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
Applicant’s arguments and amendment, filed 4/17/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 86-105 under 35 USC 102 and 35 USC 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejections have been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Pelletier (WO 2012/154955 A1), Venugopal et al (US 2020/0029383) and Dinan (US 2019/0320379 A1) as shown 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.
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 86, 90-93 & 106-108 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pelletier (WO 2012/154955 A1) in view of Venugopal et al (US 2020/0029383) (hereinafter referred to as Venugopal).
Regarding claim 86, Pelletier teaches a method comprising receiving, by a terminal device (UE), from a network node (eNB) of a communication network at least one message (220,230,240) comprising information to be applied at activation of at least one serving cell (SCell) of the communication network; and
applying the information for access to at least one serving cell (SCell)), wherein the information is for initiating a transmission using a physical random access channel preamble (See par [91], [99], [101]) on a physical random access channel resource in at least one secondary cell or primary secondary cell of the at least one serving cell being activated (par [91, 99, 101, 102]).
Pelletier does not explicitly discuss the step of transmitting by a terminal device an indication to the communication network to one of receive or monitor physical downlink control channel order on the physical uplink control channel secondary cell via a primary secondary cell or another serving cell of the communication network and the step of receiving by the terminal device a PDCCH order. Pelletier also does not explicitly teach that the serving cell comprises PUCCH SCell.
However, Venugopal, in the similar field of resource management for communications between terminals and the cellular communication network, teaches that the terminal device sends an indication to the network to one of receive or monitor physical downlink control channel order on the physical uplink control channel secondary cell via a primary secondary cell or another serving cell of the communication network and receives a PDCCH order (See Venugopal; par [9] which teaches that UE sends a schedule request SR via PCell to the network and receives a PDCCH order indicating resources for SCell). Venugopal also teaches that the serving cell comprises PUCCH SCell (see Venugpal; par[62]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply Venugopal’s teaching of transmitting an indication from UE to the network; receiving by the UE an PDCCH order and utilizing PUCCH SCells in the serving cell in Pelletier’s system with the motivation being to enhance UE’s communication reliability by using SCell.
Regarding claim 90, Pelletier teaches an apparatus, comprising at least one processor (118); and at least one memory (130, 132) including computer program code, where the at least one memory and the computer program code are configured, with the at least one processor, to cause the apparatus to at least:
receive from a network node of a communication network at least one message (220,230,240) comprising information to be applied at activation of at least one serving cell of the communication network; and
apply the information for access to at least one serving cell, wherein the information is for initiating a transmission using a physical random access channel preamble on a physical random access channel resource in at least one secondary cell or primary secondary cell of the at least one serving cell being activated (see par [91,99, 101-103]). It would be apparent to one skilled in the art that the memories are used to store computer code that the processor uses to perform the terminal’s afore-mentioned functions of receiving and applying.
Pelletier does not explicitly discuss the step of transmitting by a terminal device an indication to the communication network to one of receive or monitor physical downlink control channel order on the physical uplink control channel secondary cell via a primary secondary cell or another serving cell of the communication network and the step of receiving by the terminal device a PDCCH order. Pelletier also does not explicitly teach that the serving cell comprises PUCCH SCell.
However, Venugopal, in the similar field of resource management for communications between terminals and the cellular communication network, teaches that the terminal device sends an indication to the network to one of receive or monitor physical downlink control channel order on the physical uplink control channel secondary cell via a primary secondary cell or another serving cell of the communication network and receives a PDCCH order (See Venugopal; par [9] which teaches that UE sends a schedule request SR via PCell to the network and receives a PDCCH order indicating resources for SCell). Venugopal also teaches that the serving cell comprises PUCCH SCell (see Venugpal; par[62]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply Venugopal’s teaching of transmitting an indication from UE to the network; receiving by the UE an PDCCH order and utilizing PUCCH SCells in the serving cell in Pelletier’s system with the motivation being to enhance UE’s communication reliability by using SCell.
Regarding claim 91, Pelletier teaches that the at least one serving cell comprises a primary cell or a primary secondary cell (see par [64]).
Regarding claim 92, Pelletier teaches an apparatus of claim 90, wherein the initiating the transmission is for contention-free random access channel access based on the terminal device acquiring necessary downlink time and frequency synchronization from the at least one serving cell during the activation (see par [87], [89], [91, 99, 101-103]); dedicated preamble indicates CFRA).
Regarding claim 93, Pelletier teaches an apparatus of claim 90, wherein the at least one of the physical random access channel preamble or physical random access channel preamble resource is reserved for the apparatus by the communication network to enable contention-free access to the at least one serving cell at the time the at least one serving cell is activated (see par [112]).
Regarding claim 106, Pelletier teaches that the terminal provides an indication including a physical downlink control channel order via the physical downlink control channel in the at least one serving cell for use by the terminal device to initiate a random access procedure (see par [91]).
Regarding claim 107, Venugopal’s SR triggers the network to send a PDCCH order (See Venugopal; par [9] which teaches that UE sends a schedule request SR via PCell to the network and receives a PDCCH order indicating resources for SCell).
Regarding claim 108, Pelletier further teaches memory for storing code to perform the operation (see Pelletier; par [34,39,179]).
Claims 88 & 94, 96-102, 104, 105 and 109 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pelletier (WO 2012/154955 A1) in view of in view of Venugopal (US 2020/0029383) and Dinan (US 2019/0320379 A1).
Regarding claim 88, Pelletier teaches that the transmission using the at least one of the physical random access channel preamble or physical random access channel preamble resource (see par [113]). Pelletier does not explicitly teach the serving cell comprises a physical uplink control channel secondary cell (PUCCH SCell). However, Dinan, in the similar field of resource management for communications between terminals and the cellular communication network, teaches that SCell can offer its resource to share PUCCH payload from PCell to improve UE’s uplink transmission performance (see par [132]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply Dinan’s teaching of activating PUCCH SCell in Pelletier’s system with the motivation being to improve UE’s uplink transmission performance.
Regarding claim 94, Pelletier teaches that the transmission using the at least one of the physical random access channel preamble or physical random access channel preamble resource (see par [113]). Pelletier does not teach that the at least one secondary cell comprises a physical uplink control channel secondary cell. However, Dinan, in the similar field of resource management for communications between terminals and the cellular communication network, teaches the use of an PUCCH secondary cell as a serving cell by sending of a command/message to an UE so that the PUCCH SCell can help share its resource to improve to UE’s uplink transmission performance. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply Dinan’s teaching of activating PUCCH SCell in Pelletier’s system with the motivation being to improve UE’s uplink transmission performance.
Regarding claim 96, Pelletier teaches that the terminal provides an indication including a physical downlink control channel order via the physical downlink control channel in the at least one serving cell for use by the terminal device to initiate a random access procedure (see par [91]).
Regarding claim 97, Pelletier does not teach that transmitting the indication from the terminal device via one of channel state information reporting resource or a medium access control element to the network node to request a physical downlink control channel order. However such feature is taught by Venugopal (Venugopal teaches that the schedule request SR could be sent by UE using MAC CE or UL report; see claims 1 and 2). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply Venugopal’s teaching of sending the indication using MAC or UL report in the system of Pelletier in view of Dinan with the motivation being to improve efficiency in signaling.
Regarding claim 98, in Pelletier’s system, the random access procedure is used to acquire a timing advance TA (see par [75,81,166]). The timing advance TA will be used to sync UE’s uplink timing with SCell’s uplink timing, so that UE can uses SCell’s PUCCH resources to transmit CSI (par [123]).
Regarding claim 99, in Pelletier’s system, the random access procedure is used to acquire a timing advance TA (see par [75,81,166]). The timing advance TA will be used to sync UE’s uplink timing with SCell’s uplink timing, so that UE can uses SCell’s PUCCH resources to transmit CSI (par [123]). As a result, based on the random access, UE can report channel state information to the at least one secondary cell using the random access resource.
Regarding claim 100, Pelletier does not teach that the CSI reporting is performed upon random access completion for the activation of the at least one secondary cell or primary secondary cell of the serving cell, wherein the activation of the at least one serving cell is with physical uplink control channel mapped to a physical uplink control channel secondary cell. However, Dinan teaches the activation of an PUCCH SCell to provide PUCCH resource for CSI reporting to offload PUCCH payload from PCell to improve system’s performance. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply Dinan’s teaching of the activation of an PUCCH SCell to provide PUCCH resource for CSI reporting to offload PUCCH payload from PCell in Pelletier’s system with the motivation being to enable PUCCH config on both PCell and SCell, thereby improving system’s uplink transmission performance.
Regarding claim 101, Pelletier teaches an apparatus (114B) configured to:
determine for a terminal device of a communication network at least one message (220, 230,240) comprising information to be applied at activation of at least one serving cell of the communication network (par [91,99,101])); and
communicate the information for access to at least one serving cell with the terminal device, wherein the information is for initiating a transmission at the terminal device using at least one of a physical random access channel preamble or physical random access channel resource in at least one secondary cell or primary secondary cell of the at least one serving cell being activated (par [91,99,101]).
Pelletier does not explicitly teaches a base station receiving from a terminal device an indication to the communication network to one of receive or monitor physical downlink control channel order on the physical uplink control channel secondary cell via a primary secondary cell or another serving cell of the communication network and the step of transmitting to the terminal device a PDCCH order. Pelletier also does not explicitly teach that the serving cell comprises PUCCH SCell.
However, Venugopal, in the similar field of resource management for communications between terminals and the cellular communication network, teaches that the terminal device sends an indication to the network to one of receive or monitor physical downlink control channel order on the physical uplink control channel secondary cell via a primary secondary cell or another serving cell of the communication network and sending the terminal a PDCCH order (See Venugopal; par [9] which teaches that UE sends a schedule request SR via PCell to the network and receives a PDCCH order indicating resources for SCell). Venugopal also teaches that the serving cell comprises PUCCH SCell (see Venugpal; par[62]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply Venugopal’s teaching of receiving an indication from UE; transmitting to the UE an PDCCH order and utilizing PUCCH SCells in the serving cell in Pelletier’s system with the motivation being to enhance UE’s communication reliability by using SCell.
Furthermore, Pelletier also does not explicitly teach that the base station 114A comprises at least one processor; and at least one memory including computer program code, where the at least one memory and the computer program code are configured, with the at least one processor, to cause base station to perform the afore-mentioned functions of determining and communicating.
Dinan, in the similar field of resource management for communications between terminals and the cellular communication network, teaches a base station that utilizes a processor (403), memory (404) and computer program code (405) to efficiently perform the functions of determining a message (600,601) comprising information and communicating the information to the terminal (600,601). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply Dinan’s teaching of using processor, memory and computer instruction in the base station in the system of Pelletier in view of Venugopal with the motivation being to improve the base station’s operation and performance.
Regarding claim 102, Pelletier teaches that the transmission using the at least one of the physical random access channel preamble or physical random access channel preamble resource (see par [113]). Pelletier does not explicitly teach that the one serving cell to be activated comprises a physical uplink control channel secondary cell (PUCCH SCell) and the transmission using the at least one of the physical random access channel preamble or physical random access channel preamble resource for transmitting on the physical uplink control channel secondary cell. However, Dinan, in the similar field of resource management for communications between terminals and the cellular communication network, teaches the sending of a command/message to an UE to activate a physical uplink control channel secondary cell (PUCCH SCell) so that the PUCCH SCell can help share its resource to improve to UE’s uplink transmission performance. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply Dinan’s teaching of activating PUCCH SCell in Pelletier’s system with the motivation being to improve UE’s uplink transmission performance.
Regarding claim 104, Pelletier teaches that the terminal provides an indication including a physical downlink control channel order via the physical downlink control channel in the at least one serving cell for use by the terminal device to initiate a random access procedure (see par [91]).
Regarding claim 105, Pelletier further teaches memory for storing code to perform the operation (see Pelletier; par [34,39,179]).
Pelletier does not explicitly teach that transmitting the indication from the terminal device via one of channel state information reporting resource or a medium access control element to the network node to request a physical downlink control channel order. However, such feature is taught by Venugopal (Venugopal teaches that the schedule request SR could be sent by UE using MAC CE or UL report; see claims 1 and 2). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply Venugopal’s teaching of sending the indication using MAC or UL report in the system of Pelletier in view of Dinan with the motivation being to improve efficiency in signaling.
Regarding claim 109, Pelletier further teaches memory for storing code to perform the operation (see Pelletier; par [34,39,179]).
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 HUY D VU whose telephone number is (571)272-3155. The examiner can normally be reached 7:00a-to 5:00p Mon-Thurs.
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, Deborah Reynolds can be reached at (571)272-0734. 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.
HUY D. VU
Supervisory Patent Examiner
Art Unit 2461
/HUY D VU/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2461
Prosecution Insights