DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
1. Applicant's arguments filed 17 February 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant asserts, on pages 7-8 of Remarks, that “Yang only discloses " the UE may signal a sounding reference signal (SRS) signal port switching capability of the UE...a channel processor may determine RSRP, RSSI, RSRQ, CQI and/or the like in a 5G radio access technology (RAT) and/or a similar type of RAT, a UE may be capable of communicating " It can be seen that, Yang only refers to SRS signal port switching, such as antenna switching, further, Yang refers to RSRP. However, according to the description of Yang, the scheme of Yang is: the UE reports an indication to the base station, which includes an SRS port switching capability of the UE, the UE then receives a transmission mode configuration from the base station, and the UE communicates with the base station using this received transmission mode configuration. According to the scheme, the base station is enabled to configure the UE to operate with a transmission mode that is the same as or different from the UE's self-reported maximum capabilities, thus solving the problem of inflexible configuration. Therefore, in Yang, no SRS port switching is performed by the UE, actually, the capability of SRS port switching of the UE is reported to the base station. Although Yang discloses " if the UE indicates SRS port switching capability of T #R, then the UE may need to perform antenna switching to transmit SRS for downlink channel estimation of all of the downlink channels for the UE" (see paragraph 0007), it should be noted that Yang only discloses if the UE indicates to the base station that the SRS port switching capability is less than the preset value R. the UE will perform antenna port switching, that is, this is only an operation that the UE may perform antenna port switching under the above assumed conditions, rather than indicating that Yang discloses the operation of UE performing antenna port switching. That is. Yang does not actually disclose the behavior of "UE performing antenna port switching". That is, Yang does not disclose a behavior of SRS port switching or antenna port switching. Further, although Yang refers to the processor of the UE determines RSRP, the determination is irrelevant with SRS port switching capability of the UE, not to say SRS port switching. Further, there is no collision between SRS port switching and RSRP in Yang. Further, as no behavior of SRS port switching is disclosed in Yang, Yang is irrelevant with any type of RAT for performing SRS port switching, no matter what type of RAT is used for performing RSRP, Yang does not disclose the feature "the first behavior and the second behavior correspond to a same Radio Access Technology (RAT)" defined in amended claim 1. Therefore, starting from Chen, the skilled person in the art can not combine Yang to achieve the scheme of amended claim 1. Therefore, amended claim 1 is allowable over Chen, in combination or alone with Yang.”
On the contrary, Yang clearly discloses that the UE performs antenna port switching to transmit SRS. Specifically, in paragraph [0007], Yang states: “In some cases, the UE may signal, to a base station, the maximum output power of the UE and the MIMO capability of the UE (e.g., a number of Tx chains supported by the UE, such as single Tx, 2 Tx, 4 Tx, and/or the like). Additionally, or alternatively, the UE may signal a sounding reference signal (SRS) port switching capability of the UE, such as whether the UE needs to perform antenna switching (e.g., antenna port switching, or port switching) to transmit SRS for downlink channel estimation. For example, if the UE indicates an SRS port switching capability of T=R (e.g., indicating that the number of Tx chains and the number of Rx chains of the UE are equal), then the UE may not need to perform antenna switching to transmit SRS for downlink channel estimation by the base station. If the UE indicates an SRS port switching capability of T≠R, then the UE may need to perform antenna switching to transmit SRS for downlink channel estimation of all of the downlink channels for the UE.” [emphasis added]. Therefore, Yang discloses that the UE performs antenna port switching for the purpose of transmitting SRS. Applicant’s assertion that Yang’s disclosure that the antenna port switching of the UE is conditional constitutes a lack of a disclosure by Yang that the UE performs antenna port switching is incorrect, because the disclosure of conditional antenna port switching of the UE, is a disclosure that said UE performs antenna port switching. Regarding Applicant’s assertion “Further, although Yang refers to the processor of the UE determines RSRP, the determination is irrelevant with SRS port switching capability of the UE, not to say SRS port switching.” the portion of Yang in question is mapped to the limitation “the second behavior comprises a measurement behavior”. Applicant’s assertion “Further, there is no collision between SRS port switching and RSRP in Yang.” is moot, because Chen, rather than Yang, is relied on for disclosing the collision of the first behavior and the second behavior. Regarding Applicant’s assertion “Further, as no behavior of SRS port switching is disclosed in Yang, Yang is irrelevant with any type of RAT for performing SRS port switching, no matter what type of RAT is used for performing RSRP, Yang does not disclose the feature "the first behavior and the second behavior correspond to a same Radio Access Technology (RAT)" defined in amended claim 1.”, as outlined above, Yang unambiguously discloses “the first behavior comprises at least one of the following: Sounding Reference Signal (SRS) port switching, and antenna port switching”. Furthermore, Yang discloses that the network is associated with a particular RAT, as seen in paragraph [0031]: “FIG. 1 is a diagram illustrating a network 100 in which aspects of the present disclosure may be practiced. The network 100 may be an LTE network or some other wireless network, such as a 5G network.” [emphasis added]. Therefore, the antenna port switching of the UE and the UE’s signal strength measurements are associated with the same RAT.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
2. 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.
3. 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.
4. Claims 1, 8, 11, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication 2016/0242182 (hereinafter Chen), in view of Yang et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication 2020/0112349 (hereinafter Yang).
Regarding claim 1, Chen discloses a method for determining a behavior of a terminal device (disclosed is a method for performing antenna selection at a wireless device, according to [0009], [0037], [0126]), comprising:
determining, by a terminal device, that a first behavior and a second behavior collide (a UE determines that a subframe for antenna switching [“first behavior”] overlaps with a subframe for an uplink transmission [“second behavior””] to an SeNodeB, according to [0109]); and
executing, by the terminal device, one of the first behavior and the second behavior (the UE is prevented from performing uplink transmissions in a time interval that is the same or that overlaps the time interval for antenna switching, according to [0128]).
Chen does not expressly disclose that the first behavior comprises at least one
of the following: Sounding Reference Signal (SRS) port switching, and antenna port switching; the second behavior comprises a measurement behavior; wherein the first behavior and the second behavior correspond to a same Radio Access Technology (RAT).
Yang discloses that the first behavior comprises at least one of the following: Sounding Reference Signal (SRS) port switching, and antenna port switching (a particular UE, served by a particular base station, may undergo SRS port switching and antenna port switching, according to [0007], [0051]);
the second behavior comprises a measurement behavior (the particular UE performs signal strength measurements, according to [0046], [0077]);
wherein the first behavior and the second behavior correspond to a same Radio Access Technology (RAT) (the particular UE and the particular base station operate according to a specific RAT, such as a 5G RAT, according to [0031], [0039], [0044], [0050]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chen with Yang such that the first behavior comprises at least one of the following: Sounding Reference Signal (SRS) port switching, and antenna port switching; the second behavior comprises a measurement behavior; wherein the first behavior and the second behavior correspond to a same Radio Access Technology (RAT).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to facilitate carrier aggregation and the lowering of costs (Yang: [0005]).
Claim 11 recites the apparatus, comprising a processor and a transceiver (Chen discloses a UE that comprises a processor and a transceiver, according to [0107], [0109], Fig. 6 [elements 603, 609, and 640]), that performs the method recited in claim 1, and is therefore rejected on the same grounds as claim 1.
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Cheng and Yang discloses all the limitations of claim 1. Additionally, Cheng discloses that the executing, by the terminal device, one of the first behavior and the second behavior, comprises: determining, by the terminal device, to execute one of the first behavior and the second behavior according to a capability of the terminal device (the UE performs antenna switching according to its antenna according to its capability to communicate with multiple cells using multiple antennas and/or related antenna port configurations, according to [0093], [0111]).
Claim 18 does not differ substantively from claim 8, and is therefore rejected on the same grounds as claim 8.
5. Claims 2-3, 5-6, 12-13, and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Yang as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, further in view of Nukala et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication 2014/0099955 (hereinafter Nukala).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Chen and Yang discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
Neither Chen nor Yang expressly discloses that the executing, by the terminal device, one of the first behavior and the second behavior, comprises: interrupting, by the terminal device, the first behavior and executing the second behavior; and executing, by the terminal device, the first behavior after execution of the second behavior is completed.
Nukala discloses that the executing, by the terminal device, one of the first behavior and the second behavior, comprises:
interrupting, by the terminal device, the first behavior and executing the second behavior (a UE aborts a handover attempt after expiration of an inactivity timer, after which said UE performs a network scan to detect one or more available neighbor network base stations, according to [0071], [0077], [0079], Fig. 8a [step 814], Fig. 8b [step 824]); and
executing, by the terminal device, the first behavior after execution of the second behavior is completed (after completing the network scan, the UE attempts to handover to a preferred neighbor base station, according to [0080], Fig. 8b [step 830]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chen as modified by Yang with Nukala such that the executing, by the terminal device, one of the first behavior and the second behavior, comprises: interrupting, by the terminal device, the first behavior and executing the second behavior; and executing, by the terminal device, the first behavior after execution of the second behavior is completed.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to minimize disruptions to latency-sensitive applications (Nukala: [0004], [0037]).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Chen and Yang discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
Neither Chen nor Yang expressly discloses that the executing, by the terminal device, one of the first behavior and the second behavior, comprises: abandoning, by the terminal device, execution of the first behavior and executing the second behavior.
Nukala discloses that the executing, by the terminal device, one of the first behavior and the second behavior, comprises: abandoning, by the terminal device, execution of the first behavior and executing the second behavior (a UE aborts a handover attempt after expiration of an inactivity timer, after which said UE performs a network scan (which constitutes a measurement) to detect one or more available neighbor network base stations, according to [0071], [0077], [0079], Fig. 8a [step 814], Fig. 8b [step 824]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chen as modified by Yang with Nukala such that the executing, by the terminal device, one of the first behavior and the second behavior, comprises: abandoning, by the terminal device, execution of the first behavior and executing the second behavior.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to minimize disruptions to latency-sensitive applications (Nukala: [0004], [0037]).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Chen and Yang discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
Neither Chen nor Yang expressly discloses that the executing, by the terminal device, one of the first behavior and the second behavior, comprises: interrupting, by the terminal device, the second behavior and executing the first behavior; and executing, by the terminal device, the second behavior after execution of the first behavior is completed.
Nukala discloses that the executing, by the terminal device, one of the first behavior and the second behavior, comprises:
interrupting, by the terminal device, the second behavior and executing the first behavior (a UE periodically performs measurements for its serving base station and interrupts those measurements to initiate a handover when an RSRP measurement is below a handover threshold, according to [0075]-[0076], Fig. 8a [steps 802, 804, 806, 808, and 810]); and
executing, by the terminal device, the second behavior after execution of the first behavior is completed (after the handover initiation, the UE performs a network scan (which constitutes a measurement) to detect one or more available neighbor network base stations, according to [0079], Fig. 8b [step 824]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chen as modified by Yang with Nukala such that the executing, by the terminal device, one of the first behavior and the second behavior, comprises: interrupting, by the terminal device, the second behavior and executing the first behavior; and executing, by the terminal device, the second behavior after execution of the first behavior is completed.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to minimize disruptions to latency-sensitive applications (Nukala: [0004], [0037]).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Chen and Yang discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
Neither Chen nor Yang expressly discloses that the executing, by the terminal device, one of the first behavior and the second behavior, comprises: abandoning, by the terminal device, execution of the second behavior and executing the first behavior.
Nukala discloses that the executing, by the terminal device, one of the first behavior and the second behavior, comprises: abandoning, by the terminal device, execution of the second behavior and executing the first behavior (a UE periodically performs measurements for its serving base station and interrupts those measurements to initiate a handover when an RSRP measurement is below a handover threshold, according to [0075]-[0076], Fig. 8a [steps 802, 804, 806, 808, and 810]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chen as modified by Yang with Nukala such that the executing, by the terminal device, one of the first behavior and the second behavior, comprises: abandoning, by the terminal device, execution of the second behavior and executing the first behavior.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to minimize disruptions to latency-sensitive applications (Nukala: [0004], [0037]).
Claims 12-13 and 15-16 do not differ substantively from claims 2-3 and 5-6, respectively, and therefore are rejected on the same grounds as claims 2-3 and 5-6, respectively.
6. Claims 9-10 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Yang as applied to claims 8 and 18 above, further in view of Li et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication 2022/0053385 (hereinafter Li), further in view of Cui et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication 2019/0174343 (hereinafter Cui).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Chen and Yang discloses all the limitations of claim 8.
Neither Chen nor Yang expressly discloses that the determining, by the terminal device, to execute one of the first behavior and the second behavior according to the capability of the terminal device, comprises: interrupting, by the terminal device, the first behavior for New Radio (NR) Frequency Range 2 (FR2) and executing the second behavior for NR Frequency Range 1 (FR1) if the terminal device supports a capability of independent gap measurements in different frequency ranges.
Li discloses that the determining, by the terminal device, to execute one of the first behavior and the second behavior according to the capability of the terminal device, comprises: interrupting, by the terminal device, the first behavior for New Radio (NR) Frequency Range 2 (FR2) (a UE undergoes a handover interruption for an FR2 target cell, according to [0024]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chen as modified by Yang with Li such that the determining, by the terminal device, to execute one of the first behavior and the second behavior according to the capability of the terminal device, comprises: interrupting, by the terminal device, the first behavior for New Radio (NR) Frequency Range 2 (FR2).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to minimize the impact of delay on user experience (Li: [0021]-[0024]).
Neither Chen, Yang, nor Li expressly discloses that the determining, by the terminal device, to execute one of the first behavior and the second behavior according to the capability of the terminal device, comprises: executing the second behavior for NR Frequency Range 1 (FR1) if the terminal device supports a capability of independent gap measurements in different frequency ranges.
Cui discloses that the determining, by the terminal device, to execute one of the first behavior and the second behavior according to the capability of the terminal device, comprises: executing the second behavior for NR Frequency Range 1 (FR1) if the terminal device supports a capability of independent gap measurements in different frequency ranges (a UE that supports measurement gaps patterns for different frequency ranges performs measurements in FR1, according to [0042]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chen as modified by Yang as modified by Li with Cui such that the determining, by the terminal device, to execute one of the first behavior and the second behavior according to the capability of the terminal device, comprises: executing the second behavior for NR Frequency Range 1 (FR1) if the terminal device supports a capability of independent gap measurements in different frequency ranges.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to minimize measurement delay and signaling (Cui: [0023]).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Chen, Yang, Li, and Cui discloses all the limitations of claim 9.
Neither Chen, Yang, nor Li expressly discloses interrupting, by the terminal device, the second behavior for NR FR2.
Cui discloses interrupting, by the terminal device, the second behavior for NR FR2 (a UE has a measurement gap repetition period configured for FR2 measurement objects, according to [0022], whereby at a later time the UE may transition to an RRC_Idle state by disconnecting from the network and not performing channel quality feedback, according to [0093]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chen as modified by Yang as modified by Li as modified by Cui with Cui by interrupting, by the terminal device, the second behavior for NR FR2.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to minimize measurement delay and signaling (Cui: [0023]).
Claims 19-20 do not differ substantively from claims 9-10, respectively, and therefore are rejected on the same grounds as claims 9-10, respectively.
Conclusion
7. 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 MATTHEW W GENACK whose telephone number is (571)272-7541. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM Eastern Time.
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, Anthony Addy can be reached on 571-272-7795. 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.
/MATTHEW W GENACK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2645