Art Rejection
1. The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
2. Claims 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chang, U.S. pat. Appl. Pub. No. 2023/0022967, in view of Wang, U.S. pat. Appl. Pub. No. 2025/0240135.
Per claim 1, Chang discloses a failure detection and recovery device, applied in a terminal equipment, comprising:
a) a receiver configured to receive a RRC signaling for triggering cell switch, e.g., receiving a handover command (see par 0051); and
b) processor circuitry configured for performing failure detection after the receiver receives the signaling (par 0051), and applying stored configuration when a handover failure is detected, wherein the stored configuration at least comprising configuration of a cell or cell group in a radio resource control reconfiguration message received and stored by the terminal equipment, e.g., applying stored CHO configuration in step 3(see par 0054);
c) wherein the processor circuitry is further configured for applying a configuration used before the radio resource control reconfiguration is received, i.e., UE reverts back to configuration used in the source cell in step 2 (see par 0052).
Chang does not explicitly teach that the RRC signaling comprises a layer 2 signaling. However, such use of layer 2 signaling to trigger a cell switch is known in the art as disclosed by Wang (see Wang, par 0002-0003, 0185).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize a layer 2 signaling in Chang because it would have enabled reducing latency and overhead for the handover process (see Wang, par 0003).
Per claim 2, Chang teaches starting a timer when the receiver receives the layer 2 signaling and determining that the handover failure is detected when the timer expires (see par 0042).
3. Claims 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chang and Wang, and further in view of Jeong, U.S. pat. Appl. Pub. No. 2012/0257510.
Per claims 3-4, Chang teaches that the handover execution comprises performing a random access procedure on the target cell (see par 0032). Neither Chang nor Wang teach counting a number of transmitted random access preambles and determining whether a handover failure is detected if the number of the transmitted random access preambles exceeds a threshold. However, Jeong discloses a prior art random access procedure, wherein the procedure is determined to be failed if is detected if the number of the transmitted/retransmitted random access preambles exceeds a threshold (see Jeong, par 0064-0065).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply Jeong’s random access procedure in Chang because it would have enabled determining whether the random access procedure is a success or a failure.
4. Claims 7, 9-13, 17 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chang, in view of Wallentin, U.S. pat. Appl. Pub. No. 2022/0279401.
Per claim 7, Chang discloses a failure detection and recovery device applied in a terminal equipment comprising:
a) performing failure detection (see par 0037-0039);
b) when one of a link failure, a measurement reporting failure, a cell switch command reception failure and a terminal equipment processing failure is detected, applying stored configuration and reporting the failure to a network device via a SCell or a non-serving cell, i.e., to initiate a reconnection (see par 0025, 0043);
c) wherein the stored configuration is configuration of a cell or cell group in a radio resource control reconfiguration message received and stored by the terminal equipment (see par 0043, 0055).
Chang does not explicitly teach detecting a link failure by monitoring negative/positive feedbacks of a hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) process and determining whether the link failure is detected according to a monitoring result. However, Wallentin discloses a prior art system for detecting a link failure by monitoring negative/positive HARQ feedbacks (see Wallentin, par 0160).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply Wallentin’s teaching in Chang because it would have enabled utilizing another known method to detect a link failure (see Wallentin, par 0160).
Per claim 9, Chang teaches that the configuration of the cell or cell group comprises configuration of a primary cell and/or a secondary cell and beam information (see par 0025).
Per claim 10, Chang teaches that a non-serving cell is a candidate for handover or a cell associated with a serving cell (see par 0025).
Per claim 11, Chang teaches the failure report comprises an expected processing (see 0025, 0043).
Per claim 12, Chang teaches that the failure cause comprises a corresponding timer expires and the failure type comprises a link failure (see par 0037-0039).
Per claim 13, Chang teaches that the expected processing comprises a cell switch (see par 0043).
Per claim 17, Wallentin teaches determining that a link failure is detected if S consecutive negative feedback indications (or no feedback indication) are received within a period of time (see 0160).
Per claim 19, Chang teaches determining /detecting a terminal equipment processing failure when the terminal equipment is unable to comply with a radio resource reconfiguration message carrying candidate cell information, i.e., unable to complete a measurement report before a timer expires (see par 0030, 0039).
Per claim 20, Chang teaches applying configuration used before a radio resource control reconfiguration message or a cell switch command is received, the radio resource control reconfiguration message comprising configuration of a candidate cell (see par 0043, 0055).
5. Claims 5, 14-15 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chang, Wang, and Wallentin.
Per claim 5, neither Chang nor Wang teach monitoring negative/positive feedbacks of a hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) process carrying uplink data and determining whether the link failure is detected according to a monitoring result. However, Wallentin discloses a prior art system for detecting a link failure by monitoring negative/positive HARQ feedbacks (see Wallentin, par 0160).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply Wallentin’s teaching in Chang because it would have enabled utilizing another known method to detect a link failure (see Wallentin, par 0160).
Per claims 14-15, neither Chang nor Wallentin teach performing measuring at a physical layer of the terminal equipment while providing indication of quality to a higher layer. However, Wang teaches performing measurement on a configured reference signal at a lower layer of the terminal equipment and providing indication of quality to a higher layer of the terminal equipment, wherein the reference signal used for radio link monitoring/measuring (see par 0089-0090). Chang also teaches determining whether the link failure is detected according to the received indication and a timer (see Chang, par 0039).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply Wang teaching of performing signal monitoring at a physical layer (layer 2) in Chang because it would have enabled reducing latency and overhead for the handover process (see Wang, par 0003).
Per claim 18, Chang also teaches detecting/determining a measurement report failure if the measurement result (that could be transmitted via a lower layer per Wang) is not received before the timer expires (see par 0039).
Allowable Subject Matter
6. Claim 16 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Amendment
7. Applicant's arguments filed on July 28, 2026 with respect to claims 1-5, 7, 9-15 and 17-20 have been fully considered but are deemed moot in view of new ground of rejection set forth above.
Per claim 1, applicant alleges that Chang does not disclose the claimed invention because Chang fails to teach, upon detecting of a handover failure, applying configuration adopted prior to receiving the radio control reconfiguration message containing candidate (target) cell configuration. Applicant asserts that Chang instead teaches applying the CHO configurations, by the UE upon detection of handover failure, which are configuration parameters of a target cell via an RRC reconfiguration message. Examiner respectfully disagrees.
It appears that applicant has cited Chang’s performing of the recovery in step 3 to show difference with the claimed invention. However, Chang clearly teaches performing the recovery in step 2 before step 3 that UE would first revert back a configuration used in the source cell upon detection of a handover failure (see par 0052). This is a configuration the UE used before it applied configuration of the target cell as instructed by the reconfiguration message. Thus, the examiner submits that Chang teaching meets the alleged claim limitation.
Per claim 7, Wallentin is now cited to show performing failure detection by monitoring positive/negative feedbacks of HARQ process as set forth in item 4 above.
Conclusion
8. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Viet Vu whose telephone number is 571-272-3977. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Thursday from 8:00am to 6:00pm. The Group general information number is 571-272-2400. The Group fax number is 571-273-8300.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Emmanuel Moise, can be reached at 571-272-3865.
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 questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/Viet D Vu/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2455
8/14/26
Prosecution Insights