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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to claims 1-3, 5, 7-14, 16, 18-24 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
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 of this title, 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.
Claims 1-3, 5, 7-14, 16, 18-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lim et al. (U.S. Patent Application Number: 2013/0242935) in view of Kumar et al. (U.S. Patent Application Number: 2021/0022111).
Consider claim 1; Lim discloses a method for sending a capability, performed by a first base station, comprising:
sending a first capability information to a second base station [e.g. involving resources (par. 30, lines 1-2, 18-21; par. 37, lines 1-6; par. 38, lines 1-4)]. Lim discloses the claimed invention except: wherein the first capability information is configured to indicate a capability of solving a multi-card communication conflict problem in a terminal by at least one of the first base station or a neighboring base station of the first base station.
In an analogous art Kumar discloses the first capability information is configured to indicate a capability of solving a multi-card communication conflict problem in a terminal by at least one of the first base station or a neighboring base station of the first base station [e.g. solving the conflict using offsets (par. 102, lines 1-4)].
It is an object of Lim’s invention to provide a method of resolving conflicts. It is an object of Kumar’s invention to provide a method of conflict avoidance. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Lim by including a conflict resolution, as taught by Kumar, for the purpose of effectively managing communication in a wireless network.
Consider claim 2, as applied in claim 1; Kumar discloses the capability of solving the multi-card communication conflict problem in the terminal comprises one of: being able to solve the multi-card communication conflict problem in the terminal [e.g. solving the conflict using offsets (par. 102, lines 1-4)], or being unable to solve the multi-card communication conflict problem in the terminal.
Consider claim 3, as applied in claim 2; Kumar discloses in response to the capability of solving the multi-card communication conflict problem in the terminal comprising being able to solve the multi-card communication conflict problem in the terminal [e.g. solving the conflict using offsets (par. 102, lines 1-4)], the first capability information is further configured to indicate a manner to solve the multi-card communication conflict problem in the terminal by at least one of the first base station or the neighboring base station of the first base station (par. 102, lines 1-4); wherein the manner comprises at least one of: changing a terminal identifier of a subscriber identity module (SIM) card; providing an offset corresponding to the terminal identifier of the SIM card (par. 102, lines 1-4); changing an algorithm for determining a paging occasion based on the terminal identifier of the SIM card; providing a paging reason; or allowing the SIM card to be temporarily disconnected.
Consider claim 5, as applied in claim 2; Kumar discloses in response to the capability of solving the multi-card communication conflict problem in the terminal comprising being able to solve the multi-card communication conflict problem in the terminal [e.g. solving the conflict using offsets (par. 102, lines 1-4)], the first capability information is further configured to indicate a type of the multi- card communication conflict problem in the terminal which can be solved by at least one of the first base station or the neighboring base station of the first base station; wherein the type comprises at least one of: a conflict between a first SIM card monitoring a paging message and a second SIM card monitoring a paging message in the terminal (par. 58, lines 1-5; par. 61, lines 1-3); a conflict between a first SIM card performing a communication operation and the second SIM card monitoring a paging message in the terminal; a conflict between the first SIM card performing a communication operation and a second SIM card responding to a paging message in the terminal; a conflict between the first SIM card performing a communication operation and a second SIM card measuring a signal in the terminal; a conflict between the first SIM card performing a communication operation and a second SIM card receiving system information in the terminal; or a conflict between the first SIM card performing a communication operation and a second SIM card updating a tracking area in the terminal.
Consider claim 7, as applied in claim 1; Lim discloses sending the first capability information to the second base station [e.g. involving resources (par. 30, lines 1-2, 18-21; par. 37, lines 1-6; par. 38, lines 1-4)] by carrying the first capability information in a setup request signaling for an inter base station interface (par. 52, line 7 – par. 53, line 17).
Consider claim 8, as applied in claim 1; Lim discloses receiving second capability information [e.g. involving resources (par. 30, lines 1-2, 18-21; par. 37, lines 1-6; par. 38, lines 1-4)] sent by the second base station (par. 53, lines 1-17). Lim discloses the claimed invention except: determining a capability of solving the multi-card communication conflict problem in the terminal by at least one of the second base station or a neighboring base station of the second base station based on the second capability information.
In an analogous art Kumar discloses determining a capability of solving the multi-card communication conflict problem in the terminal by at least one of the second base station or a neighboring base station of the second base station based on the second capability information [e.g. solving the conflict using offsets (par. 102, lines 1-4)].
It is an object of Lim’s invention to provide a method of resolving conflicts. It is an object of Kumar’s invention to provide a method of conflict avoidance. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Lim by including a conflict resolution, as taught by Kumar, for the purpose of effectively managing communication in a wireless network.
Consider claim 9, as applied in claim 8; Lim discloses receiving a setup response signaling for an inter base station interface sent by the second base station (par. 53, lines 1-17), wherein the second capability information [e.g. involving resources (par. 30, lines 1-2, 18-21; par. 37, lines 1-6; par. 38, lines 1-4)] is carried in the setup response signaling (par. 53, lines 1-17).
Consider claim 10, as applied in claim 1; Lim discloses in response to updating of the first capability information (par. 38, lines 10-14), sending updated first capability information [e.g. involving resources (par. 30, lines 1-2, 18-21; par. 37, lines 1-6; par. 38, lines 1-4, 10-14)] to the second base station through an inter base station interface with the second base station (par. 52, line 7 – par. 53, line 17).
Consider claim 11, as applied in claim 1; Lim discloses sending the first capability information to the second base station [e.g. involving resources (par. 30, lines 1-2, 18-21; par. 37, lines 1-6; par. 38, lines 1-4, 10-14)] in response to receiving a request for acquiring the first capability information from the second base station (e.g. neighbor eNB) (par. 63, lines 1-11).
Consider claim 12; Lim discloses a method for receiving a capability, performed by a second base station, comprising:
receiving first capability information sent by a first base station [e.g. involving resources (par. 30, lines 1-2, 18-21; par. 37, lines 1-6; par. 38, lines 1-4)]. Lim discloses the claimed invention except:
determining a capability of solving a multi-card communication conflict problem in a terminal by at least one of the first base station or a neighboring base station of the first base station based on the first capability information;
wherein the first capability information indicates a capability of solving a multi-card communication conflict problem in a terminal by at least one of the first base station or a neighboring base station of the first base station.
In an analogous art Kumar discloses determining a capability of solving a multi-card communication conflict problem in a terminal by at least one of the first base station or a neighboring base station of the first base station based on the first capability information [e.g. solving the conflict using offsets (par. 102, lines 1-4)];
wherein the first capability information indicates a capability of solving a multi-card communication conflict problem in a terminal by at least one of the first base station or a neighboring base station of the first base station [e.g. solving the conflict using offsets (par. 102, lines 1-4)].
It is an object of Lim’s invention to provide a method of resolving conflicts. It is an object of Kumar’s invention to provide a method of conflict avoidance. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Lim by including a conflict resolution, as taught by Kumar, for the purpose of effectively managing communication in a wireless network.
Consider claim 13, as applied in claim 12; Kumar discloses the capability of solving the multi-card communication conflict problem in the terminal comprises one of: being able to solve the multi-card communication conflict problem in the terminal [e.g. solving the conflict using offsets (par. 102, lines 1-4)], or being unable to solve the multi-card communication conflict problem in the terminal.
Consider claim 14, as applied in claim 13; Kumar discloses in response to the capability of solving the multi-card communication conflict problem in the terminal comprising being able to solve the multi-card communication conflict problem in the terminal [e.g. solving the conflict using offsets (par. 102, lines 1-4)], the first capability information is further configured to indicate a manner to solve the multi-card communication conflict problem in the terminal by at least one of the first base station or the neighboring base station of the first base station (par. 102, lines 1-4); wherein the manner comprises at least one of: changing a terminal identifier of a subscriber identity module (SIM) card; providing an offset corresponding to the terminal identifier of the SIM card (par. 102, lines 1-4); changing an algorithm for determining a paging occasion based on the terminal identifier of the SIM card; providing a paging reason; or allowing the SIM card to be temporarily disconnected.
Consider claim 16, as applied in claim 13; Kumar discloses in response to the capability of solving the multi-card communication conflict problem in the terminal comprising being able to solve the multi-card communication conflict problem in the terminal [e.g. solving the conflict using offsets (par. 102, lines 1-4)], the first capability information is further configured to indicate a type of the multi- card communication conflict problem in the terminal which can be solved by at least one of the first base station or the neighboring base station of the first base station; wherein the type comprises at least one of: a conflict between a first SIM card monitoring a paging message and a second SIM card monitoring a paging message in the terminal (par. 58, lines 1-5; par. 61, lines 1-3); a conflict between a first SIM card performing a communication operation and the second SIM card monitoring a paging message in the terminal; a conflict between the first SIM card performing a communication operation and a second SIM card responding to a paging message in the terminal; a conflict between the first SIM card performing a communication operation and a second SIM card measuring a signal in the terminal; a conflict between the first SIM card performing a communication operation and a second SIM card receiving system information in the terminal; or a conflict between the first SIM card performing a communication operation and a second SIM card updating a tracking area in the terminal.
Consider claim 18, as applied in claim 12; Lim discloses receiving a setup request signaling for an inter base station interface sent by the first base station (par. 52, line 7 – par. 53, line 17), wherein the first capability information is carried in the setup request signaling [e.g. involving resources (par. 30, lines 1-2, 18-21; par. 37, lines 1-6; par. 38, lines 1-4; par. 52, line 7 – par. 53, line 17)].
Consider claim 19, as applied in claim 18; Lim discloses setting up the inter base station interface with at least one of the first base station or the neighboring base station in response to determining that the capability is a target capability (par. 52, line 7 – par. 53, line 17).
Consider claim 20, as applied in claim 12; Lim discloses sending second capability information [e.g. involving resources (par. 30, lines 1-2, 18-21; par. 37, lines 1-6; par. 38, lines 1-4)] to the first base station (par. 53, lines 1-17). Lim discloses the claimed invention except: wherein the second capability information is configured to indicate a capability of solving the multi-card communication conflict problem in the terminal by at least one of the second base station or a neighboring base station of the second base station.
In an analogous art Kumar discloses the second capability information is configured to indicate a capability of solving the multi-card communication conflict problem in the terminal by at least one of the second base station or a neighboring base station of the second base station [e.g. solving the conflict using offsets (par. 102, lines 1-4)].
It is an object of Lim’s invention to provide a method of resolving conflicts. It is an object of Kumar’s invention to provide a method of conflict avoidance. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Lim by including a conflict resolution, as taught by Kumar, for the purpose of effectively managing communication in a wireless network.
Consider claim 21, as applied in claim 20; Lim discloses sending a setup response signaling for an inter base station interface to the first base station (par. 53, lines 1-17), wherein the second capability information is carried [e.g. involving resources (par. 30, lines 1-2, 18-21; par. 37, lines 1-6; par. 38, lines 1-4)] in the setup response signaling (par. 53, lines 1-17).
Consider claim 22, as applied in claim 12; Lim discloses receiving updated first capability information [e.g. involving resources (par. 30, lines 1-2, 18-21; par. 37, lines 1-6; par. 38, lines 1-4, 10-14)] sent by the first base station through an inter base station interface with the first base station (par. 52, line 7 – par. 53, line 17).
Consider claim 23, as applied in claim 12; Lim discloses sending a request for acquiring the first capability information to the first base station (par. 63, lines 1-11).
Consider claim 24; Lim discloses a method for sending a problem, comprising:
determining, by the second base station whether to receive first capability information sent by a first base station [e.g. involving resources (par. 30, lines 1-2, 18-21; par. 37, lines 1-6; par. 38, lines 1-4)].
Lim discloses the claimed invention except: sending, by a terminal, a multi-card communication conflict problem to a second base station in response to having the multi-card communication conflict problem; wherein the first capability information indicates a capability of solving a multi-card communication conflict problem in a terminal by at least one of the first base station or a neighboring base station of the first base station.
In an analogous art Kumar discloses sending, by a terminal, a multi-card communication conflict problem to a second base station in response to having the multi-card communication conflict problem (par. 58, line 1 – par. 59, line 20; par. 102, lines 1-4); wherein the first capability information indicates a capability of solving a multi-card communication conflict problem in a terminal by at least one of the first base station or a neighboring base station of the first base station [e.g. solving the conflict using offsets (par. 102, lines 1-4)].
It is an object of Lim’s invention to provide a method of resolving conflicts. It is an object of Kumar’s invention to provide a method of conflict avoidance. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Lim by including a conflict resolution, as taught by Kumar, for the purpose of effectively managing communication in a wireless network.
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
extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
Examiner should be directed to Joel Ajayi whose telephone number is (571) 270-1091. The Examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday from 7:30am to 5:00pm and Friday 7:30am to 4:00 pm.
If attempts to reach the Examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner’s supervisor, Matthew Anderson can be reached on (571) 272-4177. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free) or 703-305-3028.
Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or proceeding should be directed to the receptionist/customer service whose telephone number is (571) 272-2600.
/JOEL AJAYI/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2646
Prosecution Insights