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 .
Claims 1-5 and 10-20 are pending.
Claims 1, 10 and 17 have been amended.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment of adding i, ii, and iii, to the independent claims has been accepted. The amendments to claim 10 have been accepted. Examiner appreciates the enhancement to clarity of the claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-5 and 10-20 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Specifically, Zhou in view of Kakishima teach monitoring for a time delay of the sum of i, ii, and iii by Kakishima [0060]-[0071] teaching that the delay time may be specified as the delay time from the ACK transmission and reception timing for RRC signal and in the case of switching the maximum number of MIMO layers, the T MaxMimoLayerSwitchRRC may include the sum of multiple delay times including TRRCProcessing and TSwitchRRC.
Examiner notes that under the broadest interpretation of the claims the summation in the case of switching a maximum number of MIMO layers is within the scope of the current claims. Thus, when the base station uses RRC signaling for the maximum number of MIMO layers in the terminal, the “sum of multiple delay times” would include all of i), ii) and iii) as claimed. Applicant’s argument that the switching for the maximum number of MIMO layers is irrelevant is not persuasive because the claim uses the word “comprising” which is open-ended and contemplates a maximum number of MIMO layer scenario.
Regarding Applicant’s arguments concerning claim 10, Examiner respectfully disagrees in that the handover is described as a bandwidth part switch in Rastegardoost para. [0451] with regard to the illustrated Figure 21: “The wireless device may use an active BWP of a source cell substantially similar to (e.g., same BWP-ID and/or at least partially overlapped in frequency domain) a first active BWP of a target cell, for example, during a handover from a source base station 2104 to a target base station 2102.” Therefore, handovers taught are BWP switches vis a vis Fig. 21 as illustrated below.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Pat. Pub. 20200145169 to Hua Zhou et al. (hereinafter Zhou) in view of U.S. Pat. Pub. 20220345906 to Yuichi Kakishima and Takuma Takada (hereinafter Kakishima)
Regarding claim 1, Zhou teaches A base station belonging to a first cell group (CG), (Zhou para. [0196] teaches Master Cell Group and Secondary Cell Groups in multi-connectivity. Zhou Fig. 8 illustrates example cell groups.)
a transceiver configured to connect to a user equipment (UE) (Zhou para. [0166] and Fig. 4 illustrates that transceivers may be employed in base stations to implement communication interface 402 ); and
a processor configured to (Zhou Fig. 4, element 403, processor) transmit a command to the UE to perform a BWP switch, and (Zhou paras. [0291] - [0300] and Fig. 25 illustrates an example of BWP switching based on RRC messages from a base station. )
monitor a physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) for an acknowledgement or a negative acknowledgement (ACK/NACK) for a predetermined period of time, (Zhou teaches in Fig. 35 and Fig. 37 and para. [0388] base station 3702 monitors PUCCH resources for an ACK/NACK. Zhou para. [0384] -[0387] and Fig. 37 further teaches that the base station may send configuration RRC messages for including “one or more timing parameters of ACK information and may include “feedback timing indicator”. Zhou Fig. 35 illustrates “Time indicated by feedback timing indicator” between time 3520 and time 3525. ).
Zhou does not explicitly teach wherein the predetermined period of time is precomputed in the base station as the sum of i) a standard-defined period of time between transmission of a radio resource control (RRC) command and receipt of the ACK/NACK, ii) a time to process an RRC command, and iii) a time to perform a BWP switch. (Although Zhou teaches monitoring a PUCCH for an ACK/NACK following an RRC message with resource indications and timing indicators precomputed in a base station (see, e.g., Fig. 35), Zhou does NOT identify precisely the period of time between RRC and receipt of the ACK/NACK.
However, in the analogous art of 3GPP 5G wireless communications, Kakishima teaches wherein the predetermined period of time is precomputed in the base station as the sum of i) a standard-defined period of time between transmission of a radio resource control (RRC) command and receipt of the ACK/NACK, (Kakishima paras. [0032]- [0040] teaches that a base station can determine BWP switching in a terminal according to different patterns and “Bandwidth part operation is specified to dynamically switch a bandwidth for a transmission and a reception by the terminal 20.” Kakishima para. [0040] teaches pattern 2 using RRC Reconfiguration message. Kakishima para. [0066] teaches a specific delay time may be specified as a delay time from the ACK transmission and reception timing for the RRC signaling”) ii) a time to process an RRC command, and (Kakishima para. [0048] teaches TRRCprocessingDelay for RRC Reconfiguration message BWP switch.)
iii) a time to perform a BWP switch. (Kakishima teaches in para. [0035] that a terminal transmits a PUCCH within an active bandwidth part, paras. [0064]-[0068] teach “The delay time in a case where the switching of the maximum number of MIMO layers in the terminal 20 is indicated by the base station 10 by using RRC signaling may be defined, for example, as a delay time from the RRC signaling that triggered the switching. For example, the delay time may be specified as a delay time from the ACK transmission and reception timing for the RRC signaling.” (emphasis added). Further, the switching is ”indicated by the base station 10” as a “sum of multiple delay times” including “TRRCProcessing andTSwitchRRC which is the RRC processing and delay time of switching. Examiner notes that the support in the Applicant’s specification paras. [0034] – [0036] identify a summation for “precomputing” is also a summation of the delay times which is indicated by the base station.
Kakishima paras. [0060]-[0071] teaches the sum of the three delay times (i), (ii) and (iii) in the case of RRC signaling. For example, the delay time may be specified as the delay time from the ACK transmission and reception timing for RRC signal and in the case of switching the maximum number of MIMO layers, the T MaxMimoLayerSwitchRRC may be the sum of multiple delay times including TRRCProcessing and TSwitchRRC.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the BWP switching disclosed by Zhou by providing a timing delay as disclosed by Kakishima during a PUCCH as described by both references. Each of Zhou and Kakishima are in the field of wireless communications. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to implement the dual-connectivity standards and dynamic BWP switching/active BWP switching according to 3GPP standards as recited in para. [0032] of Kakishima, including the delay times recited in the standard and in para. [0064]-[0066] of Kakishima.
Regarding claim 2, Zhou does not teach The base station of claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to transmit data to the UE on a BWP corresponding to the BWP switch after receiving the ACK.
However, in the analogous art of 3GPP 5G wireless communications, Kakishima teaches wherein the processor is further configured to transmit data to the UE on a BWP corresponding to the BWP switch after receiving the ACK (Kakishima para. [0066] teaches that “the delay time may be specified as a delay time from the ACK transmission and reception timing for the RRC signaling”).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined Zhou and Kakishima. Each of Zhou and Kakishima are in the field of wireless communications. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to quantify the time period shown in Zhou for transmitting an ACK/NACK to a base station while monitoring a PUCCH. Further, one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to implement dual-connectivity and dynamic BWP switching/active BWP switching according to 3GPP standards as recited in para. [0032] of Kakishima.
Regarding claim 3, Zhou teaches The base station of claim 1, wherein the command to perform the BWP switch comprises a radio resource control (RRC) command. (Zhou para. [0300] teaches BWP switching using one or more RRC messages.)
Regarding claim 4, Zhou teaches The base station of claim 1, wherein the UE is simultaneously connected to the base station of the first CG and the base station of the second CG in a dual connectivity (DC) mode. (Zhou Fig. 8 illustrates dual connectivity and Zhou para. [0321] teaches primary and secondary NR cells in dual connectivity.)
Regarding claim 5, Zhou teaches The base station of claim 4, wherein the base station of the first CG and the base station of the second CG are 5G new radio (NR) cells. (Zhou para. [0180] teaches “an RRC connection between a wireless device and NG-RAN, which may comprise at least one of addition, modification and release of carrier aggregation; or addition, modification, and/or release of dual connectivity in NR”. Further para. [0196] teaches a master gNB and secondary gNBs in multi-connectivity.)
Claims 10, 11 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over of U.S. Pat. Pub. 20200351729 to Nazanin Rastegardoost et al. (hereinafter Rastegardoost) in view of U.S. Pat. Pub. 20230216650 to Youngwoo Kwak et al. (hereinafter Kwak).
Regarding claim 10, Rastegardoost teaches A base station belonging to a first cell group (CG) (Rastegardoost, Fig. 22, Source BS1 2204 in Cell1), comprising:
a transceiver configured to connect to a user equipment (UE); and (Rastegardoost Fig. 3, communication interface 320A described as a transceiver in para. [0219])
a processor (Rastegardoost, Fig. 3 processor 321A) configured to:
receive, from a base station of a second CG, an indication that a first bandwidth part (BWP) switch command was provided to the UE by the base station of the second CG, (Rastegardoost para. [0436] and Fig. 21 teaches that when a source base station 2104 determines to perform a handover for the wireless device, the source base station sends a handover request, and the target base station may send a handover request acknowledge 2114 to the source base station 2104. The target base stion 2102 is described as “the new cell”:
PNG
media_image1.png
565
781
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As shown, measurement reports 2102 include identifying target base station 2102 and handover request. Rastegardoost para. [0448] – [0452] teaches that simultaneous connectivity can be simplified by performing a BWP switch that utilizes similar BWPs as shown in Fig. 22:
PNG
media_image2.png
447
815
media_image2.png
Greyscale
determine that the UE is to perform a BWP switch for the first CG, (Rastegardoost teaches in para. [0450] – [0452] teaches that BWP mechanisms may “enhance sending/transmitting to and/or receiving from two base stations in a wireless network at the same time”. Further during a handover, the wireless device may use an active BWP of a source cell substantially similar to a first active BWP of a target cell... for example during a handover”. ).
receive an acknowledgement (ACK) configured to notify the first CG that the second CG-initiated BWP switch has been executed by the UE, (Rastegardoost para. [0467] teaches “the target base station may send/transmit the handover request acknowledgment comprising the RRC reconfiguration message to a source base station 2404. The RRC reconfiguration message may comprise one or more parameters indicating the BWP configurations of the wireless device in the target cell. The BWP configurations may indicate a location and/or bandwidth and/or identifier of the first active UL/DL BWP.” Examiner interprets the BWP configurations as including the BWP switch during handover. )
and
Rastegardoost does NOT teach transmit, after a predetermined time based on at least the indication, a second BWP switch command to the UE.
However, Kwak teaches transmit, after a predetermined time based on at least the indication, a second BWP switch command to the UE (Kwak teaches in para. [0414] and Figs. 21 and 24 teach that in step 2112 a wireless device receiving a first BWP and a second BWP in different BWP groups that in step 2114 the wireless device may activate a second BWP within a second activation time that can be according to Fig. 24:
PNG
media_image3.png
555
1035
media_image3.png
Greyscale
).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the BWP switching disclosed by Rastegardoost by providing the timing of Kwak. Each of Kwak and Rastegardoost are in the field of wireless communications. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to implement the smaller delay to BWP switching to increase efficiency as recited in Kwak para. [0006].
Regarding claim 11, Rastegardoost does NOT teach The base station of claim 10, wherein the second BWP switch command is transmitted as part of Downlink Control Information (DCI) from the base station of the first CG.
However, in the analogous art of 3GPP 5G wireless communications, Kwak teaches wherein the second BWP switch command is transmitted as part of Downlink Control Information (DCI) from the base station of the first CG. (Kwak teaches in para. [0123] a second BWP switch in response to receiving DCI indicating the second BWB as an active BWP. Kwak para. [0413] teaches different DCI messages that indicate switching from a first BWP to a second BWP).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the BWP switching disclosed by Rastegardoost by providing the DCI of Kwak. Each of Kwak and Rastegardoost are in the field of wireless communications. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to implement the smaller delay to BWP switching to increase efficiency as recited in Kwak para. [0006].
Regarding claim 15, Rastegardoost does NOT teach The base station of claim 10, wherein the base station is connected to the UE on one of a first frequency range (FR1) or a second frequency range (FR2).
However, in the analogous art of 3GPP 5G wireless communications, Kwak teaches The base station of claim 10, wherein the base station is connected to the UE on one of a first frequency range (FR1) or a second frequency range (FR2). (Kwak para. [0260] teaches that the wireless device may be connected via a BWP inactivity timer to FR1 or FR2.)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the BWP switching disclosed by Rastegardoost by providing the frequency ranges of Kwak. Each of Kwak and Rastegardoost are in the field of wireless communications. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to implement the smaller delay to BWP switching to increase efficiency as recited in Kwak para. [0006].
Claims 12, 13 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rastegardoost in view of Kwak further in view of U.S. Pat. Pub. 20210409170 to Ali Cagatay Cirik et al. (hereinafter Cirik).
Regarding claim 12, Rastegardoost does NOT teach The base station of claim 11, wherein the UE transmits the indication that the first BWP switch command was received by the UE from the base station of the second CG.
In the analogous art of 3GPP 5G wireless communications, Cirik teaches the UE transmits the indication that the first BWP switch command was received by the UE from the base station of the second CG (Cirik para. [0139]-[0140 and Fig. 13 teaches multi-connectivity wherein a UE is connected to master base station and one or more secondary base stations. “In an example, a configured set of serving cells for a wireless device may comprise two subsets: an MCG comprising serving cells of a master base station, and one or more SCGs comprising serving cells of a secondary base station(s).” With multi-connectivity, Cirik teaches that a “master base station may be informed by a UE of a SCG failure type”.)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the BWP switching disclosed by Rastegardoost with the multi-connectivity of Cirik. Each of Rastegardoost and Cirik are in the field of wireless communications. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to modify Rastegardoost with the multi-connectivity of Cirik to enable BWP switching in a dual-connectivity and multi-connectivity network as shown in Cirik Figures 11A and 11B.
Regarding claim 13, Rastegardoost teaches The base station of claim 10, wherein the first BWP switch command comprises a first radio resource control (RRC) command from the base station of the second CG, and (Rastegardoost teaches in para. [0396] teaches that network mobility may be based on “RRC_CONNECTED state” requiring explicit RRC signaling to trigger handover from PCell to SCell via RRC connection Reconfiguration. Rastegardoost para. [0467] teaches “The RRC reconfiguration message may comprise one or more parameters indicating the BWP configurations of the wireless device in the target cell.”
Rastegardoost does NOT teach wherein the second BWP switch command comprises a second RRC command from the base station of the first CG.
However, in the analogous art of 3GPP 5G wireless communications, Cirik teaches wherein the second BWP switch command comprises a second RRC command from the base station of the first CG. (Cirik para. [0139] teaches multi-connectivity wherein “a wireless device in RRC-CONNECTED with multiple RX/TX may be configured to utilize radio resourced provided by multiple schedulers located in a plurality of base stations.”)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the BWP switching disclosed by Rastegardoost with the multi-connectivity of Cirik. Each of Rastegardoost and Cirik are in the field of wireless communications. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to implement BWP switching in a dual-connectivity and multi-connectivity network as shown in Cirik Figures 11A and 11B.
Regarding claim 14, Rastegardoost does NOT teach The base station of claim 13, wherein the base station of the second CG transmits the indication that the first BWP switch command was received by the UE from the base station of the second CG.
However, in the analogous art of 3GPP 5G wireless communications, Cirik teaches wherein the base station of the second CG transmits the indication that the first BWP switch command was received by the UE from the base station of the second CG (Cirik para. [0139] teaches multi-connectivity wherein “a wireless device in RRC-CONNECTED with multiple RX/TX may be configured to utilize radio resourced provided by multiple schedulers located in a plurality of base stations.” Further Cirik teaches in para. [0199] that BWP switching may be indicated by RRC and/or PDCCH. Cirik teaches in para. [0202] that in response to the switching, the MAC entity may perform the Random Access procedure on the initial DL BWP and the initial UL BWP including communicating an indication “that the first BWP switch command was received by the UE from the base station of the second CG”.)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the BWP switching disclosed by Rastegardoost with the multi-connectivity of Cirik are in the field of wireless communications. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to implement the 3GPP dual-connectivity standards with the multi-connectivity of Cirik to enable BWP switching in a dual-connectivity and multi-connectivity network as shown in Cirik Figures 11A and 11B.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rastegardoost in view of Kwak, further in view of 3GPP TS 38.133 V15.9.0 (2020-03) (hereinafter 38.133).
Regarding claim 16, Rastegardoost does NOT teach The base station of claim 15, wherein the base station of the second CG is connected to the UE on another one of the FR1 or FR2.
However, in the analogous art of 3GPP 5G Wireless standards, 38.133 teaches wherein the base station of the second CG is connected to the UE on another one of the FR1 or FR2 (38.133 Appendix A.7.5.7.1.1 page 967 teaches with regard to active BWP switching: “The supported test configurations are given in Table A.7.5.7.1.1-1. The test scenario comprises two NR cells, Cell 1 and Cell 2, on radio channel 1 in FR1 and radio channel 2 in FR2, respectively.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective date of the invention to have combined Rastegardoost with 38.133 to teach that a base station of the second CG is connected to the UE on another one of the FR1 or FR2. Each of Rastegardoost and 38.133 are in the field of wireless communications and address bandwidth part switching. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Rastegardoost with 38.133 to implement the wireless standards for BWP switching in accordance with the appropriate standards.
Claims 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou combined with Kakishima.
Regarding claim 17 Zhou teaches A method, comprising:
at a cell of a first cell group (CG) that is connected to a user equipment (UE) (Zhou para. [0196] teaches Master Cell Group and Secondary Cell Groups in multi-connectivity. Zhou Fig. 8 illustrates example cell groups connected to UEs.)):
transmitting a command to the UE to perform a BWP switch; and (Zhou paras. [0291] - [0300] and Fig. 25 illustrates an example of BWP switching based on RRC messages from a base station.)
monitoring a physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) for an acknowledgement or a negative acknowledgement (ACK/NACK) for a predetermined period of time, (Zhou teaches in Fig. 35 and Fig. 37 and para. [0388] base station 3702 monitors PUCCH resources for an ACK/NACK. Zhou para. [0384] -[0387] and Fig. 37 further teaches that the base station may send configuration RRC messages for including “one or more timing parameters of ACK information and may include “feedback timing indicator”. Zhou Fig. 35 illustrates “Time indicated by feedback timing indicator” between time 3520 and time 3525. ).
Although Zhou teaches monitoring for an ACK on a PUCCH, Zhou does not explicitly teach wherein the predetermined period of time is precomputed in the base station as the sum of i) a standard-defined period of time between transmission of a radio resource control (RRC) command and receipt of the ACK/NACK, ii) a time to process an RRC command, and iii) a time to perform a BWP switch. (Zhou DOES teach monitoring a PUCCH for an ACK/NACK following an RRC message with resource indications and timing indicators precomputed in a base station (see, e.g., Fig. 35), Zhou does NOT identify precisely the period of time between RRC and receipt of the ACK/NACK. )
However, in the analogous art of 3GPP 5G wireless communications, Kakishima teaches wherein the predetermined period of time is precomputed in the base station as the sum of i) a standard-defined period of time between transmission of a radio resource control (RRC) command and receipt of the ACK/NACK, (Kakishima paras. [0032]- [0040] teaches that a base station can determine BWP switching in a terminal according to different patterns and “Bandwidth part operation is specified to dynamically switch a bandwidth for a transmission and a reception by the terminal 20.” Kakishima para. [0040] teaches pattern 2 using RRC Reconfiguration message. Kakishima para. [0066] teaches a specific delay time may be specified as a delay time from the ACK transmission and reception timing for the RRC signaling”).
ii) a time to process an RRC command, (Kakishima para. [0048] teaches TRRCprocessingDelay for RRC Reconfiguration message BWP switch.)
and iii) a time to perform a BWP switch. (Kakishima para. [0048] teaches TBWPswitchDelayRRC of 6 ms BWP switch. Kakishima teaches in para. [0048] that the “terminal 20 should be able to receive PDSCH/PDCCH or transmit PUSCH in the switched BWP immediately after the start of DL slot n+(TRRCprocessingDelay+TBWPswitchDelayRRC)/(NR Slot length). Here, TRRCprocessingDelay is the length of the delay time of RRC processing, TBWPswitchDelayRRC is 6 ms, and the terminal 20 is allowed not to perform data transmission/reception during TRRCprocessingDelay+TBWPswitchDelayRRC.”)
Examiner further notes that Fig. 1 of Kakishima teaches in para. [0035] that a terminal transmits a PUCCH within an active bandwidth part, and in paras. [0064]-[0066] teaches that calculating the delay in the case of a switch: “In the case where the switching of the maximum number of MIMO layers in the terminal 20 is indicated by the base station 10 by using the DCI, it may be specified that, for example, a delay of TMaxMimoLayerSwitchDci occurs. For example, TMaxMimoLayerSwitchDci may be defined as a sum of multiple delay times. For example, TMaxMimoLayerSwitchDci may include one or both of TDciProcessing that is a time required for the DCI processing and TSwitchDci that is a delay time of Switching. The delay time in a case where the switching of the maximum number of MIMO layers in the terminal 20 is indicated by the base station 10 by using RRC signaling may be defined, for example, as a delay time from the RRC signaling that triggered the switching. For example, the delay time may be specified as a delay time from the ACK transmission and reception timing for the RRC signaling.” (emphasis added).
Kakishima paras. [0060]-[0071] teaches the sum of the three delay times (i), (ii) and (iii) in the case of RRC signaling. For example, the delay time may be specified as the delay time from the ACK transmission and reception timing for RRC signal and in the case of switching the maximum number of MIMO layers, the T MaxMimoLayerSwitchRRC may be the sum of multiple delay times including TRRCProcessing and TSwitchRRC.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the BWP switching disclosed by Zhou by providing a timing delay as disclosed by Kakishima. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to implement the dual-connectivity standards and dynamic BWP switching/active BWP switching according to 3GPP standards as recited in para. [0032] of Kakishima, including the delay times recited in the standard and in para. [0046]-[0050] of Kakishima.
Regarding claim 18, Zhou teaches The method of claim 17, wherein the command to perform the BWP switch comprises a radio resource control (RRC) command. (Zhou para. [0300] teaches BWP switching using one or more RRC messages.)
Regarding claim 19 Zhou teaches The method of claim 17, wherein the UE is simultaneously connected to the cell of the first CG and the cell of a second CG in a dual connectivity (DC) mode. (Zhou Fig. 8 illustrates dual connectivity and Zhou para. [0321] teaches primary and secondary NR cells in dual connectivity.)
Regarding claim 20 Zhou teaches The method of claim 19, wherein the cell of the first CG and the cell of the second CG are 5G new radio (NR) cells. (Zhou para. [0180] teaches “an RRC connection between a wireless device and NG-RAN, which may comprise at least one of addition, modification and release of carrier aggregation; or addition, modification, and/or release of dual connectivity in NR”. Further para. [0196] teaches a master gNB in the Master Cell Group and secondary gNBs in Secondary Cell Groups in multi-connectivity are NR MAC entities.)
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 MARGARET MARIE ANDERSON whose telephone number is (703)756-1068. The examiner can normally be reached M-F.
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, CHARLES JIANG can be reached at 571-270-7191. 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.
/MARGARET MARIE ANDERSON/Examiner, Art Unit 2412
/CHARLES C JIANG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2412