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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 7, 9 and 10 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 7, 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu (US 2020/0059991, supported by paragraphs 28-31, 43-46 and Figure 4 of provisional 62/764,806) in view of Lee et al. (US 2020/0205220, Lee hereafter, previously cited in the action mailed June 18, 2025).
RE claims 7 and 10, Wu discloses a single terminal (Figure 2, 110) and method for performing communication in dual connectivity, the single terminal comprising: a transmitter that: performs a first communication with a first base station, which is a master node using a first radio access technology (RAT) (Figure 2, LTE Transceiver 206, Paragraph 60 discloses a UE with these transceivers establishes a connection with a master node using one wireless protocol, and a second connection with a secondary node using a second wireless protocol. The first and second protocols may be the same or different), and performs a second communication with a second base station, which is a secondary node using a second RAT (Figure 2, 5G NR Transceiver 208, Paragraph 60 discloses a UE with these transceivers establishes a connection with a master node using one wireless protocol, and a second connection with a secondary node using a second wireless protocol. The first and second protocols may be the same or different)); a first Media Access Control (MAC) entity configured to be associated with the first communication (Paragraph 60 further discloses the UE includes “includes suitable MAC entities (e.g., a first MAC entity for the master cell group, a second MAC entity for the secondary cell group)); a second MAC entity configured to be associated with the second communication (Paragraph 60 further discloses the UE includes “includes suitable MAC entities (e.g., a first MAC entity for the master cell group, a second MAC entity for the secondary cell group)); a single data inactivity timer configured for the single terminal (Paragraphs 62-74 discloses an embodiment in which the mac entities are controlled by a single “Dual-Data Inactivity Timer”); and a processor that: starts or restarts the single data inactivity timer when data transmission occurs at the first MAC entity associated with the first communication, and starts or restarts the single data inactivity timer when data transmission occurs at the second MAC entity associated with the second communication (Paragraph 64 discloses: “The UE 110 is configured to start or restart the dual-data inactivity timer whenever at least one of the first MAC entity 332 or the second MAC entity 334 transmits a MAC Service Data Unit (SDU) for a logical channel (LCH) (e.g., DTCH logical channel, DCCH logical channel, CCCH logical channel), or at least one of the first MAC entity 332 or the second MAC entity 334 receives a MAC SDU for an LCH (e.g., DTCH logical channel, DCCH logical channel). In aspects, the UE 110 is configured to start or restart the dual-data inactivity timer whenever a Protocol Data Unit (PDU) is sent or received from at least one of the first MAC entity 332 or the second MAC entity 334.”), wherein the processor transitions a Radio Resource Control (RRC) state to RRC IDLE upon detection of expiration of the single data inactivity timer (Paragraph 69: “the dual-data inactivity timer expires if none of the MAC entities receive or transmit a MAC SDU for an LCH within a time period (e.g., the duration of the dual-data inactivity timer).”, and “Upon receiving the expiry indication from the lower layers, the UE 110 transitions from a connected mode at a radio resource control layer (e.g., the RRC connected state) to an a idle mode at a radio resource control layer (e.g., the RRC idle state) and the UE 110 initiates an RRC connection release procedure releasing the RRC connections for all nodes (e.g., the master node and the secondary node).”), detection of expiration of the single data activity timer, and wherein the single data inactivity timer is not configured for either the first MAC entity or the second MAC entity (Paragraphs 62-74, in view of this disclosure, it is clear the “dual-data inactivity timer” is a timer for the UE itself as it pertains to its multiple connections. The timer is not controlled by a MAC entity individually. It is instead started and restarted by activity from either MAC entity, and when both are inactive for a duration that causes the timer to expire, the UE as a whole transitions to RRC Idle mode).
Wu does not explicitly disclose wherein the data transmission which may occur at the first MAC entity and/or second MAC entity is of a service data unit.
However, Lee teaches starting or restarting a data inactivity timer according to the transmission of a service data unit (Paragraph 105, arrival or transmission of a MAC service data unit (SDU) by the MAC layer of a UE will cause the UE to start or restart an a configured data inactivity timer).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the terminal and method of Wu with the teachings of Lee since such a modification would have involved the mere application of a known technique to a piece of prior art ready for improvement.
Where a claimed improvement on a device or apparatus is no more than "the simple substitution of one known element for another or the mere application of a known technique to a piece of prior art ready for improvement," the claim is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a). Ex Parte Smith, 83 USPQ.2d 1509, 1518-19 (BPAI, 2007) (citing KSR v. Teleflex, 127 S.Ct. 1727, 1740, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007)).
RE claim 9, Wu discloses a radio communication system comprising: a first base station, which is a master node using a first radio access technology (RAT) (Figure 2, LTE Transceivers 206 and 256, Paragraph 60 discloses a UE with these transceivers establishes a connection with a master node using one wireless protocol, and a second connection with a secondary node using a second wireless protocol. The first and second protocols may be the same or different. See further Figures 4 and 5.); a second base station, which is a secondary node using a second RAT (Figure 2, 5G NR Transceivers 208 and 258, Paragraph 60 discloses a UE with these transceivers establishes a connection with a master node using one wireless protocol, and a second connection with a secondary node using a second wireless protocol. The first and second protocols may be the same or different. See further Figures 4 and 5.); and a single terminal for performing communications with the first base station and the second base station in dual connectivity (Figure 2, 5G NR Transceivers 208 and 258, Paragraph 60 discloses a UE with these transceivers establishes a connection with a master node using one wireless protocol, and a second connection with a secondary node using a second wireless protocol. The first and second protocols may be the same or different. See further Figures 4 and 5.), wherein the single terminal includes: a transmitter that: performs a first communication with a first base station and performs a second communication with a second base station (Figure 2, LTE Transceivers 206 and 256, Paragraph 60 discloses a UE with these transceivers establishes a connection with a master node using one wireless protocol, and a second connection with a secondary node using a second wireless protocol. The first and second protocols may be the same or different. See further Figures 4 and 5.); a first Media Access Control (MAC) entity configured to be associated with the first communication (Paragraph 60 further discloses the UE includes “includes suitable MAC entities (e.g., a first MAC entity for the master cell group, a second MAC entity for the secondary cell group)); a second MAC entity configured to be associated with the second communication (Paragraph 60 further discloses the UE includes “includes suitable MAC entities (e.g., a first MAC entity for the master cell group, a second MAC entity for the secondary cell group)); a single data inactivity timer configured for the single terminal (Paragraphs 62-74 discloses an embodiment in which the mac entities are controlled by a single “Dual-Data Inactivity Timer”); and a processor that: starts or restarts the single data inactivity timer when data transmission occurs at the first MAC entity associated with the first communication, and starts or restarts the single data inactivity timer when data transmission occurs at the second MAC entity associated with the second communication (Paragraph 69: “the dual-data inactivity timer expires if none of the MAC entities receive or transmit a MAC SDU for an LCH within a time period (e.g., the duration of the dual-data inactivity timer).”), wherein the processor transitions a Radio Resource Control (RRC) state to RRC IDLE upon detection of expiration of the single data inactivity timer (Paragraph 69: “Upon receiving the expiry indication from the lower layers, the UE 110 transitions from a connected mode at a radio resource control layer (e.g., the RRC connected state) to an a idle mode at a radio resource control layer (e.g., the RRC idle state) and the UE 110 initiates an RRC connection release procedure releasing the RRC connections for all nodes (e.g., the master node and the secondary node).”), wherein the single data inactivity timer is not configured for either the first MAC entity or the second MAC entity (Paragraphs 62-74, in view of this disclosure, it is clear the “dual-data inactivity timer” is a timer for the UE itself as it pertains to its multiple connections. The timer is not controlled by a MAC entity individually. It is instead started and restarted by activity from either MAC entity, and when both are inactive for a duration that causes the timer to expire, the UE as a whole transitions to RRC Idle mode), wherein the first base station includes a receiver that performs the first communication with the terminal (Figure 2, 254, 256, 258), and wherein the second base station includes a receiver that performs the second communication with the terminal (Figure 2, 254, 256, 258).
Wu does not explicitly disclose wherein the data transmission which may occur at the first MAC entity and/or second MAC entity is of a service data unit.
However, Lee teaches starting or restarting a data inactivity timer according to the transmission of a service data unit (Paragraph 105, arrival or transmission of a MAC service data unit (SDU) by the MAC layer of a UE will cause the UE to start or restart an a configured data inactivity timer).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the system of Wu with the teachings of Lee since such a modification would have involved the mere application of a known technique to a piece of prior art ready for improvement.
Where a claimed improvement on a device or apparatus is no more than "the simple substitution of one known element for another or the mere application of a known technique to a piece of prior art ready for improvement," the claim is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a). Ex Parte Smith, 83 USPQ.2d 1509, 1518-19 (BPAI, 2007) (citing KSR v. Teleflex, 127 S.Ct. 1727, 1740, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007)).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 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 statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to James P Duffy whose telephone number is (571)270-7516. The examiner can normally be reached Tuesday-Friday, 9am-6pm EST.
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, Huy D Vu can be reached at 571-272-3155. 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.
/James P Duffy/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2461
Prosecution Insights