Ex Parte Ekström et alDownload PDFPatent Trial and Appeal BoardJul 12, 201612443542 (P.T.A.B. Jul. 12, 2016) Copy Citation UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR 12/443,542 0313012009 Hannes Ekstrom 113648 7590 07114/2016 Patent Portfolio Builders, PLLC P.O. Box 7999 Fredericksburg, VA 22404-7999 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE United States Patent and Trademark Office Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS P.O. Box 1450 Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450 www .uspto.gov ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO. Ol 10-390/P22796US1 9903 EXAMINER LINDENBAUM, ALAN LOUIS ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 2466 NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE 07/14/2016 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): Mailroom@ppblaw.com PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07) UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD Ex parte HANNES EKSTROM, MATHIAS CRAMBY, WALTER MULLER, and GORAN RUNE 1 Appeal2014-005300 Application 12/443,542 Technology Center 2400 Before JEAN R. HOMERE, JASON V. MORGAN, and KARA L. SZPONDOWSKI, Administrative Patent Judges. MORGAN, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL Introduction This is an Appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the Examiner's final rejection of claims 27-57. Claims 1-26 are cancelled. Br. 9. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b ). We AFFIRM. INVENTION Appellants' invention is directed to a base station adapted to communicate over a radio link with a user equipment located in a cell in a 1 Appellants identify Telefonaktiebolaget L M Ericsson (publ) as the real party in interest. Br. 2. Appeal2014-005300 Application 12/443,542 radio access network. A message comprising neighbor cell information to assist the user equipment in handling mobility in idle mode is sent to the user equipment using a point-to-point connection over the radio link. Abstract. EXEMPLARY CLAIM Claim 27, reproduced belmv with key limitations emphasized~ is representative: 27. A method in a base station for transmitting neighbor cell information, the base station being adapted for communication over a radio link with a user equipment located in a cell of a radio access network, the base station serving the cell, the method comprising: while the user equipment is in an idle mode, sending a message to the user equipment from the base station using a point-to-point connection over the radio link, the message comprising neighbor cell information to assist the user equipment in handling mobility. REJECTIONS The Examiner rejects claims 27-31, 39--43, 52, and 53 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by Raith (US 6,970,807 Bl; Nov. 29, 2005). Final Act. 2-5. The Examiner rejects claims 32, 35, and 45 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Raith and Kim et al. (US 2005/004897 4 A 1; Mar. 3, 2005). Final Act. 6-8. The Examiner rejects claims 33, 34, 44, and 46--48 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Raith, Kim, and Kyung et al. (US 2006/ 000215609 Al; Sept. 28, 2006). Final Act. 8-10. 2 Appeal2014-005300 Application 12/443,542 The Examiner rejects claims 36-38 and 49-51under35 U.S.C. § 103 (a) as being unpatentable over Raith, Kim, and Kitazoe (US 2007 I 0291770 Al; Dec. 20, 2007). Final Act. 11-12. The Examiner rejects claims 45-57 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Raith and Kauser et al. (US 5,724,660; Mar. 3, 1998). Final Act. 12-13. ISSUE Did the Examiner err in finding Raith discloses "while the user equipment is in an idle mode, sending a message to the user equipment from the base station using a point-to-point connection over the radio link," as recited in claim 2 7? ANALYSIS We agree with and adopt as our own the Examiner's findings of facts and conclusions as set forth in the Answer and in the Action from which this appeal was taken. We have considered Appellants' arguments, but do not find them persuasive of error. We provide the following explanation for emphasis. In rejecting claim 27, the Examiner finds Raith's cell reselection, in an idle mode, where a mobile assisted handoff (MARO) message or neighbor list transmitted on a point-to-point channel is received from a cellular system, discloses while user equipment is in an idle mode, sending a message to the user equipment from a base station using a point-to-point connection over a radio link. Final Act. 2 (citing Raith col. 4, 11. 12-15, col. 5, 11. 58---60, and col. 8, 1. 60-col. 9, 1. 13). Appellants contend the Examiner erred because Raith's mobile assisted handoff "transmission occurs while the mobile station is in Active 3 Appeal2014-005300 Application 12/443,542 mode, not while the mobile station is in Idle mode." Br. 5. However, Raith explicitly discloses that"[ c ]ell reselection may occur ... when the mobile station 16 is in an idle mode." Raith col. 5, 11. 58---60 (emphasis added). Raith further discloses that "[t]he process of allocating the mobile station 16 to the best base station 12 during an active packet data session is similar or identical to the cell reselection process while in idle mode." Raith col. 8, 11. 60---63 (emphases added). Thus, contrary to Appellants' contention, Raith provides for the disclosed transmission during a mobile station being in either an active or an idle mode. Appellants further argue that "MARO lists are used where 'the mobile station 16 is continuously allocated an uplink channel', i.e., the mobile station is in Active mode." Br. 5. However, Raith clarifies that although the terms MARO list and neighbor list "are used to facilitate an understanding of the invention by associating a neighbor list with idle operation ... and a MARO list for active operation .... these t[]erms are interchangeable and each may be used to describe measurement lists for active and idle modes." Raith col. 9, 11. 1-6. In other word, the identical cell reselection process in Raith' s idle mode includes the transmission of a MARO list (or the equivalent term a "neighbor list"). Appellants also argue that in Raith, "when a mobile station is in Idle mode, the mobile simply monitors a broadcast channel, i.e., a channel that is not point-to-point." Br. 5 (citing Raith col. 2, 11. 42-52, col. 7, 1. 37 et seq.). However, Appellants do not provide persuasive arguments or evidence showing error in the Examiner's finding that the Idle mode cell reselection process in Raith-which is similar or identical to the mobile station allocation processing an active packet session (Raith col. 8, 11. 60---63}- 4 Appeal2014-005300 Application 12/443,542 includes point-to-point channel transmission of a neighbor list or MAHO list data (Ans. 14--15 (citing Raith col. 4, 11. 12-15)). For these reasons, we agree with the Examiner that Raith discloses "while the user equipment is in an idle mode, sending a message to the user equipment from the base station using a point-to-point connection over the radio link," as recited in claim 2 7. Accordingly, we sustain the Examiner's 3 5 U.S. C. § 102(b) rejection of claim 27, and claims 28-31, 39--43, 52, and 53, which Appellants do not argue separately. Br. 6. Appellants do not raise new issues with respect to the Examiner's 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) rejections of the dependent claims. Br. 7. Therefore, we also sustain the Examiner's 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) rejections of claims 32-38 and 44--51. DECISION We affirm the Examiner's decision rejecting claims 27-53. No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a). See 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(±). AFFIRMED 5 Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation