DETAILED ACTION
This Action is in response to Applicant’s Request for Continued Examination (RCE) filed on May 19, 2026. Claims 1-5, 24-26, 28-34, and 36-42 are now pending in the present application. This Action is made NON-FINAL.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on May 19, 2026 has been entered.
Claim Objections
Claim 40 is objected to because of the following informality: On line 3, delete “that” after “bits”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office Action.
Claims 1-3, 24, 25, 28, 29, 31, 33, 34, and 36-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 2013/0053103 A1) in view of Koskela et al. (US 9,883,484 B2) and further in view of Nokia (Clarification on NS_203 support for n258).
Consider claim 1, Kim et al. disclose a method of operating user equipment (UE 100/500 - see, for example, figures 5 and 6), comprising:
detecting a base station (eNB 105/505 – figures 1 and 5) via the user equipment (UE
100/500 performs cell searching to discover a cell (i.e., eNB 105/505) to camp on – see figure 1 step 110, figure 6 step 600, and paragraphs 0034, 0068, and 0098);
synchronizing the user equipment (UE 100/500) to the base station (eNB 105/505 – this step is, at the very least, implicit or inherent in Kim et al. since, after discovering the cell, the UE 100/500 establishes a connection to the cell, receives a Systen Information Block (SIB), and camps on the cell which means that synchronization between the UE and the eNB has taken place (see figure 1 steps 110, 115, and 120, figure 6 steps 600, 605, and 610, and paragraphs
0034, 0035, 0068, 0098, and 0099));
receiving, at the user equipment (UE 100/500), system information from the base station (SIB1 and SIB2 are received by the UE from eNB 105/505 – steps 115 and 125 in figure 1 and steps 515 and 525 in figure 5), the system information comprising one or more network signaling flags, the one or more network signaling flags indicating a plurality of frequency ranges within a frequency band supported by the base station (SIB1 includes a frequency band indicator (read as network signaling flag) indicating a frequency band supported by the base station (one frequency band) and an additional frequency band indicator (read as another network signaling flag) indicating at least one frequency band supported by the base station (another frequency band). The SIB2 includes additionalSpectrumEmission and extAdditionalSpectrumEmission IEs indicating spectrum emission values corresponding to the plurality of frequency bands/ranges within the supported frequency band – see the abstract, figure 4 steps 400, 415, and 420, figure 5 step 515, and paragraphs 0013-0016, 0051-0055, 0064, 0068, and 0069); and
receiving, by the user equipment, one or more frequency ranges of the plurality of frequency ranges within the frequency band supported by the user equipment corresponding to the one or more network signaling flags (UE 500 receives the frequency bands indicated by the frequency band indicators, determines whether the indicated frequency bands include one or more frequency bands supported by the UE, and selects a supported frequency band – figure 6 and paragraphs 0054, 0055, 0070-0073, and 0099-0101).
However, Kim et al. do not specifically disclose sending an indication indicative of the one or more frequency ranges within the frequency band supported by the user equipment from the user equipment to the base station.
In the same field of endeavor, Koskela et al. disclose sending an indication indicative of the one or more frequency ranges supported by the user equipment from the user equipment to the base station (see column 1 lines 37-40 and 58-61, column 2 lines 25-28 and 51-53, column 5 lines 27-62, and column 8 lines 1-5 - receiving an indication from the user equipment that the user equipment supports at least one of the plurality of network-signaling values corresponding to the frequency band without the previously defined network-signaling value. The UE transmits an indication that it supports a network signaling value).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide an indication of the frequency range supported by the user equipment from the user equipment to the base station as disclosed by Koskela et al. in the method disclosed by Kim et al. in order to allow the network to know which network signaling value associated with the frequency band supported by the user equipment and thus letting the network know the A-MPR usage of the user equipment (see, for example, column 5 lines 54-62 of Koskela et al.).
Although Koskela et al. clearly suggest that the indication sent by the UE includes a maximum power reduction requirement associated with the frequency band supported by the UE since the network signaling value being indicated as being supported by the UE corresponds to a network signaling value that corresponds to a different requirement in emissions and/or an additional maximum power reduction (see column 1 lines 34-36 and 54-61 and column 2 lines 13-16 of Koskela et al.), Kim et al., as modified by Koskela et al., fail to disclose wherein the indication being sent specifically includes one or more modified maximum power reduction behavior bits indicative of the one or more frequency ranges within the frequency band supported by the user equipment.
In the same field of endeavor, Nokia discloses that the indication sent by the UE includes
one or more modified maximum power reduction behavior bits indicative of the one or more frequency ranges within the frequency band supported by the user equipment (see section H.1 and Table H.1-1 which discloses and shows the field modifiedMPR-Behavior indicated per supported NR band in the IE RF-Parameters by a UE supporting an MPR or A-MPR modified in a given version of the specification. Nokia states that “the bits in the field can explicitly indicate NS value(s) supported by a UE.” Table H.1-1 shows, for NR band n258, bit index 2 indicating “NS_203 as defined in clause 6.5.3.2.4 or both NS_203 and CA_NS_203 as defined in clause 6.5A.3.2.4.” Nokia’s Other comments section in page 1 states “UEs to reflect this CR content explicitly signal newly supported requirements via modifiedMPR and network can differentiate UEs based on this CR and the legacy UEs.” Thus, the modifiedMPR-Behavior bits explicitly indicate the NS values — and thereby the frequency ranges/emission requirements within a frequency band — supported by the UE, and are sent from the UE to the base station).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to use one or more modifiedMPR-Behavior bits as disclosed by Nokia in the method disclosed by Kim et al., as modified by Koskela et al., in order to explicitly indicate the NS values supported by the UE so that the network can differentiate UEs and appropriately treat them based on their supported requirements (see, for example, Nokia, section H.1 and Other comments section on page 1).
Consider claim 2, and as applied to claim 1 above, Kim et al., as modified by Koskela et al. and Nokia disclose the claimed invention on claim 1. Additionally, Nokia discloses wherein sending the one or more modified maximum power reduction behavior bits comprises setting the one or more modified maximum power reduction behavior bits corresponding to the one or more frequency ranges supported by the user equipment (see section H.1 and Table H.1-1 which discloses and shows the setting of one or more modifiedMPR-Behavior bits per supported NR band which are then provided to the base station by the UE to explicitly indicate the NS values supported by the UE).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use one or more modifiedMPR-Behavior bits as disclosed by Nokia in the method disclosed by Kim et al., as modified by Koskela et al., in order to explicitly indicate the NS values supported by the UE (see, for example, section H.1 of Nokia).
Consider claim 3, and as applied to claim 1 above, Kim et al., as modified by Koskela et al. and Nokia, further disclose wherein the base station is configured to establish communication with the user equipment over a channel within the one or more frequency ranges indicated by the user equipment (see, for example, figure 1 step 150 and paragraph 0050 – Afterward, UE 100 performs normal operation at step 150. For example, the UE 100 is capable of performing one of cell reselection, paging message reception monitoring, system information change monitoring, RRC connection configuration, and data communication, as needed).
Consider claim 24, Kim et al. disclose an electronic device (figure 8 – eNB) comprising:
a transceiver 805 (figure 8); and
processing circuitry (figure 8 – controller 810) communicatively coupled to the transceiver 805, the processing circuitry configured to:
send, using the transceiver, a first indication of a plurality of frequency ranges within a frequency band that are available in a coverage area (SIB1 and SIB2 are received by the UE from eNB 105/505 (see steps 115 and 125 in figure 1 and steps 515 and 525 in figure 5) with the SIB1 including a frequency band indicator indicating a frequency band supported by the base station and an additional frequency band indicator indicating at least one frequency band supported by the base station (see the abstract, figure 4 steps 400, 415, and 420, figure 5 step 515, and paragraphs 0013-0016, 0064, 0068, and 0069) with each frequency band having a plurality of frequency ranges (see figure 2 and 3); and
establish, using the transceiver, communication with the user equipment over a channel within the one or more frequency ranges included in a frequency band (see, for example, figure 1 step 150 and paragraph 0050 – Afterward, UE 100 performs normal operation at step 150. For example, the UE 100 is capable of performing one of cell reselection, paging message reception monitoring, system information change monitoring, RRC connection configuration, and data communication, as needed).
However, Kim et al. do not specifically disclose receive, from user equipment, an indication indicative of one or more frequency ranges of the plurality of frequency ranges within the frequency band that are supported by the user equipment based on the first indication.
In the same field of endeavor, Koskela et al. disclose sending an indication indicative of the one or more frequency ranges of the plurality of frequency ranges within the frequency band supported by the user equipment from the user equipment to the base station based on broadcast system information received by the user equipment (see the abstract, column 1 lines 37-40 and 58-61, column 2 lines 25-28 and 51-53, column 5 lines 27-62, and column 8 lines 1-5 - receiving an indication from the user equipment that the user equipment supports at least one of the plurality of network-signaling values corresponding to the frequency band without the previously defined network-signaling value).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide an indication of the frequency range supported by the user equipment from the user equipment to the base station as disclosed by Koskela et al. in the method disclosed by Kim et al. in order to allow the network to know which network signaling value associated with the frequency band supported by the user equipment and thus letting the network know the A-MPR usage of the user equipment (see, for example, column 5 lines 54-62 of Koskela et al.).
Although Koskela et al. clearly suggest that the indication sent by the UE includes a maximum power reduction requirement associated with the frequency band supported by the UE since the network signaling value being indicated as being supported by the UE corresponds to a network signaling value that corresponds to a different requirement in emissions and/or an additional maximum power reduction (see column 1 lines 54-61 of Koskela et al.), Kim et al., as modified by Koskela et al., fail to disclose wherein the indication being sent specifically includes one or more modified maximum power reduction behavior bits indicative of one or more frequency ranges within the frequency band supported by the user equipment.
In the same field of endeavor, Nokia discloses that the indication sent by the UE includes
one or more modified maximum power reduction behavior bits indicative of one or more frequency ranges within the frequency band supported by the user equipment (see section H.1 and Table H.1-1 which discloses and shows one or more modifiedMPR-Behavior bits per supported NR band which are then provided to the base station by the UE to explicitly indicate the NS values supported by the UE. The bits in the field can explicitly indicate NS value(s) supported by a UE. For n258, bit index 2 indicates NS_203 or both NS_203 and CA_NS_203. Nokia’s Other comments section in page 1 states “UEs to reflect this CR content explicitly signal newly supported requirements via modifiedMPR and network can differentiate UEs based on this CR and the legacy UEs”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use one or more modifiedMPR-Behavior bits as disclosed by Nokia in the electronic device disclosed by Kim et al., as modified by Koskela et al., in order to explicitly indicate the NS values supported by the UE so that the network can differentiate UEs and appropriately treat them (see, for example, section H.1 and other comments section in page 1 of Nokia).
Consider claim 25, and as applied to claim 24 above, Kim et al., as modified by Koskela et al. and Nokia, further disclose wherein the processing circuitry is configured to broadcast, using the transceiver, system information indicating that a base station supports the plurality of frequency ranges included in the frequency band (SIB1 and SIB2 are broadcasted and received by the UE from eNB 105/505 (see steps 115 and 125 in figure 1 and steps 515 and 525 in figure 5)).
Consider claim 28, and as applied to claim 24 above, Kim et al., as modified by
Koskela et al. and Nokia, also disclose wherein the processing circuitry is configured to receive, using the transceiver, user data from an additional user equipment over a frequency within the frequency band that is exclusive from the one or more frequency ranges that are supported by the user equipment (figure 6 and paragraph 0101 disclose the path (step 615 to step 620) that a legacy UE (i.e., additional user equipment) performs over a frequency within the frequency band which is exclusive from the one or more frequency ranges that are supported by the user equipment) (Also see, for example, figure 1 step 150 and paragraph 0050 – Afterward, UE 100 performs normal operation at step 150. For example, the UE 100 is capable of performing one of cell reselection, paging message reception monitoring, system information change monitoring, RRC connection configuration, and data communication, as needed (which is applicable to this scenario too)).
Consider claim 29, and as applied to claim 24 above, Kim et al., as modified by Koskela et al. and Nokia, further disclose wherein the one or more frequency ranges include a first frequency range and a second frequency range (see figures 2 and 3), and the processing circuitry is configured to cause a base station to configure resources of the base station for an additional user equipment within the first frequency range based on the additional user equipment indicating that the second frequency range is unsupported by the additional user equipment (figure 6 and paragraph 0101 disclose the path (step 615 to step 620) that a legacy UE (i.e., additional user equipment) performs over a first frequency range when the legacy UE does not support the second frequency range).
However, Kim et al., as modified by Koskela et al. and Nokia, do not specifically disclose that the configuration of resources of the base station is based on a second indication by the additional user equipment.
In the same field of endeavor, Koskela et al. additionally disclose sending an indication
of the one or more frequency ranges supported by the user equipment from the user equipment to the base station to allow the base station to communicate using resources for the one or more frequency ranges (which, at the very least, implicitly disclose which frequency range(s) is not supported (see column 1 lines 37-40 and 58-61, column 2 lines 25-28 and 51-53, and column 8 lines 1-5 - receiving an indication from the user equipment that the user equipment supports at least one of the plurality of network-signaling values corresponding to the frequency band without the previously defined network-signaling value)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide an indication of the frequency range unsupported by the additional user equipment from the additional user equipment to the base station as disclosed by Koskela et al. in the method disclosed by Kim et al., as modified by Koskela et al. and Nokia, in order to allow the network to know which network signaling value associated with the frequency band that is supported by the additional user equipment and thus letting the network know the A-MPR usage of the additional user equipment (see, for example, column 5 lines 54-62 of Koskela et al.).
Consider claim 31, and as applied to claim 24 above, Kim et al., as modified by Koskela et al. and Nokia, further disclose wherein the plurality of frequency ranges includes a first frequency range and a second frequency range, and the one or more frequency ranges excludes the first frequency range (see figures 2 and 3 which show multiple frequency ranges and some non-overlapping or mutually exclusive frequency ranges).
Consider claim 33, and as applied to claim 24 above, Kim et al., as modified by Koskela et al., fail to disclose wherein the one or more modified maximum power reduction behavior bits are set to indicate that the user equipment supports the one or more frequency ranges.
In the same field of endeavor, Nokia discloses that an indication sent by the user
equipment includes one or more modified maximum power reduction behavior bits that are set to indicate that the user equipment supports the one or more frequency ranges (see section H.1 and Table H.1-1 which disclose and shows the setting of one or more modifiedMPR-Behavior bits per supported NR band which are then provided to the base station by the UE to explicitly
indicate the NS values supported by the UE).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use one or more modifiedMPR-Behavior bits as disclosed by Nokia in the electronic device disclosed by Kim et al., as modified by Koskela et al., in order to explicitly indicate the NS values supported by the UE (see, for example, section H.1 of Nokia).
Consider claim 34, Kim et al. disclose a user equipment (UE 100/500 - see, for example, figures 5-7), comprising:
a transceiver 700 (figure 7 and paragraph 0108); and
processing circuitry (controller 720 – figure 7 and paragraphs 0108 and 0109) communicatively coupled to the transceiver 700, the processing circuitry configured to:
receive a first indication of a plurality of frequency ranges that are available in a coverage area based on system information broadcast by a base station, the plurality of frequency ranges being within a frequency band (SIB1 and SIB2 are received by the UE from eNB 105/505 (see steps 115 and 125 in figure 1 and steps 515 and 525 in figure 5) with the SIB1 including a frequency band indicator indicating a frequency band supported by the base station and an additional frequency band indicator indicating at least one frequency band supported by the base station (see the abstract, figure 4 steps 400, 415, and 420, figure 5 step 515, and paragraphs 0013-0016, 0064, 0068, and 0069)
with each frequency band having a plurality of frequency ranges (see figure 2 and 3).
However, Kim et al. do not specifically disclose that the processing circuitry is configured to send, using the transceiver, an indication indicative of one or more frequency ranges of the plurality of frequency ranges within the frequency band that are supported by the user equipment.
In the same field of endeavor, Koskela et al. disclose that the processing circuitry (processor 22 – figure 4 and column 6 lines 26-41) is configured to send, using the transceiver 28 (figure 2 and column 6 lines 59-67), an indication indicative of one or more frequency ranges of the plurality of frequency ranges within the frequency band that are supported by the user equipment (see the abstract, column 1 lines 37-40 and 58-61, column 2 lines 25-28 and 51-53, column 5 lines 27-62, and column 8 lines 1-5 - receiving an indication from the user equipment that the user equipment supports at least one of the plurality of network-signaling values corresponding to the frequency band without the previously defined network-signaling value).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide an indication of the frequency range supported by the user equipment from the user equipment to the base station as disclosed by Koskela et al. in the user equipment disclosed by Kim et al. in order to allow the network to know which network signaling value associated with the frequency band supported by the user equipment and thus letting the network know the A-MPR usage of the user equipment (see, for
example, column 5 lines 54-62 of Koskela et al.).
Although Koskela et al. clearly suggest that the indication sent by the UE includes a maximum power reduction requirement associated with the frequency band supported by the UE since the network signaling value being indicated as being supported by the UE corresponds to a network signaling value that corresponds to a different requirement in emissions and/or an additional maximum power reduction (see column 1 lines 54-61 of Koskela et al.), Kim et al., as modified by Koskela et al., fail to disclose wherein the indication being sent specifically includes one or more modified maximum power reduction behavior bits indicative of one or more frequency ranges within the frequency band supported by the user equipment.
In the same field of endeavor, Nokia discloses that the indication sent by the UE includes
one or more modified maximum power reduction behavior bits associated with the one or more frequency ranges supported by the user equipment (see section H.1 and Table H.1-1 which discloses and shows one or more modifiedMPR-Behavior bits per supported NR band which are then provided to the base station by the UE to explicitly indicate the NS values supported by the UE. The bits explicitly indicate NS value(s) supported by a UE, and the NS values correspond to emission/A-MPR requirements associated with frequency ranges within the band).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use one or more modifiedMPR-Behavior bits as disclosed by Nokia in the method disclosed by Kim et al., as modified by Koskela et al., in order to explicitly indicate the NS values supported by the UE (see, for example, section H.1 and other comments section in page 1 of Nokia).
Consider claim 36, and as applied to claim 34 above, Kim et al., as modified by Koskela et al. and Nokia, further disclose wherein the system information broadcast by the base station includes one or more network signaling flags that indicate the plurality of frequency ranges are supported by the base station (SIB1 and SIB2 are received by the UE from eNB 105/505 – steps 115 and 125 in figure 1 and steps 515 and 525 in figure 5 with SIB1 including a frequency band indicator (read as network signaling flag) indicating a frequency band supported by the base station (one frequency band) and an additional frequency band indicator (read as another network signaling flag) indicating at least one frequency band supported by the base station (another frequency band) – see the abstract, figure 4 steps 400, 415, and 420, figure 5 step 515, and paragraphs 0013-0016, 0064, 0068, and 0069) with each frequency band having a plurality of frequency ranges (see figure 2 and 3)).
Consider claim 37, and as applied to claim 34 above, Kim et al., as modified by Koskela et al., fail to disclose wherein the processing circuitry is configured to set the one or more modified maximum power reduction behavior bits to indicate that the user equipment supports the one or more frequency ranges.
In the same field of endeavor, Nokia discloses that an indication sent by the user equipment includes one or more modified maximum power reduction behavior bits that are set to indicate that the user equipment supports the one or more frequency ranges (see section H.1 and Table H.1-1 which disclose and shows the setting of one or more modifiedMPR-Behavior bits per supported NR band which are then provided to the base station by the UE to explicitly indicate the NS values supported by the UE. For n258, the Notes column of Table H.1-1 states “This bit shall be set to 1 by a UE supporting n258 or both n258 and CA_n258 in this version of specification.” The bit being set to “1” indicates the UE supports the corresponding frequency range/NS value).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to use one or more modifiedMPR-Behavior bits as disclosed by Nokia in the user equipment disclosed by Kim et al., as modified by Koskela et al., in order to explicitly indicate the NS values supported by the UE (see, for example, section H.1
of Nokia).
Consider claim 38, Kim et al. disclose a tangible, non-transitory, computer-readable medium (inherent in controller 810 (figure 8) due to the steps disclosed in paragraphs 0121 and 0122), comprising instructions that, when executed by a processor (figure 8 – controller 810),
causes the processor to:
send, to user equipment, a first indication of a plurality of frequency ranges within a
frequency band that are available in a coverage area (SIB1 and SIB2 are received by the UE from eNB 105/505 (see steps 115 and 125 in figure 1 and steps 515 and 525 in figure 5) with the SIB1 including a frequency band indicator indicating a frequency band supported by the base station and an additional frequency band indicator indicating at least one frequency band supported by the base station (see the abstract, figure 4 steps 400, 415, and 420, figure 5 step 515, and paragraphs 0013-0016, 0064, 0068, and 0069) with each frequency band having a plurality of frequency ranges (see figure 2 and 3); and
establish communication with the user equipment over a channel within the one or more frequency ranges included in the frequency band (see, for example, figure 1 step 150 and paragraph 0050 – Afterward, UE 100 performs normal operation at step 150. For example, the UE 100 is capable of performing one of cell reselection, paging message reception monitoring, system information change monitoring, RRC connection configuration, and data communication, as needed).
However, Kim et al. do not specifically disclose receive, from the user equipment, an
indication indicative of one or more frequency ranges of the plurality of frequency ranges that are supported by user equipment based on the first indication.
In the same field of endeavor, Koskela et al. disclose sending an indication indicative of
the one or more frequency ranges of the plurality of frequency ranges supported by the user equipment from the user equipment to the base station based on broadcast system information received by the user equipment (see the abstract, column 1 lines 37-40 and 58-61, column 2 lines 25-28 and 51-53, and column 8 lines 1-5 - receiving an indication from the user equipment that the user equipment supports at least one of the plurality of network-signaling values corresponding to the frequency band without the previously defined network-signaling value).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide an indication of the frequency range supported by the user equipment from the user equipment to the base station as disclosed by Koskela et al. in the method disclosed by Kim et al. in order to allow the network to know which network signaling value associated with the frequency band supported by the user equipment and thus letting the network know the A-MPR usage of the user equipment (see, for example, column 5 lines 54-62 of Koskela et al.).
Although Koskela et al. clearly suggest that the indication sent by the UE includes a maximum power reduction requirement associated with the frequency band supported by the UE since the network signaling value being indicated as being supported by the UE corresponds to a network signaling value that corresponds to a different requirement in emissions and/or an additional maximum power reduction (see column 1 lines 54-61 of Koskela et al.), Kim et al., as modified by Koskela et al., fail to disclose wherein the indication being sent specifically includes one or more modified maximum power reduction behavior bits indicative of one or more frequency ranges within the frequency band supported by the user equipment.
In the same field of endeavor, Nokia discloses that the indication sent by the UE includes
one or more modified maximum power reduction behavior bits indicative of the one or more frequency ranges within the frequency band supported by the user equipment (see section H.1 and Table H.1-1 which discloses and shows one or more modifiedMPR-Behavior bits per supported NR band which are then provided to the base station by the UE to explicitly indicate the NS values supported by the UE. The bits explicitly indicate NS value(s) supported by a UE, and the NS values correspond to emission/A-MPR requirements associated with frequency ranges within the band).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to use one or more modifiedMPR-Behavior bits as disclosed by Nokia in the method disclosed by Kim et al., as modified by Koskela et al., in order to explicitly indicate the NS values supported by the UE (see, for example, section H.1 of Nokia).
Consider claim 39, and as applied to claim 38 above, Kim et al., as modified by Koskela et al. and Nokia, further disclose wherein the instructions, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to cause a base station to configure resources of the base station for the user equipment within the one or more frequency ranges (see, for example, figure 1 step 150 and paragraph 0050 – Afterward, UE 100 performs normal operation at step 150. For example, the UE 100 is capable of performing one of cell reselection, paging message reception monitoring, system information change monitoring, RRC connection configuration, and data communication, as needed which means that, at the very least, implicitly or inherently resources
have been configured by the eNB to allow communication in the one or more frequency ranges).
Consider claim 40, and as applied to claim 38 above, Kim et al., as modified by Koskela et al., fail to disclose wherein the one or more maximum power reduction behavior bits are set to indicate that the user equipment supports the one or more frequency ranges.
In the same field of endeavor, Nokia discloses that an indication sent by the user equipment includes one or more modified maximum power reduction behavior bits that are set to indicate that the user equipment supports the one or more frequency ranges (see section H.1 and Table H.1-1 which disclose and shows the setting of one or more modifiedMPR-Behavior bits per supported NR band which are then provided to the base station by the UE to explicitly indicate the NS values supported by the UE).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use one or more modifiedMPR-Behavior bits as disclosed by Nokia in the medium disclosed by Kim et al., as modified by Koskela et al., in order to explicitly indicate the NS values supported by the UE (see, for example, section H.1 of Nokia).
Claims 4, 5, 26, 30, and 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 2013/0053103 A1) in view of Kokila et al. (US 9,883,484 B2), further in view of Nokia (Clarification on NS_203 support for n258), as applied to claims 1 and 24 above, and further in view of Yui (WO 2020/069174 A1).
Consider claim 4, and as applied to claim 1 above, Kim et al., as modified by Koskela et al. and Nokia, fail to disclose wherein the base station is configured to allocate a secondary cell to the user equipment over a channel within the one or more frequency ranges indicated by the user equipment.
In the same field of endeavor, Yiu discloses the base station is configured to allocate a
secondary cell to the user equipment over a channel within the one or more frequency ranges indicated by the user equipment (serving cell 204/source base station allocates a target cell 206/target base station (i.e., secondary cell) to the UE 202 over a channel based on the UE capability information indicated by the UE which could include frequencies supported – see figure 2 steps 207-218 and paragraphs 0039-0076).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to allocate a secondary cell to the UE as disclosed by Yiu in the method disclosed by Kim et al., as modified by Koskela et al. and Nokia, in order to configure the UE for multi-connectivity (see, for example, the abstract of Yiu).
Consider claim 5, and as applied to claim 1 above, Kim et al., as modified by Koskela et al. and Nokia, fail to disclose wherein the base station is configured to perform a handover event of the user equipment with an additional base station by sending an indication of the one or more frequency ranges indicated by the user equipment to the additional base station.
In the same field of endeavor, Yiu discloses the base station is configured to perform a handover event of the user equipment with an additional base station by sending an indication of the one or more frequency ranges indicated by the user equipment to the additional base station (serving cell 204/source base station sends a handover request to a target cell 206/target base station (i.e., additional base station) by sending an indication of simultaneous support of the UE 202 based the UE capability information indicated by the UE which could include frequencies supported – see figure 2 steps 207-218 and paragraphs 0039-0076).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to allocate a secondary cell to the UE as disclosed by Yiu in the method disclosed by Kim et al., as modified by Koskela et al. and Nokia, in order to configure the UE for multi-connectivity handover (see, for example, the abstract of Yiu).
Consider claim 26, and as applied to claim 24 above, Kim et al., as modified by Koskela et al. and Nokia, fail to disclose wherein the processing circuitry is configured to send, using the transceiver, a second indication of the one or more frequency ranges that are supported by the user equipment to an additional base station in a different coverage area during a handover event.
In the same field of endeavor, Yiu discloses the processing circuitry (figure 3 – processor
302 and paragraph 0010) is configured to send, using the transceiver (figure 3 - network interface
device 320 and paragraph 0091), a second indication of the one or more frequency ranges that
are supported by the user equipment to an additional base station in a different coverage area during a handover event (serving cell 204/source base station sends a handover request to a target cell 206/target base station (i.e., additional base station) in a different coverage area by sending an indication of simultaneous support of the UE 202 based the UE capability information indicated by the UE which could include frequencies supported – see figure 2 steps 207-218 and paragraphs 0039-0076).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to allocate a secondary cell to the UE as disclosed by Yiu in the electronic device disclosed by Kim et al., as modified by Koskela et al. and Nokia, in order to configure the UE for multi-connectivity handover (see, for example, the abstract of Yiu).
Consider claim 30, and as applied to claim 24 above, Kim et al., as modified by Koskela et al. and Nokia, fail to disclose wherein the processing circuitry is configured to perform a handover event with an additional base station in a different coverage area that supports less than the plurality of frequency ranges.
In the same field of endeavor, Yiu discloses the processing circuitry (figure 3 – processor
302 and paragraph 0010) is configured to perform a handover event with an additional base station in a different coverage area that supports less than the plurality of frequency ranges (serving cell 204/source base station sends a handover request to a target cell 206/target base station (i.e., additional base station) in a different coverage area by sending an indication of simultaneous support of the UE 202 based the UE capability information indicated by the UE which could include frequencies supported and not supported – see figure 2 steps 207-218 and paragraphs 0039-0076).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to allocate a secondary cell to the UE as disclosed by Yiu in the electronic device disclosed by Kim et al., as modified by Koskela et al. and Nokia, in order to configure the UE for multi-connectivity handover (see, for example, the abstract of Yiu).
Consider claim 32, and as applied to claim 24 above, Kim et al., as modified by Koskela et al. and Nokia, fail to disclose wherein the processing circuitry is configured to allocate a secondary cell to the user equipment over another channel within the one or more frequency ranges.
In the same field of endeavor, Yiu discloses the processing circuitry (figure 3 – processor 302 and paragraph 0010) is configured to allocate a secondary cell to the user equipment over another channel within the one or more frequency ranges (serving cell 204/source base station allocates a target cell 206/target base station (i.e., secondary cell) to the UE 202 over another channel based on the UE capability information indicated by the UE which could include frequencies supported – see figure 2 steps 207-218 and paragraphs 0039-0076).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to allocate a secondary cell to the UE as disclosed by Yiu in the electronic device disclosed by Kim et al., as modified by Koskela et al. and Nokia, in order to configure the UE for multi-connectivity (see, for example, the abstract of Yiu).
Claims 41 and 42 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 2013/0053103 A1) in view of Koskela et al. (US 9,883,484 B2), further in view of Nokia (Clarification on NS_203 support for n258), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ishii (US 2011/0319119 A1).
Consider claims 41 and 42, and as applied to claim 1 above, Kim et al., as modified by Koskela et al. and Nokia, fail to disclose wherein the one or more network signaling flags indicate one or more regulatory specifications (claim 41) and wherein the one or more network signaling flags correspond to regional regulatory specifications of a region where the base station and the user equipment are located (claim 42).
In the same field of endeavor, Ishii discloses the use of one more network signaling values (i.e., network signaling flags) to indicate one or more regulatory specifications (claim 41 – see paragraphs 0037 and 0038 – network signaling value used to indicate a regulatory specification related to A-MPR) and wherein the one or more network signaling values (flags) correspond to regional regulatory specifications of a region where the base station and the user equipment are located (claim 42 – see paragraphs 0037-0039 where the regulatory specifications
are applicable to base stations located in regions of Japan).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the network signaling flags to indicate regional regulatory specifications as disclosed by Ishii in the method disclosed by Kim et al., as modified by Koskela et al. and Nokia, in order to allow for proper operation of the user equipment according to the situation of each region (see, for example, paragraph 0037 of Ishii).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed May 19, 2026 have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
Applicant argues, on the first full paragraph of page 8 of the remarks, that Nokia is entirely silent regarding “one or more modified maximum power reduction behavior bits indicative of the one or more frequency ranges of the plurality of frequency ranges within the frequency band supported by the user equipment,” because Nokia’s bits merely indicate support for entire NR bands (e.g., n257, n258, n260, n261) rather than frequency ranges within a frequency band.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. The rejection is based on the combination of Kim et al., Koskela et al., and Nokia, not on Nokia alone. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
First, Nokia does not merely disclose bits that identify whole bands. Nokia Annex H.1 expressly states that “the bits in the field can explicitly indicate NS value(s) supported by a UE.” Nokia Table H.1-1 shows that, for the same NR band (n258), multiple bit definitions exist at different bit indices, including bit index 2 indicating support for “NS_203” or “both NS_203 and CA_NS_203.” If the bits merely indicated support for the entire band, separate bit definitions within the same band row would be unnecessary. Thus, the modifiedMPR-Behavior bits are organized per band but each bit indicates a specific NS value/MPR behavior applicable within that band.
Second, Koskela et al. teach that multiple NS values may be defined for the same frequency band and that each NS value corresponds to a different emission requirement and/or A-MPR requirement (see Koskela et al. - column 1, lines 31-40, column 4, lines 53-64, and column 5, lines 27-62). Koskela et al. also teach that indicating a same band multiple times with different NS values allows signaling different frequency ranges/emission configurations within the band. Thus, Koskela et al. establish that NS values are associated with frequency ranges within a frequency band.
Third, combining Koskela et al.’s teaching (NS values correspond to frequency ranges/emission requirements within a band) with Nokia’s teaching (modifiedMPR-Behavior bits explicitly indicate NS values supported by the UE for a supported NR band) yields bits that are indicative of the one or more frequency ranges within the frequency band supported by the UE, as claimed.
Under the broadest reasonable interpretation (see MPEP § 2111), the claim term “indicative of” does not require the bits to directly encode numerical frequency boundaries. The bits need only be indicative of (i.e., serve as an indication of) the supported frequency ranges. The combined teaching of Koskela et al. (NS values = frequency ranges/emission requirements within a band) and Nokia (modifiedMPR-Behavior bits = explicit indication of supported NS
values) satisfies this limitation.
Applicant’s argument, on the first paragraph of page 9 of the remarks, that Nokia’s indication relates specifically to how the UE supports MPR and AMPR behaviors does not overcome the rejection because the claim itself recites “modified maximum power reduction behavior bits.” The fact that the bits relate to MPR/A-MPR behaviors is consistent with and not in conflict with the claimed language. Moreover, the claim requires only that those bits be “indicative of” the supported frequency ranges, which is met by the combined references as explained above.
Consequently, and having addressed each of Applicant’s arguments, the previous rejection of all the claims is maintained by the Examiner.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Supervisory Patent Examiner (SPE) should be directed to Rafael Pérez-Gutiérrez whose telephone number is (571)272-7915. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 6:15 am - 4:15 pm EST.
SPE 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.
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.
Rafael Pérez-Gutiérrez
R.P.G./rpg
/Rafael Pérez-Gutiérrez/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2642
August 31, 2026
Prosecution Insights