DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
The instant Office Action is in response to communication filed on 6/22/2026.
Claims 1-6, 8, 10-12, 14 and 16-23 are pending. Claims 1, 14 and 18 are the base independent claims. Claims 1, 14 and 18 are amended.
Claim 23 is newly added.
Response to Arguments/Amendment
Regarding claim 1, Applicant files arguments with respect to the amendment in the remark.
--In response, new grounds of rejection are made by the combination of Kim, Tamura and Kwok’073 based on the amended claim limitations. Upon further consideration, Kim or Tamura still applies to a respective portion of the independent claims because the amendment does not change the scope of this portion. The rest of the arguments have been fully considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the new reference being used in the current rejection.
Regarding claims 14 and 18, because the patent scopes of the limitations in the independent claims are the same as in claim 1, therefore the claims are rejected based on the same reason given to claim 1 mutatis mutandis.
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.
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 1-6, 8, 10-12, 14 and 16-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al (US 2022/0256634, supported by provisional application 62/931952) in view of Tamura et al (US 2017/0289906) further in view of Kwok et al (US 2021/0022073, hereinafter Kwok’073).
Regarding claim 1, Kim discloses a method performed in a user device (UE) capable of operating in dual-mode connectivity (DC) with a master node (MN) and a secondary node (SN) of a radio access network (RAN) (fig. 23 & par 220; e.g. The wireless device may communicate with at least one base station (e.g. two or more base stations in dual-connectivity) via the plurality of cells), the method comprising:
receiving, from the RAN, a configuration related to a DC procedure (par 311; e.g. a base station may send a conditional primary secondary cell group cell (PSCell) configuration) and a network-specified condition to be satisfied (par 311; A UE may start evaluating the execution condition(s) for PS Cell candidate cells upon receiving the conditional PSCell configuration) before the UE applies the configuration (par 311; The UE may execute a PSCell addition/change (SCG) addition) once the condition(s) is met for a PSCell candidate cell).
The reference does not explicitly disclose the negative limitation:
determining whether a single connectivity (SC) condition of the UE is satisfied; and when SC condition is satisfied: inhibiting the UE from applying the configuration (emphasis added).
However, Tamura discloses:
determining whether a single connectivity (SC) condition of the UE is satisfied; and when SC condition is satisfied: inhibiting the UE from applying the configuration (fig. 16 & par 207-208; e.g. The control unit 403 notifies the signals that have been determined as objects, the radio qualities of which are to be measured by the UE; Since the control unit 205 is notified that the use of the SCG 32a is not permitted, the control unit 205 causes the storage unit 203 to store information indicating that the SCG 32a is not used; in other words, it is applying a SC configuration, hence inhibiting or not applying a DC configuration).
In view of the above, 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 teaching of communication protocol configured for the electronic system of Tamura with the electronic system of Kim. One is motivated as such to consider various conditions of the network (Tamura, par 15).
The combination does not explicitly disclose the negative limitation that the UE is autonomously determining the SC condition, and when SC condition is satisfied, inhibiting the UE from monitoring the network-specified condition (emphasis added).
However, it is obvious in view of Kwok’073. Kwok discloses:
In fig. 1, par 39-40, par 45, in some cases, UE may determine o use a first single connectivity mode…the first UE 102 and the second UE 104 can each intelligently select connectivity modes for themselves; also see par 19, in another example, a connection control component can be implemented in a UE. The UE can receive an instruction from a network-based connection control component to operate in a dual connectivity configuration. Based at least in part on network information, device information, and/or signal information, as discussed herein, the UE can determine to transmit via a single uplink transmission (e.g., via one of 4G wireless resources or 5G wireless resources), despite the UE being connected in a NSA configuration. Therefore, one skilled in the art understands, when the UE determines to transmit via a single uplink transmission or SC condition is satisfied, the UE does not follow the instruction from a network-based connection control component to operate in a dual connectivity configuration, hence it reads on the negative limitation of not monitoring, ignoring or inhibiting the network-specified condition for dual connectivity (emphasis added).
In view of the above, 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 teaching of communication protocol configured for the electronic system of Kwok with the electronic system of Kim and Tamura. One is motivated as such to maximize expected user experience (Kwok’073, par 40).
Regarding claim 2, Kim discloses:
receiving, from the RAN and prior to checking whether the SC condition is satisfied, an indication that the UE is allowed to apply the SC condition (par 299; A UE-RRC layer may receive an RRC reconfiguration message with reconfiguration sync information element (IE) or mobility control information from a base station; also fig. 23, fig. 24).
Regarding claim 3, Kim discloses:
the indication is a first indication; and the method further comprising: receiving, from the RAN, a second indication that the UE is not allowed to apply a carrier aggregation (CA) condition (par 300; e.g. CA duplication; also par 314; PDCP duplication being not configured).
Regarding claim 4, Tamura discloses:
wherein the SC condition includes one of (examining note: since the claim shows a limitation in an alternative form, the prior art may teach either or both limitations, and this notice applies to subsequent occurrences of claim limitations that are in the alternative form): (i) a low data requirement at the UE, the low data requirement corresponding to a minimum required data rate for the UE being below a threshold level, (ii) a requirement that no applications requiring DC currently are running on the UE, (iii) a requirement that a quality of a carrier of the SN be below a threshold level, (iv) a low-power condition of a battery of the UE, or (v) a hot-temperature condition of the UE (par 206; the radio quality; or par 218; level of the battery).
Regarding claim 5, Kim discloses:
wherein the DC procedure is one of: (i) a conditional SN addition or change (CSAC) procedure, or (ii) a conditional PSCell addition or change (CPAC) procedure (par 311; PSCell addition/change).
Regarding claim 6, Kim discloses:
the receiving of the configuration, the determining of whether the SC condition of the UE is satisfied, and the inhibiting occur in a first instance (par 312; e.g. the UE may evaluate the conditional PSCell addition/change execution conditions at A); the method further comprising, in a second instance: receiving, by UE and from the RAN, a second configuration related to a conditional handover (CHO) procedure and a second network-specified condition to be satisfied before the UE applies the configuration; and when the SC condition is satisfied: allowing, by the UE, the UE to apply the second configuration (par 321; In an example, based on the failure information, the old base station may perform handover (e.g., to change PCell to the cell or the PSCell) by transmitting handover command to the wireless device via the PSCell).
Regarding claim 8, Tamura discloses:
subsequently to the inhibiting the UE from monitoring the network-specified condition, determining that the SC condition is no longer satisfied; and resuming, by the UE, the monitoring of the network-specified condition (par 218; when the remaining level of the battery 204 comes to have a margin after the determination of not to permit the use of the SCG 32a, the use of the SCG 32a may be permitted).
Regarding claim 10, Kim discloses:
the SC condition corresponds to a first threshold value of a parameter associated with the UE; the method further comprising: in response to detecting a second threshold value of the parameter, disabling MN carrier aggregation (CA) (fig. 16 & par 205; When, for example, the remaining level of the battery 204 is low, the control unit 403 determines not to permit the UE 2 to use the SCG 32a).
Regarding claim 11, Kim discloses:
wherein inhibiting the UE from applying the configuration includes disabling DC (fig. 16 & par 205; When, for example, the remaining level of the battery 204 is low, the control unit 403 determines not to permit the UE 2 to use the SCG 32a).
Regarding claim 12, Kim discloses:
wherein the inhibiting of the UE from operating in DC includes at least one of: (i) suspending measurements on a carrier frequency of the SN, or (ii) transmitting a report of the measurements on the carrier frequency of the SN, the report indicating at least one of a low signal strength or a low signal quality (fig. 16 & par 205; This obviates the need to transmit ACK/NACK to both the MeNB 31 and the SeNB 32 and measure radio quality in the MCG 31a and the SCG 32a, thus the power consumption of the UE 2 can be attempted to be reduced).
Regarding claim 14, Kim discloses a method performed in a radio access network (RAN) for configuring a user equipment (UE), (fig. 23 & par 220; e.g. The wireless device may communicate with at least one base station (e.g. two or more base stations in dual-connectivity) via the plurality of cells), the method comprising:
transmitting, to the UE, a configuration related to a DC procedure (par 311; e.g. a base station may send a conditional primary secondary cell group cell (PSCell) configuration) and a network-specified condition to be satisfied (par 311; A UE may start evaluating the execution condition(s) for PS Cell candidate cells upon receiving the conditional PSCell configuration) before the UE applies the configuration (par 311; The UE may execute a PSCell addition/change (SCG) addition) once the condition(s) is met for a PSCell candidate cell).
The reference does not explicitly disclose:
providing, to the UE, an indication of whether the UE is allowed to apply a single connectivity (SC) condition to determine whether the UE is to apply, subject to the network-specified condition, the configuration.
However, Tamura discloses:
providing, to the UE, an indication of whether the UE is allowed to apply a single connectivity (SC) condition to determine whether the UE is to apply, subject to the network-specified condition, the configuration (fig. 16 & par 207-208; e.g. The control unit 403 notifies the signals that have been determined as objects, the radio qualities of which are to be measured by the UE; Since the control unit 205 is notified that the use of the SCG 32a is not permitted, the control unit 205 causes the storage unit 203 to store information indicating that the SCG 32a is not used; in other words, it is applying a SC configuration, hence inhibiting or not applying a DC configuration).
In view of the above, 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 teaching of communication protocol configured for the electronic system of Tamura with the electronic system of Kim. One is motivated as such to consider various conditions of the network (Tamura, par 15).
The combination does not explicitly disclose the negative limitation that the UE is autonomously determining the SC condition, and to inhibit the UE from monitoring the network-specified condition (emphasis added).
However, it is obvious in view of Kwok’073. Kwok discloses:
In fig. 1, par 39-40, par 45, in some cases, UE may determine o use a first single connectivity mode…the first UE 102 and the second UE 104 can each intelligently select connectivity modes for themselves; also see par 19, in another example, a connection control component can be implemented in a UE. The UE can receive an instruction from a network-based connection control component to operate in a dual connectivity configuration. Based at least in part on network information, device information, and/or signal information, as discussed herein, the UE can determine to transmit via a single uplink transmission (e.g., via one of 4G wireless resources or 5G wireless resources), despite the UE being connected in a NSA configuration. Therefore, one skilled in the art understands, when the UE determines to transmit via a single uplink transmission or SC condition is satisfied, the UE does not follow the instruction from a network-based connection control component to operate in a dual connectivity configuration, hence it reads on the negative limitation of not monitoring, ignoring or inhibiting the network-specified condition for dual connectivity (emphasis added).
In view of the above, 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 teaching of communication protocol configured for the electronic system of Kwok with the electronic system of Kim and Tamura. One is motivated as such to maximize expected user experience (Kwok’073, par 40).
Regarding claim 16, Tamura discloses:
wherein the SC condition includes one of (examining note: since the claim shows a limitation in an alternative form, the prior art may teach either or both limitations, and this notice applies to subsequent occurrences of claim limitations that are in the alternative form): (i) a low data requirement at the UE, the low data requirement corresponding to a minimum required data rate for the UE being below a threshold level, (ii) a requirement that no applications requiring DC currently are running on the UE, (iii) a requirement that a quality of a carrier of the SN be below a threshold level, (iv) a low-power condition of a battery of the UE, or (v) a hot-temperature condition of the UE (par 206; the radio quality; or par 218; level of the battery).
Regarding claim 17, Kim discloses:
the indication is a first indication; and the method further comprising: receiving, from the RAN, a second indication that the UE is not allowed to apply a carrier aggregation (CA) condition (par 300; e.g. CA duplication).
Regarding claims 18-23, the claims are similar to the method claims 1-5, therefore Kim in view of Tamura also discloses the UE based on similar limitation mappings above.
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 YAOTANG WANG whose telephone number is (571)272-4023. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00-18:00 ET (M, W, TH & alternate 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, HADI ARMOUCHE can be reached at 571-270-3618. 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.
/YAOTANG WANG/SCE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2409
Prosecution Insights