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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/24/2025 has been entered.
Disposition of Claims
With the Applicants submission dated 12/24/2025, the status of the claims are: claims 1-10 and 21, 23-24, and 26, are pending; and claims 11-20, 22, and 25, have been cancelled.
Response to Arguments
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 and § 103
Applicant’s arguments, see Rejections under 102 and rejections under 103, filed 12/24/2025, are moot in view of the amendments to the claims, however, a 112 rejection is made in view of the amendments below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim(s) 1-10 and 21, 23-24, and 26, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
With regard to the independent claims 1 and 6, the claims have been amended to recite, in part:
“receive, from a master node related to a dual connectivity operation, a radio resource control (RRC) reconfiguration message including a value of a timer based on the UE being configured with a split SRB”.
The underlined/italicized portion of the claims have no explicit teaching in the specification as filed. For example, the PG PUB (US 2023/0397284 A1) fig.6 teaches the transmission of the RRCReconfiguration message to the UE by the Master Node (MN) as claimed, in element 620. The RRCReconfiguration message comprising the T316 timer configuration (e.g. the value of a timer), however the transmission of this RRCReconfiguration message does not appear to be based on the fact that the UE is configured with split Signaling Radio Bearer. In the PG PUB paragraphs [0095 – 0096] describes the process of transmitting the RRCReconfiguration with the value of a timer, but there is not indication in the specification or in these paragraphs that the RRCReconfiguration with the value of a timer is sent based on the UE being configured with a split SRB. The split SRB may or may not be configured as a UE may utilize a number of different types of SRBs for communication with network nodes while in Dual Connectivity. For example, SRB1 and SRB2 allow for communications with a Master Node (MN), while the SRB3 allows for communications with a Secondary Node (SN). Additionally a UE may be configured with a split SRB which allows for the UE to exchange messages with a MN utilizing either the MN or SN resources. However, as this is known, the disclosure does not teach that the RRCReconfiguration is transmitted based on the UE being configured with a split SRB, that is, the UE does not receive the RRCReconfiguration message because the UE is configured with a split SRB, indeed the UE could be configured with other types of SRB such as SRB1, SRB2, or SRB3, and still receive the RRCReconfiguration message. Par.[0096] does not describe and/or insinuate that because the UE has a split SRB then the MN transmits the RRCReconfiguration message to the UE. Thus, the claims are rejected.
Dependent claims 2-5, 7-10, 21, 23-24, and 26, are similarly rejected for their dependency thereon, and for curing the deficiencies therein.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Jung et al. (US 12, 069, 759 B2) “Recovery From Deadlock After MCG Failure Report” fig.17
Koskinen (US 2021/0203543 A1) “Failure Indication of Master Cell Group With Fall-Back to Radio Resource Control Re-Establishment”
Chen (US 2020/0059395 A1) “Reporting Master Node Radio Link Failure”
Teyeb et al. (US 2023/0086398 A1) “Master Cell Group (MCG) Failure and Radio Link Failure Reporting”
Teyeb et al. (US 2023/0217291 A1) “Method, Product, and Apparatus for Treating Master Cell Group, MCG, Failure and Radio Link Failure, RLF Reporting”
Teyeb et al. (US 2024/0406779 A1) “Measurement Configuration in NR-DC”
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMAAL HENSON whose telephone number is (571)272-5339. The examiner can normally be reached M-Thu: 7:30 am - 6:30 pm.
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, Derrick Ferris can be reached at (571)272-3123. 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.
JAMAAL HENSON
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2411
/JAMAAL HENSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2411