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/Amendment
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims # 21-40 have been considered but they are not persuasive.
1)
Applicant argues one more time referring to the previous argument dated August 7, 2024 that Yamada's branch quantity carrier is another name for the component carrier. A skilled artisan would have understood that a branch is a commonly known term of art related to antennas in the spatial domain, while the component carrier /branch quantity carrier refers to a term in the frequency domain. Accordingly, Applicant respectfully submits that independent claims 21, 26, 31, and 36 are patentably distinguishable over Chun in view of Yamada.
Examiner respectfully disagrees with applicant remarks and arguments as the term “value of a branch quantity of terminals” has been interpretated as a configuration of a UE from a base station to synchronize the number of aggregation path that will be used for transmitting data between the user equipment and base station (See Yamada [Abstract]). The number of path that a base station or a UE in aggregation mode is associated also with the number of antenna feeds that will be used for parallel or aggregate transmission. Yamada reference specifically used the exact term as the applicant claim to show the UE configuration about branch quantity. Base station sends its characteristic of antenna that can include number of antenna, component carrier, frequency used and RSSI value (See [0150-0156]; [0190]). Therefore if the applicant wants to convey another interpretation, the applicant should recite the claim differently in order for the examiner to have a specific interpretation of the interested limitation. Also applicant cannot decide how to interpret the same term “ branch quantity carrier” used in the claim and in a reference differently. Applicant is welcome to rewrite its claims using other term to convey other meaning of the scope of the claim.
2) Applicant argues that current claim 21 recites "determine, based on at least the value of the branch quantity in the first information, whether to access the first cell." Even assuming for the sake of argument that the Examiner's interpretation of the term "value of a branch quantity of terminals" as "a configuration of a UE from a base station to synchronize the number of aggregation path that will be used for transmitting data" is correct (which Applicant does not concede), such interpretation does not cover that the asserted "value of the branch quantity" is used for determining whether to access the asserted first cell, and nowhere does Yamada disclose so.
Examiner respectfully disagrees with applicant remark and arguments as the measurement of branch quantity of Yamada (See [0150-0156]; [0190]) can be used by Chun to allow access or no access a cell (See [0136-0138]). The above rejection is a 103 rejection, where Chun applied access restriction or permission depending on system information received which can be a configuration on amount a branch quantity of terminal to allow access to a cell. Therefore it is an obvious procedure of allowance or restriction on a cell access.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 21-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chun (US 2021/0068036 A1) in view of Yamada (CN 102265665 B).
Regarding Clam 21, 26, 31, 36
Chun discloses an apparatus (Fig.5(UE)), comprising:
one or more processors (Fig.9(910)); and
a memory (Fig.9(930)) having instructions stored thereon that (See [0650]; implements the function, process and method), when executed by the one or more processors (Fig.9(910)), cause the apparatus (Fig.5(UE)) to:
receive, in a first cell, first information from a network device (See [0136-0137]; UEs received SIB from eNB),
wherein the first information comprises characteristic information of at least one of:
terminals allowed to access the first cell (See [0138]; UE can receive information allowing to access cell)
or
terminals disallowed to access the first cell (See [0138]; UE receive information disallowing access to cell);
wherein the first information is carried in a system information block (SIB) (See [0136-0138]; UE A and the UE B receive the updated SIB. Thereafter, data occurs in each UE, and each UE determines to apply or skip which access control mechanism).
and
determine, based on the first information, whether to access the first cell (See [0139]; UE determine whether to access cell).
But Chun fails to explicitly recite
wherein the characteristic information comprises a value of a branch quantity of terminals;
However in analogous art,
Yamada teaches about a UE receiving characteristic information comprising value of a branch quantity of terminals (See [0150-0156]; [0190]; Because through a special signal (e.g. RRC signaling) for performing branch quantity carrier to the mobile station device 200 added (carrier aggregation), can configure a mobile device-specific component carrier).
Chun and Yamada are analogous art because they all pertain to wireless communication technology. Chun teaches about UE receiving system information from the network. Yamada teaches about a UE receiving characteristic information comprising value of a branch quantity of terminals. Chun could have use Yamada features in term of receiving additional configuration for the UE to use to synchronize data path transmission between base station and UE. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time of the filling of the application to combine Chun and Yamada as to obtain of an efficient to wireless communication system.
Regarding Claim 22, 27, 32, 37
Chun and Yamada teach all the features with respect to claim 21, 26, 31, 36 and Chun further teaches
wherein the first information is carried in a system information block (SIB) (See [0136]; information carried by SIB),
wherein the first information is carried in a paging message, or
wherein the first information is carried in downlink control information (DCI), and
the DCI schedules a SIB.
(The term “OR” translates into at least one the of the limitation can be analyzed for the claim examination)
Regarding Claim 23, 28, 33, 38
Chun and Yamada teach all the features with respect to claim 21, 26, 31, 36 and Chun further teaches
wherein the at least one of
the first characteristic information or the second characteristic information corresponds to a type of terminals (See [0136]; terminal compatible with EUTRAN and NR technology), and
wherein the first information comprises at least one of
a first type of the first terminals allowed to access the first cell (See [0138]; allowed to access NR) or
a second type of the second terminals disallowed to access the first cell (See [0138]; disallowed to access NR).
Regarding Claim 24, 29, 34, 39
Chun and Yamada teach all the features with respect to claim 21, 26, 31, 36 and Chun further teaches
wherein the at least one of
the first characteristic information or the second characteristic information comprises
a value of one or more of a duplex capability (See [0130]; [0150]; [0269]; frequency band) or
a branch quantity of terminals.
(The term “OR” translates into at least one the of the limitation can be analyzed for the claim examination)
Regarding Claim 25, 30, 35, 40
Chun and Yamada teach all the features with respect to claim 24, 29, 34, 39 and Chun further teaches
wherein the duplex capability is a half-duplex frequency division duplex (FDD) capability (See [0130]; [0150]; [0269]; each RAT can operate with own frequency band) .
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 GARY LAFONTANT whose telephone number is (571)272-3037. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00AM -5:00PM.
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, Anderson Matthews can be reached on 571-272-7922. 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.
/GARY LAFONTANT/Examiner, Art Unit 2646