www.uspto.gov
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
`
`17/295,304
`
`05/19/2021
`
`Anders BERGGREN
`
`SYP330962US01
`
`1911
`
`TUC
`
`St
`
`tou
`
`TUCKER ELLIS LLP - Sony Group
`950 MAIN AVENUE
`SUITE 1100
`CLEVELAND,OH 44113-7213
`
`DSOUZA, JOSEPH FRANCIS A
`
`2632
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`01/28/2025
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
`following e-mail address(es):
`
`patents @ tuckerellis.com
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`Application No.
`Applicant(s)
`17/295,304
`BERGGREN etal.
`
`Office Action Summary Art Unit|AIA (FITF)StatusExaminer
`ADOLF DSOUZA
`2632
`Yes
`
`
`
`-- The MAILING DATEof this communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address --
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORYPERIOD FOR REPLYIS SET TO EXPIRE 3 MONTHS FROM THE MAILING
`DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensionsof time may be available underthe provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, may a reply betimely filed after SIX (6) MONTHSfrom the mailing
`date of this communication.
`If NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHSfrom the mailing date of this communication.
`-
`- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133).
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, evenif timely filed, may reduce any earned patent term
`adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`
`
`
`1) Responsive to communication(s) filed on 9/19/2024.
`C} A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/werefiled on
`2a)[¥) This action is FINAL.
`2b) (J This action is non-final.
`3) An election was madeby the applicant in responseto a restriction requirement set forth during the interview
`on
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`4)(2) Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`closed in accordance with the practice under Exparte Quayle, 1935 C.D. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`1-2,4-13,15 and 17-18 is/are pending in the application.
`)
`Claim(s)
`5a) Of the above claim(s) _ is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`CL] Claim(s)__is/are allowed.
`Claim(s) 1-2,4-13,15 and 17-18 is/are rejected.
`(] Claim(s)__ is/are objectedto.
`C] Claim(s
`are subjectto restriction and/or election requirement
`)
`* If any claims have been determined allowable, you maybeeligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init_events/pph/index.jsp or send an inquiry to PPHfeedback@uspto.gov.
`
`) ) ) )
`
`Application Papers
`10) The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`11)0) The drawing(s) filedon__ is/are: a)(J accepted or b)( objected to by the Examiner.
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121(d).
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`12)[¥) Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d)or (f).
`Certified copies:
`c)Z None ofthe:
`b)() Some**
`a) All
`1.¥) Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`2.2) Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`3.1.) Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been receivedin this National Stage
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`*“ See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`Attachment(s)
`
`1) [[] Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`
`Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`2)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3)
`
`4)
`
`(LJ Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`(Qj Other:
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mail Date 20250123
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/295,304
`Art Unit: 2632
`
`Page 2
`
`Notice of Pre-AlA or AIA Status
`
`1.
`
`The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined
`
`underthe first inventor to file provisions of the AIA.
`
`Response to Arguments
`
`2.
`
`Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are
`
`moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the
`
`prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the
`
`argument.
`
`Applicant submitted IDS (1/8/2025). Examiner is using R2-1708401 in the IDS to reject
`
`what Applicant argued in Remarks (REM 9/19/2024), i.e., the limitation: “wherein the
`
`information comprises a type of a core networkwith which the at least one further
`
`access nodeis associated”. Though Examiner maintains his argumentthat “specifying
`
`the frequency, specifies the type of core network’, R2-1708401 explicitly discloses the
`
`abovelimitation and henceis a better reference for this limitation.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`3.
`
`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-AlA) for the rejection will
`
`not be considered a new ground ofrejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale
`
`supporting the rejection, would be the same undereither status.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/295,304
`Art Unit: 2632
`
`Page 3
`
`4.
`
`The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basisfor 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 effectivefiling 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.
`
`5.
`
`Claims 1
`
`- 2, 4-5, 7-8, 10 - 13, 15, 17 - 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C.
`
`103 as being unpatentable over R2-1711112 (which had been provided in the
`
`International Search Report) in view of R2-1708401 (which had beenprovidedin
`
`the IDS (1/8/2025)).
`
`Regarding claim 1, R2-1711112 discloses a method of operating a wireless
`
`communication device (page 2, section 2.2, Mobility in IDLE mode, 1% paragraph
`
`discloses UE in IDLE mode; page 1, section 1 discloses 5G, hence wireless), the
`
`method comprising:
`
`the wireless communication device receiving from an access nodeof a cellular
`
`network, information associated with at least one further access node of the
`
`cellular network (page 2, section 2.1, 2™last paragraph discloses “... the legacy LTE
`
`HO command message should be enhanced_to indicate the target CN type information
`
`to the UE, so that the UE can know whetherit needs to change NASlayer type."; page
`
`2, section 2.2, Scenario 1: Inter-frequency discloses “..the frequency of E-UTRA
`
`connected to 5GC should be set a higherpriority for 5G UE who hasthe capability to
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/295,304
`Art Unit: 2632
`
`Page 4
`
`access 5GC, the 5G UE would have more chancesto reselect such cell..”; page 2,
`
`Proposal 4 discloses “For UE in IDLE mode, the inter-frequency cell reselection
`
`procedure could take the CN type supported by eNBinto account...”. wherein the CN
`
`type is the information received by the UE andis associated with the inter-frequency),
`
`and wherein the information enables the wireless communication device to
`
`control selection of the at least one further access node (page 2, Proposal 4
`
`discloses cell reselection based on CN and associated inter-frequency);
`
`and wherein the information is included in broadcasted system information of the
`
`serving access node(page2, section 2.1, 2nd last paragraph discloses “...
`
`the legacy
`
`L TE HO command message should be enhancedto indicate the target CN type
`
`information to the UE, so that the UE can know whetherit needs to change NASlayer
`
`type.“; wherein broadcasted system information is inherent in the command message).
`
`R2-1711112 does not explicitly disclose wherein the information comprises a type of a
`
`core network with which the at least one further access nodeis associated.
`
`In the same field of endeavor, however, R2-1708401 discloses the information
`
`comprises a type of a core network with which the at least one further access
`
`nodeis associated (section 2, 1° paragraph discloses “... which meansthat the
`
`network should let the UE know its CN connectivity capability before the UEstarts a
`
`RRC connection establishment procedure . ..... Therefore, it comes to the conclusion
`
`that the eNB should broadcast the CNtype it connectedto, i.e. 5GC or not. This
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/295,304
`Art Unit: 2632
`
`Page 5
`
`broadcast message could be implicated by the 5GC NASspecific parameters whichis
`
`agreed in the last RAN2 meeting, or be an explicit indicator in the SI. This CN type
`
`information could assist the UE to select an appropriate CN to access..”; section 2,
`
`above repeated in Proposal 1).
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, at the time
`
`the invention wasfiled, to use the method, as taught by R2-1708401 in the system of
`
`R2-1711112 because this would allow the UE to select an appropriate CN to access, as
`
`disclosed by R2-1708401.
`
`Regarding claim 2, R2-1711112 discloses the receiving is performed when the
`
`wireless communication device operates in a disconnected mode (page 2, section
`
`2.2, Mobility in IDLE mode i.e. disconnected).
`
`Regarding claim 4, R2-1711112 discloses the wireless communication device
`
`controlling selection of the at least one further access node basedon the type of
`
`the core network with which the at least one further access node is associated
`
`(page 2, Proposal 4 discloses: “For UE in IDLE mode, the inter-frequencycell
`
`reselection procedure could take the CN type supported by eNB into account, in order
`
`to steer more UEs to E-UTRA connected to SGC”. wherein the selection of the access
`
`node would correspond to the cell reselection procedure).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/295,304
`Art Unit: 2632
`
`Page 6
`
`Regarding claim 5, R2-1711112 discloses the controlling comprises selecting an
`
`access nodeof theat least one further access node (page 2, Proposal 4 discloses:
`
`“For UE in IDLE mode, the inter-frequency cell reselection procedure could take the CN
`
`type supported by eNB into account, in order to steer more UEs to E-UTRA connected
`
`to SGC’; wherein selecting the access node would correspond to the cell reselection
`
`procedure).
`
`Regarding claim 7, R2-1711112 discloses the controlling is performed when the
`
`wireless communication device operates in a disconnected mode (page 2, section
`
`2.2 “Mobility in IDLE mode”; wherein disconnected mode would be the IDLE mode).
`
`Regarding claim 8, R2-1711112 discloses the controlling is further based on a type
`
`of device associated with the wireless communication device (page 2, Scenario 1
`
`discloses "the frequency of E-UTRA connected to 5GC should be set a higherpriority
`
`for 5G UE who hasthe capability to access 5GC’; wherein type of device is inherent).
`
`Regarding claim 10, R2-1711112 discloses the controlling is further based on a
`
`receive signal strength associated with the at least one further access node (page
`
`2, section 2.2, Proposal 3 recites signal strength; Proposal 4 recites CN, which is
`
`related to signal strength).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/295,304
`Art Unit: 2632
`
`Page 7
`
`Regarding claim 11, R2-1711112 discloses the at least one further access node
`
`(30F) is configured to support an E- UTRA radio access technology (Title; page 1,
`
`section 1 Introduction).
`
`Regarding claim 12, R2-1711112 discloses wherein the type of the core with which
`
`the at least one further access node is associated is selected from the group
`
`comprising: a 4G core network, a 5G core network having no capability of
`
`providing voice services, and a 5G core network having a capability of providing
`
`voice services (page 2, section 2.2 discloses 5G, wherein voice services, though not
`
`explicitly disclosed, is inherent in 5G).
`
`Claim 13 is similarly analyzed as claim 1. Processor is inherent in a UE.
`
`Claim 15 is similarly analyzed as claim 1, with claim 15 reciting equivalent
`
`transmitting/receiving operations as in claim 1.
`
`Claim 17 is similarly analyzed as claim 11.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/295,304
`Art Unit: 2632
`
`Page 8
`
`Claim 18 is similarly analyzed as claim 12.
`
`
`
`6. Claim6is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over R2-
`
`1711112 (which had been provided in the International Search Report) in view of
`
`R2-1708401 (which had been provided in the IDS (1/8/2025)) and further in view
`
`of Aldanaetal. (US 20200120458).
`
`Regarding claim 6, R2-1711112 does not disclose the wireless communication device
`
`connecting to the selected access node using a random-access procedure.
`
`In the same field of endeavor, however, Aldana discloses the wireless communication
`
`device connecting to the selected access node using a random access procedure
`
`([0615] discloses “The terminal device may then synchronize with the target network
`
`access node by performing a random access procedure with the target network access
`
`node,
`
`...”
`
`).
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, at the time
`
`the invention wasfiled, to use the method, as taught by Aldana in the system of R2-
`
`1711112 because this would allow the UE to connectto the access node using standard
`
`procedure.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/295,304
`Art Unit: 2632
`
`Page 9
`
`7.
`
`Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over R2-
`
`1711112 (which had been provided in the International Search Report) in view of
`
`R2-1708401 (which had been provided in the IDS (1/8/2025)) and further in view
`
`of S2-1810076 (which have been providedin the International Search Report).
`
`Regarding claim 9, R2-1711112 does not disclose the controlling depends on whether
`
`the wireless communication device is an Internet of Things, loT, device.
`
`In the same field of endeavor, however, S2-1810076discloses the controlling
`
`depends on whether the wireless communication device is an Internet of Things,
`
`loT, device (section 6.45, 2™ paragraph onwardsdiscloses “The UE selects a core
`
`network type (5GC or EPC) taking into account the CioT optimisations broadcast for
`
`each network type and which optimisations the UE supports and prefers. The CloT UE
`
`CN type selection takes into account the following rules in order to avoid frequentinter-
`
`CN-type mobility across EPC and 5GC within the same PLMN’, wherein CioT UE is
`
`disclosed).
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, at the time
`
`the invention wasfiled, to use the method, as taught by S2-1810076in the system of
`
`R2-1711112 because this would allow the application to be used for loT UEstoo.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/295,304
`Art Unit: 2632
`
`Page 10
`
`Other Prior Art Cited
`
`8.
`
`The prior art madeof record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to the
`
`applicant’s disclosure.
`
`The following patents/publications are cited to further show the state of the art with
`
`respect to UE reselection:
`
`e
`
`Parkvall et al. (US 10630410) discloses Network Architecture, Methods, And
`
`Devices for A Wireless Communications Network.
`
`Conclusion
`
`9.
`
`Applicant's submission of an information disclosure statement under 37 CFR
`
`1.97(c) with the timing fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(p) on 1/8/2025 prompted the new
`
`ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS
`
`MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 609.04(b). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time
`
`policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
`
`A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE
`
`MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the eventa first reply is filed within
`
`TWO MONTHS ofthe mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not
`
`mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTHshortenedstatutory period, then the
`
`shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any
`
`nonprovisional extension fee (87 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be
`
`calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however,will the
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/295,304
`Art Unit: 2632
`
`Page 11
`
`statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this
`
`final action.
`
`10.=Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
`
`ContactInformation
`
`examiner should be directed to ADOLF DSOUZA whosetelephone numberis (571)272-
`
`1043. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9 AM- 5 PM.
`
`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 AutomatedInterview Request
`
`(AIR) at http:/Avwww.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
`
`If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's
`
`supervisor, Chieh M Fan can be reached on 571-272-3042. The fax phone numberfor
`
`the organization wherethis 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 Centeris
`
`available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center,
`
`visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https:/Awww.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-
`
`center for more information about Patent Center and
`
`https:/Awww.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information aboutfiling 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 CustomerService
`
`Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA)or 571-272-1000.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/295,304
`Art Unit: 2632
`
`Page 12
`
`/ADOLF DSOUZA/
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2632
`
`