DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
Amendments filed on 01/20/2026 are entered. The amendments change the scopes of the previously presented claims. New grounds of rejections are applied to the amended claims and the current Office Action is made FINAL as necessitated by the claim amendments.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-25 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office 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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 15, 17-20 and 22-25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US 2023/0039731 A1) in view of Botsva (US 2019/0059752).
Kim discloses the features as shown above.
Regarding claim 1, a method for wireless communication in a multi-connectivity UE (see electronic device 101 in Fig. 2 that performs the steps shown in Fig. 12B connecting to first and second cellular networks), comprising:
communicating with one or more base stations via a first RAT (see “According to various embodiments, the first cellular network may be an LTE communication network, and the second cellular network may be a 5G (NR) communication network. According to various embodiments, the electronic device may be connected to a BS supporting a first frequency band in the second cellular network through the second communication processor 214 and the second antenna module 244 of FIG. 2A and connected to a BS supporting the first cellular network through the first communication processor 212 and the first antenna module 242 of FIG. 2” recited in paragraph [0362]);
determining whether the UE is in a selected state (see “low-power mode” recited in paragraph [0363] and step 1222 of Fig. 10) by:
determining that a screen of the UE is off (see “the electronic device 101 may configure the low-power mode if a condition related to the amount of the transmitted data is satisfied when a display (for example, the display device 160 of FIG. 1) is in an off state (for example, if the screen is turned off)” recited in paragraph [0378]);
determining that a throughput estimation of the UE is less than a threshold (see “a second condition being satisfied in which the data throughput indicated by the information related to data throughput is less than a first threshold value while the display is in an inactive state” recited in claim 1 or see paragraph [0479]);
disabling communication via a second RAT in response to determining that the UE is in the selected state (see “in response to receiving the signal indicating to change from the first mode to the second mode, perform at least one operation for releasing the connection of the NR communication network” in claim 1 or see step 1224 in Fig. 12B; steps 1729 in Fig. 17);
continuing to communicate via the first RAT (see step 1226 in Fig. 12B, wherein the electronic device continues to transmit/receive data using the first cellular network after releasing the connection with the second cellular network in step 1224); and
muting a measurement report associated with the second RAT (see “the second communication circuitry to maintain the release of the connection with the NR communication network by not transmitting, to the LTE communication network, a measurement report related to the NR communication network” recited in claim 1; also see step 1225 in Fig. 12B).
Regarding claim 2, wherein the selected state is independent of a mobility condition (see “mobility management” recited in paragraph [0102] and throughout the Kim reference, while claim 1 and Fig. 12B that describes the low-power mode does not involve the mobility management capability of the electronic device).
Regarding claim 3, wherein entry into the selected state is independent of a time duration in which: the screen of the UE is off; and the UE is unplugged from the power source (see “whether to request the communication processor to change from a first mode to a second mode based on at least one of: a first condition being satisfied in which a temperature value, as indicated by the information related to the sensed temperature, is greater than a first reference temperature, or a second condition being satisfied in which the data throughput indicated by the information related to data throughput is less than a first threshold value while the display is in an inactive state” recited in claim 1, wherein entry into the second mode is not dependent on the “time duration” in which the screen of the UE is off and the UE is unplugged from the power source).
Regarding claim 15, wherein the first RAT corresponds to 4G WWAN technology and the second RAT correspond to 5G WWAN technology (see “wide area network” recited in paragraph [0077] and see “According to various embodiments, the first cellular network may be an LTE communication network, and the second cellular network may be a 5G (NR) communication network” recited in paragraph [0362]).
Regarding claim 17, wherein disabling the second RAT comprises powering down one or more components related to the second RAT (see “The low-power mode may be a mode of releasing the connection of the second cellular network and switching (or maintaining) the second communication processor 214 in a sleep state or a power-off state” recited in paragraph [0339]).
Regarding claim 18, wherein the one or more components comprises a modem (see “if the 5G modem 2240 of the electronic device 101 enters the low-power mode, the 5G modern 2240 may switch from the wake-up state to the sleep state and stop the operation for at least one entity” recited in paragraph [0501]) and RF components of the second RAT (see “the 5G modem 2240 receiving the NR wake-up signal may supply power to at least one entity (for example, the CPU 2241 the RFIC control module 2244a, the protocol stack 2244b, or the boot loader 2244c) of which the execution is stopped from the power management module 2242, and thus the stopped function may be executed” recited in paragraph [0503], thereby showing that as the 5G modem goes into sleep state, so does the RFIC control module).
Regarding claim 19, wherein the measurement report comprises one or both of an event-based measurement report for the second RAT (see “at least one operation for releasing the connection of the second cellular network may include an operation for transmitting a measurement report of a first type event that is configured to be reported when a signal of the currently served node is smaller than a specific value” recited in paragraph [0348]) and a periodic measurement report for the second RAT
Regarding claim 20, determining that the UE is not in the selected state (see step 950 in Fig. 9, wherein a preset condition is satisfied, the UE exits the previous state during which the second cellular communication connection is released); enabling or re-enabling communication via the second RAT (see step 970 in Fig. 9, wherein the second cellular communication connection is established); and unmuting the measurement report associated with the second RAT (see step 960, wherein the measurement report of the second cellular communication connection is transmitted).
Regarding claim 22, a multi-connectivity UE for wireless communication (see electronic device 101 in Fig. 2 that performs the steps shown in Fig. 12B connecting to first and second cellular networks), comprising:
a screen (see display device 160 in Fig. 1);
one or more processors (see processor 120 in Fig. 1);
memory coupled to the one or more processors (see memory 130 in Fig. 1); and
instructions stored in the memory and operable, when executed by the one or more processors, to cause the UE to:
communicate with one or more base stations via a first RAT (see “According to various embodiments, the first cellular network may be an LTE communication network, and the second cellular network may be a 5G (NR) communication network. According to various embodiments, the electronic device may be connected to a BS supporting a first frequency band in the second cellular network through the second communication processor 214 and the second antenna module 244 of FIG. 2A and connected to a BS supporting the first cellular network through the first communication processor 212 and the first antenna module 242 of FIG. 2” recited in paragraph [0362]);
determine whether the UE is in a selected state (see “low-power mode” recited in paragraph [0363] and step 1222 of Fig. 10) by:
determining that the screen of the UE is off (see “the electronic device 101 may configure the low-power mode if a condition related to the amount of the transmitted data is satisfied when a display (for example, the display device 160 of FIG. 1) is in an off state (for example, if the screen is turned off)” recited in paragraph [0378]);
determining that a throughput estimation of the UE is less than a threshold (see “a second condition being satisfied in which the data throughput indicated by the information related to data throughput is less than a first threshold value while the display is in an inactive state” recited in claim 1 or see paragraph [0479]);
disable communication via a second RAT in response to determining that the UE is in the selected state (see “in response to receiving the signal indicating to change from the first mode to the second mode, perform at least one operation for releasing the connection of the NR communication network” in claim 1 or see step 1224 in Fig. 12B; steps 1729 in Fig. 17);
continue to communicate via the first RAT (see step 1226 in Fig. 12B, wherein the electronic device continues to transmit/receive data using the first cellular network after releasing the connection with the second cellular network in step 1224); and
mute a measurement report associated with the second RAT (see “the second communication circuitry to maintain the release of the connection with the NR communication network by not transmitting, to the LTE communication network, a measurement report related to the NR communication network” recited in claim 1; also see step 1225 in Fig. 12B).
Regarding claim 23, wherein the selected state is independent of a mobility condition (see “mobility management” recited in paragraph [0102] and throughout the Kim reference, while claim 1 and Fig. 12B that describes the low-power mode does not involve the mobility management capability of the electronic device).
Regarding claim 24, a multi-connectivity UE for wireless communication (see electronic device 101 in Fig. 2 that performs the steps shown in Fig. 12B connecting to first and second cellular networks), comprising:
means for communicating with one or more base stations via a first RAT (see “According to various embodiments, the first cellular network may be an LTE communication network, and the second cellular network may be a 5G (NR) communication network. According to various embodiments, the electronic device may be connected to a BS supporting a first frequency band in the second cellular network through the second communication processor 214 and the second antenna module 244 of FIG. 2A and connected to a BS supporting the first cellular network through the first communication processor 212 and the first antenna module 242 of FIG. 2” recited in paragraph [0362]);
means for determining whether the UE is in a selected state (see “low-power mode” recited in paragraph [0363] and step 1222 of Fig. 10) by means for:
determining that the screen of the UE is off (see “the electronic device 101 may configure the low-power mode if a condition related to the amount of the transmitted data is satisfied when a display (for example, the display device 160 of FIG. 1) is in an off state (for example, if the screen is turned off)” recited in paragraph [0378]);
determining that a throughput estimation of the UE is less than a threshold (see “a second condition being satisfied in which the data throughput indicated by the information related to data throughput is less than a first threshold value while the display is in an inactive state” recited in claim 1 or see paragraph [0479]);
means for disabling communication via a second RAT in response to determining that the UE is in the selected state (see “in response to receiving the signal indicating to change from the first mode to the second mode, perform at least one operation for releasing the connection of the NR communication network” in claim 1 or see step 1224 in Fig. 12B; steps 1729 in Fig. 17);
means for continuing to communicate via the first RAT (see step 1226 in Fig. 12B, wherein the electronic device continues to transmit/receive data using the first cellular network after releasing the connection with the second cellular network in step 1224); and
means for muting a measurement report associated with the second RAT (see “the second communication circuitry to maintain the release of the connection with the NR communication network by not transmitting, to the LTE communication network, a measurement report related to the NR communication network” recited in claim 1; also see step 1225 in Fig. 12B).
Regarding claim 25, a non-transitory computer readable medium storing code for wireless communication in a multi-connectivity UE (see electronic device 101 in Fig. 2 that performs the steps shown in Fig. 12B connecting to first and second cellular networks), the code comprising instructions executable by one or more processors to:
communicate with one or more base stations via a first RAT (see “According to various embodiments, the first cellular network may be an LTE communication network, and the second cellular network may be a 5G (NR) communication network. According to various embodiments, the electronic device may be connected to a BS supporting a first frequency band in the second cellular network through the second communication processor 214 and the second antenna module 244 of FIG. 2A and connected to a BS supporting the first cellular network through the first communication processor 212 and the first antenna module 242 of FIG. 2” recited in paragraph [0362]);
determine whether the UE is in a selected state (see “low-power mode” recited in paragraph [0363] and step 1222 of Fig. 10) by,
determination that the screen of the UE is off (see “the electronic device 101 may configure the low-power mode if a condition related to the amount of the transmitted data is satisfied when a display (for example, the display device 160 of FIG. 1) is in an off state (for example, if the screen is turned off)” recited in paragraph [0378]);
determination that a throughput estimation of the UE is less than a threshold (see “a second condition being satisfied in which the data throughput indicated by the information related to data throughput is less than a first threshold value while the display is in an inactive state” recited in claim 1 or see paragraph [0479]);
disable communication via a second RAT in response to determining that the UE is in the selected state (see “in response to receiving the signal indicating to change from the first mode to the second mode, perform at least one operation for releasing the connection of the NR communication network” in claim 1 or see step 1224 in Fig. 12B; steps 1729 in Fig. 17);
continue to communicate via the first RAT (see step 1226 in Fig. 12B, wherein the electronic device continues to transmit/receive data using the first cellular network after releasing the connection with the second cellular network in step 1224); and
mute a measurement report associated with the second RAT (see “the second communication circuitry to maintain the release of the connection with the NR communication network by not transmitting, to the LTE communication network, a measurement report related to the NR communication network” recited in claim 1; also see step 1225 in Fig. 12B).
Kim does not explicitly disclose the following features: regarding claims 1, 22 and 24-25, determining that the UE is unplugged from a power source.
Botsva discloses the following features.
Regarding claims 1, 22 and 24-25, determining that the UE is unplugged from a power source (see “For this purpose, immediately after turning on the algorithm of the microcontroller proceeds the step of checking whether the device is connected to the charger 308 (an external USB adapter). If the USB adapter is connected, the wireless communication unit 309 is enabled and the device enters the standby mode of connection to the mobile device 310. If the external USB adapter is not connected, the battery voltage level 311 is checked before starting measurements. In case when the device is discharged, i.e. the battery voltage level is below 20% (312), the warning message 313 is displayed on LCD screen and the device enters sleep mode waiting for the charge. If the device is charged, then it is ready to work” recited in paragraph [0046], wherein the charger is a power source and whether a device is connected to the charger being a condition to place the device in a sleep state may be combined with the conditions to place the UE in an inactive state as taught by Kim).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the current application to modify the system of Kim using features, as taught by Botsva, in order to provide reliable transmission data and reduce power consumption (see paragraph [0046] of Botsva).
Claim(s) 4-6 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim and Botsva as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Balasubramanian (US 10,932,152 B2).
Kim and Botsva disclose the features as shown above.
Kim does not disclose the following features: regarding claim 4, wherein the throughput estimation is determined based on cross-layer information; regarding claim 5, wherein the throughput estimation corresponds to a MAC layer throughput estimation; regarding claim 6, wherein the throughput estimation is determined based on a throughput prediction over a time window; regarding claim 9, wherein the throughput estimation is an average throughput estimation.
Balasubramanian discloses the following features.
Regarding claim 4, wherein the throughput estimation is determined based on cross-layer information (see “The WTRU may predict and/or estimate one or more of network congestion, throughout of the communication channel, a cell change event (e.g., a mobility event), and/or a channel condition that indicates loss of throughput using the cross-layer parameter” recited in column 1, line 47- column 2, line 4).
Regarding claim 5, wherein the throughput estimation corresponds to a MAC layer throughput estimation (see “The WTRU may predict and/or estimate one or more of network congestion, throughout of the communication channel, a cell change event (e.g., a mobility event), and/or a channel condition that indicates loss of throughput using the cross-layer parameter” recited in column 1, line 47- column 2, line 4 and see “the cross-layer parameter may be a physical layer parameter, a RRC layer parameter, and/or a MAC layer parameter” recited in column 1, lines 47-54; the disclosed throughput estimation using MAC layer parameter may be considered as the claimed MAC layer throughput estimation).
Regarding claim 6, wherein the throughput estimation is determined based on a throughput prediction over a time window (see “A WTRU (e.g., a client) may calculate the estimated physical layer throughput obtained over a time scale of interest” recited in column 14, lines 41-52; and see “The WTRU may predict and/or estimate one or more of network congestion, throughout of the communication channel, a cell change event (e.g., a mobility event), and/or a channel condition that indicates loss of throughput using the cross-layer parameter” recited in column 1, line 47- column 2, line 4).
Regarding claim 9, wherein the throughput estimation is an average throughput estimation (see “average throughput” recited in column 20, lines 25-26).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the current Application to modify the system of Kim and Botsva using features, as taught by Balasubramanian, in order to perform rate adaptation (see column 1, line 47- column 2 of Balasubramanian).
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim, Botsva and Balasubramanian as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Tian (US 2014/0362776 A1).
Kim, Botsva and Balasubramanian disclose the features as shown above.
Kim does not disclose the following features: regarding claim 7, wherein the throughput estimation corresponds to application usage statistics.
Tian discloses the following features.
Regarding claim 7, wherein the throughput estimation corresponds to application usage statistics (see “The wireless station may determine a combined estimated application throughput based upon the mix of application traffic” recited in paragraph [0039]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the current Application to modify the system of Kim, Botsva and Balasubramanian using features, as taught by Tian, in order to determine the combined estimated application throughput for a wireless station executing multiple applications (see paragraph [0039] of Tian).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim and Botsva as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Pica (US 2014/0334318 A1).
Kim and Botsva disclose the features as shown above.
Kim does not disclose the following features: regarding claim 8, periodically determining the throughput estimation of the UE while the UE is in the selected state.
Pica discloses the following features.
Regarding claim 8, periodically determining the throughput estimation of the UE while the UE is in the selected state (see “while UE 11 is communicating in an idle or dormant mode, it may periodically estimate the available bandwidth/achievable throughput of one or more links with the network in determining whether to perform other network procedures” recited in paragraph [0159]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the current Application to modify the system of Kim and Botsva using features, as taught by Pica, in order to determine whether to perform other network procedure (see paragraph [0159] of Pica).
Claim(s) 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim and Botsva as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Laselva (US 2022/0174608 A1).
Kim and Botsva disclose the features as shown above.
Kim also discloses the following features.
Regarding claim 11, wherein the selected state comprises a state in which: the screen of the UE is off for a period of time (see “the electronic device 101 may configure the low-power mode if a condition related to the amount of the transmitted data is satisfied when a display (for example, the display device 160 of FIG. 1) is in an off state (for example, if the screen is turned off)” recited in paragraph [0378]); the UE is unplugged from the power source for the period of time; and the UE is stationary for the period of time (as shown above, it would have been obvious for a wireless UE, such as a smart phone, to be unplugged from a power source for a period of time; for example, it is obvious in the scenario of Laselva paragraph [0107] as shown below, a smart phone may be stationary, unplugged and screen being off, when the user sleeps).
Kim does not disclose the following features: regarding claim 10, wherein the selected state comprises a state in which the UE is stationary.
Laselva discloses the following features.
Regarding claim 10, wherein the selected state comprises a state in which the UE is stationary (see “Further, it is utilized that a typical smartphone/tablet/device will be stationary during the period where the user sleeps, and in addition during long periods of the day where the user places the phone on his/her office desk or at home. Namely, those stationary periods, which can be detected locally at the UE, are used for operating in the power saving mode with relaxes radio measurements” recited in paragraph [0107]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the current Application to modify the system of Kim and Botsva using features, as taught by Laselva, in order to conserve power (see paragraph [0107] of Laselva).
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim and Botsva as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Martinez (US 2020/0174517 A.)
Kim and Botsva disclose the features as shown above.
Kim does not disclose the following features: regarding claim 12, wherein the selected state comprises an active WiFi connection mode.
Martinez discloses the following features.
Regarding claim 12, wherein the selected state comprises an active WiFi connection mode (see “When a Wi-Fi connection is available, cellular interface components may be turned off or maintained in a low-power state” recited in paragraph [0074]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the current Application to modify the system of Kim and Botsva using features, as taught by Martinez, in order to minimize power consumption (see paragraph [0074] of Martinez).
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim and Botsva as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of De La Corpte De Chanterac (US 11,363,133 B1).
Kim and Botsva disclose the features as shown above.
Kim does not disclose the following features: regarding claim 13, wherein the selected state comprises a low battery state in which a remaining battery power of the UE is below a threshold.
De La Corpte De Chanterac discloses the following features.
Regarding claim 13, wherein the selected state comprises a low battery state in which a remaining battery power of the UE is below a threshold (see “At step 254, process 240 can determine whether criteria for the device to enter a low power mode are met. In some examples, the criteria can be met where the impedance of the battery is above a certain threshold, the age of the battery is above a certain threshold, the time above 95% is above a certain threshold, the number of times the battery is discharged beyond a minimum discharge voltage is above a certain threshold, the temperature of the battery (or device) is below (or above) a certain threshold, and/or the state of charge of the battery is below a certain threshold (e.g., below 20% of the charge capacitance)” recited in column 6, lines 49-62).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the current Application to modify the system of Kim and Botsva using features, as taught by De La Corpte De Chanterac, in order to determine whether the device should enter a low power mode (see column 6, lines 49-62 of De La Corpte De Chanterac).
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim and Botsva as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kang (US 2020/0229255 A1).
Kim and Botsva disclose the features as shown above.
Kim does not disclose the following features: regarding claim 14, wherein control information related to the second RAT is communicated via the first RAT.
Kang discloses the following features.
Regarding claim 14, wherein control information related to the second RAT is communicated via the first RAT (see “For example, if the 4G base station 100 broadcasts information indicating that a 5G wireless communication service within a critical distance has a high quality and the density of a 5G base station is high, a device having received the information may turn on the power of a 5G chip that has been turned off. In addition, the device may attempt to connect to the 5G base station” recited in paragraph [0042]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the current Application to modify the system of Kim and Botsva using features, as taught by Kang, in order to control On/Off state of a 5G wireless communication service (see paragraph [0042] of Kang).
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim and Botsva as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Leucht-Roth (US 10,627,886 B2).
Kim and Botsva disclose the features as shown above.
Kim does not disclose the following features: regarding claim 16, wherein determining whether the UE is in the selected state comprises communicating operating system information, application level information, or a combination thereof between an application processor and a modem of the UE.
Leucht-Roth discloses the following features.
Regarding claim 16, wherein determining whether the UE is in the selected state comprises communicating operating system information, application level information, or a combination thereof between an application processor and a modem of the UE (see “A notification is sent to an application processor of the host device that the modem is to enter a sleep state, where the notification identifies the first low power device state, and a low power link state is entered corresponding to the first low power device state based on a signal from the application processor. The low power link state applies to a link coupling a communications processor of the modem to the application processor” recited in the abstract; wherein the sleep state and link state information transmitted is considered as the claimed operating system information).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the current Application to modify the system of Kim and Botsva using features, as taught by Leucht-Roth, in order to allow the device to enter a low power device state (see abstract of Leucht-Roth).
Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim and Botsva as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Chen (US 2020/0008113 A1).
Kim and Botsva disclose the features as shown above.
Kim does not disclose the following features: regarding claim 21, receiving a multi-connectivity secondary node reconfiguration message; and sending a secondary node reconfiguration failure message.
Chen discloses the following features.
Regarding claim 21, receiving a multi-connectivity secondary node reconfiguration message (see step 410 in Fig. 4, wherein a DC-based reconfiguration message is received); and sending a secondary node reconfiguration failure message (see “In some of the present implementations, if the SRB1/SRB2 of the source BS is maintained, to deal with a DC-based HO failure or an RRC reconfiguration failure, the UE may perform a connection reestablishment procedure. In some aspects of the present implementations, if the SRB1/SRB2 of the source BS is maintained, to deal with a DC-based HO failure or an RRC reconfiguration failure, the UE may send to the target BS a failure report (or an SCG failure report) via the SRB1 or SRB2 of the source BS to inform the source BS that the DC-based HO has failed, or the RRC reconfiguration has failed. The failure report may set the failure cause as “DC-based HO failure” in a DC-based HO failure case. The target BS failure report may set the failure cause as “RRC reconfiguration failure” in an RRC reconfiguration failure case” recited in paragraph [0134]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the current Application to modify the system of Kim and Botsva using features, as taught by Chen, in order to deal with a DC-based HO failure or an RRC reconfiguration failure (see paragraph [0134] of Chen).
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 JUTAI KAO whose telephone number is (571)272-9719. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-17:00 EST.
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, Kwang Yao can be reached at (571)272-3182. 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.
/JUTAI KAO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2473
Prosecution Insights