) teaches the handover wherein the changing of the PCell from to the first cell to the second cell may comprise: monitoring whether a handover execution event condition is satisfied for the one or more candidate PCells; when the second cell satisfying the handover execution event condition is detected among the one or more candidate PCells (Fig. 5; Col. 15, lines 48-61: determine whether a measurement result of the step S555 satisfies a predetermined handover (HO) execution event condition (S560)). In the same field of endeavor, Sadek et al. (US#10,993,151) teaches in Fig. 15 a signaling flow diagram illustrated an example PCell swap procedure for switching the PCell of a connected mode access terminal between the access terminal's existing component carriers, in which the load balancing and channel selection determinations triggering the PCell swap procedure (Col. 19, line 40-67 & Col. 20, lines 45-55: triggering condition for PCell swap procedure)
Thus, It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing data of the claimed the invention to combine Sadek’s PCell swap procedure for switching the PCell into Park’s methods and systems for handover in wireless communications with the motivation being to provide a method and device for the swap PCell configuration from the first cell to the second cell.
Regarding claim 2, Park in view of Sadek teaches the apparatus of claim 1 examined above, Park et al. (US#11,871,287) further teaches wherein the post-swap PCell configuration for the second cell and the post-swap SCell configuration for the first cell are received prior to the triggering condition being met (Fig. 5; Col. 14, lines 15-31: monitoring whether a handover execution event condition is satisfied for the one or more candidate PCells).
Regarding claims 7, 13, Park in view of Sadek teaches the apparatus of claim 1 examined above, Park et al. (US#11,871,287) further teaches wherein the post-swap SCell/PCell configuration for the first/second cell comprise at least one of the following: a PDCCH monitoring configuration; a PUCCH transmit configuration; a measurement configuration for mobility measurements; a radio link monitoring configuration; a random-access configuration; a scheduling request configuration; or an uplink timing offset with respect to another cell of the telecommunication network (Fig. 6; Col. 19, lines 13-59: the first terminal 601 may determine that the RA procedure is successful when receiving a PDCCH for a C-RNTI).
Regarding claims 8, 14, Park in view of Sadek teaches the apparatus of claim 1 examined above, Park et al. (US#11,871,287) further teaches wherein maintaining, after executing the PCell swap procedure from the first cell to the second cell, the PCell/SCell configuration for the first/second cell and responsive to a further triggering condition being met, executing a further PCell swap procedure from the second cell back to the first cell by: configuring the apparatus to use the first/second cell as a PCell/SCell based on the maintained PCell/SCell configuration for the first/second cell (Figs. 5, 8; Col. 14, line 15-46 & Col. 23, lines 27 to Col. 24, line 27).
Regarding claims 9, 15, Park in view of Sadek teaches the apparatus of claim 1 examined above, Park et al. (US#11,871,287) further teaches wherein indicative of a release condition for autonomous execution by the apparatus of the PCell swap procedure from the first cell to the second cell; wherein determining that the release condition is met; and responsive to the determination that the release condition is met, discarding the received configuration information for autonomous execution by the apparatus of the PCell swap procedure from the first cell to the second cell (Fig. 5; Col. 15, lines 48-61: determine whether a measurement result of the step S555 satisfies a predetermined handover (HO) execution event condition (S560))
Regarding claim 10, Park in view of Sadek teaches the apparatus of claim 1 examined above, Park et al. (US#11,871,287) further teaches wherein responsive to the apparatus being configured to use the second cell as a PCcll, performing one of the following: performing a random access procedure to the second cell; transmitting a scheduling request to the second cell; or transmitting an additionally-configured Cell Radio Network temporary Identifier to the second cell (Fig. 6; Col. 19, lines 13-59: the first terminal 601 may determine that the RA procedure is successful when receiving a PDCCH for a C-RNTI).
Regarding claim 11, Park in view of Sadek teaches the apparatus of claim 1 examined above, Park et al. (US#11,871,287) further teaches wherein determining that the SCell release, suspension or deactivation condition is met for a cell, which the apparatus is configured to use as an SCell; and responsive to the determination that the SCell release, suspension or deactivation condition is met for the cell, configuring the apparatus to release, suspend or deactivate the cell (Fig. 5; Col. 17, lines 12-33: to release some or all of the one or more candidate PCells from the second cell 503-1 after the PCell swap operation).
Allowable Subject Matter
6. Claims 3, 5 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claims, but would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the 112 paragraph as set forth above, and in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims
Claims 4, 6 depend on the objected claims above.
7. The following is an examiner's statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The closest prior art of record fails to disclose or suggest wherein the at least one triggering condition comprises at least one of the following: at least one measurement of signals received from the first cell being below a threshold; at least one measurement of signals received from the second cell being above a threshold; at least one measurement of signals received from the second cell being offset better than at least one measurement of signals received from the first cell; a transmit power for an uplink transmission from the apparatus to the first cell being
above a transmit power threshold; or initiation, by the apparatus, of a particular service or service type; wherein configuring the apparatus to use a plurality of cells of the telecommunication network as SCells based on a plurality of SCell configurations for the respective plurality of cells, the plurality of cells including the second cell, wherein the received configuration information is further indicative of: a plurality of post-swap PCell configurations for the respective plurality of cells, and a plurality of triggering conditions for autonomous execution by the apparatus of PCell swap procedures from the first cell to the respective plurality of cells,
determining that a particular triggering condition of the plurality of triggering conditions is
met; and responsive to the determination that the particular triggering condition is met, executing a PCell swap procedure from the first cell to a particular cell of the plurality of cells which
corresponds to the particular triggering condition by: configuring the apparatus to use the particular cell as a PCell based on a particular post-swap PCell configuration for the particular cell, the particular post-swap PCell configuration being part of the plurality of post-swap PCell configurations, and configuring the apparatus to use the first cell as an SCell based on the post-swap SCell configuration for the first cell, as specifically recited in the claims.
Conclusion
8. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
The Park et al. (US#2024/0089809) shows method and apparatus for handover in wireless communication system.
The Gheorghiu et al. (US#10.873,887) shows seamless handover with dual connectivity.
The Hosseini et al. (US#2026/0261393) shows techniques for secondary cell activation.
The Yuan et al. (US#2025/0317821) shows L1 and L2 signaling of cell/beam changes.
The Wu (US#2012/0106511) shows method of handling PCell change
The Kwok et al. (US#12,720,426) shows CA configuration based on PHR.
9. Applicant's future amendments need to comply with the requirements of MPEP § 714.02, MPEP § 2163.04 and MPEP § 2163.06.
"with respect to newly added or amended claims, applicant should show support in the original disclosure for the new or amended claims." See MPEP § 714.02 and § 2163.06 ("Applicant should * * * specifically point out the support for any amendments made to the disclosure."); and MPEP § 2163.04 ("If applicant amends the claims and points out where and/or how the originally filed disclosure supports the amendment(s), and the examiner finds that the disclosure does not reasonably convey that the inventor had possession of the subject matter of the amendment at the time of the filing of the application, the examiner has the initial burden of presenting evidence or reasoning to explain why persons skilled in the art would not recognize in the disclosure a description of the invention defined by the claims."). See In re Smith, 458 F.2d 1389, 1395, 173 USPQ 679, 683 (CCPA 1972) In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d at 262,191 USPQ at 96 (emphasis added). "The use of a confusing variety of terms for the same thing should not be permitted.
New claims and amendments to the claims already in the application should be scrutinized not only for new matter but also for new terminology. While an applicant is not limited to the nomenclature used in the application as filed, he or she should make appropriate amendment of the specification whenever this nomenclature is departed from by amendment of the claims so as to have clear support or antecedent basis in the specification for the new terms appearing in the claims. This is necessary in order to insure certainty in construing the claims in the light of the specification." Ex parte Kotler, 1901 C.D. 62, 95 O.G. 2684 (Comm'r Pat. 1901). See 37 CFR 1.75, MPEP § 608.01 (i) and § 1302.01.
Note that examiners should ensure that the terms and phrases used in claims presented late in prosecution of the application (including claims amended via an examiner's amendment) find clear support or antecedent basis in the description so that the meaning of the terms in the claims may be ascertainable by reference to the description, see 37 CFR 1,75(d)(1 ). If the examiner determines that the claims presented late in prosecution do not comply with 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1), applicant will be required to make appropriate amendment to the description to provide clear support or antecedent basis for the terms appearing in the claims provided no new matter is introduced."
"USPTO personnel are to give claims their broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the supporting disclosure." In re Morris, 127 F.3d 1048, 1054-55, 44 USPQ2d 1023,1027-28 (Fed. Cir. 1997). MPEP § 2106. "
10. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to M. Phan whose telephone number is (571) 272-3149. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon - Fri from 6:00 to 3:00.
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, Chirag Shah, can be reached on (571) 272-3144. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300.
Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or proceeding should be directed to the receptionist whose telephone number is (571) 272-2600.
11. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have any questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at toll free 1-866-217-9197.
Mphan
10/01/2026
/MAN U PHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2477
Prosecution Insights