DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
RCE filed 5/11/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 1, 4, 8, 9, 11, 13, 16, and 19-22 have been amended.
Claims 3, 5-7, 12, 15, and 18 have been cancelled. Claims 2 and 17 have been previously cancelled.
Claims 23-29 have been newly added.
Claims 1, 4, 8-11, 13, 14, 16, and 19-29 remain pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 4, 8, 10, 11, 13, 14, 16, 19-25, and 27-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Zhang et al. (US20230397297A1; “Zhang”).
Regarding claims 1, 16, and 20,
Zhang (Title: Methods and Apparatuses for a SCG Deactivation Mechanism and SCG Activation Mechanism in MR-DC Scenario) discloses a method (Fig. 2-10) for controlling a status of a secondary cell group (SCG) by a terminal (i.e. UE) comprising a processor (Fig. 11, processor 1108), memory/computer-readable storage medium (Fig. 11, medium 1106) and a program/instruction executed by the processor (paragraphs 197-200) comprising, after a terminal sends first information being used for requesting activation of the SCG (Fig. 2; Fig. 7-8, steps 701, 801) to a network side through a MCG (Fig. 7, steps 701-702; UE 710 sends SCG activation trigger information to SN 730 via MN 720 associated with MCG; paragraph 27, 156-158), performing a first operation comprising receiving, from the MCG, second information being used for responding to the first information sent by the network side (Fig. 7, steps 703-704; paragraphs 159-160; SCG activation acknowledge information sent to UE 710 by MN 720 in response to the activation trigger/request), the second information comprises an RRC SCG activating command and at least one of: an uplink/downlink resource of the SCG (paragraph 160-161; SCG activation indication via RRC includes SCG radio bearer and random access related configurations), the downlink resource comprises at least one of: reference signal resource of channel state information, PDCCH (paragraph 79; PDCCH on activated SCG indicates an uplink grant or downlink assignement) or PDSCH (paragraph 31; UE receives PDSCH/PDCCH when SCell is active).
Regarding claims 4 and 19,
Zhang discloses at least one of: an acceptance response of the SCG activating request (paragraph 48-49, 121-123; activation acknowledgement in response to activation request/trigger) or a rejection response of the SCG activating request.
Regarding claims 8 and 25,
Zhang discloses wherein after starting the first timer, in a case that a first condition is satisfied, stopping, by the terminal, the first timer; wherein the first condition comprises at least one of that the terminal has received an SCG activating indication (Fig. 6-10; paragraph 3, 6, 31-33, etc.; SCG activation procedure); that the terminal has received an acceptance response of the SCG activating request (paragraph 48-49, 121-123; activation acknowledgement in response to activation request/trigger); that a mobility process occurs to the terminal, or that a radio link failure (RLF) of the MCG occurs to the terminal (paragraph 40, 174; link failure on MCG).
Regarding claims 10 and 27,
Zhang discloses wherein after starting the first timer, in a case that the first timer expires, allowing the terminal to initiate the SCG activating request on the SCG (paragraph 53-55, 161, 167; inactivity/TAT timer expiry triggering SCG activation).
Regarding claims 11 and 28,
Zhang discloses wherein after starting the second timer, in a case that the second timer expires, performing, by the terminal, a third operation comprising one of: setting the SCG to be in the deactivated status (paragraph 53-55; SCG deactivation when inactivity timer expires); not monitoring the scheduling of the SN; releasing an SCG configuration (paragraph 73-74, 88, 96, 111; stop transmission/flush buffer/reset variables); sending, through the MCG, an SCG activating request, reporting, through the MCG, SCG failure information indicating an SCG activation failure (paragraph 49, 56, 122, 154-157, 170; usage/measurement/failure report between MN/SN); and sending the first information (Fig. 2; Fig. 7-8, steps 701, 801).
Regarding claim 13,
Zhang discloses in a case that a third condition is satisfied, sending, by the terminal, the first information to a SN (Fig. 7, step 701-702); wherein the third condition comprises one or more of the following: that uplink synchronization is kept between the terminal and at least one cell in the SCG (paragraph 161, 167, 182, 192; UE and SN still time aligned); that the terminal is configured with a PUCCH resource of at least one cell in the SCG (paragraph 31); or not configured with a PUSCH resource.
Regarding claims 14 and 29,
Zhang discloses the first information carries a cause (i.e. reason) value activating the SCG (paragraph 122, 126, 156, 157, 169, 178).
Regarding claims 21 and 22,
Zhang discloses the first operation further comprises one or more of: keeping the deactivated status of the SCG or setting the SCG to be in the deactivated status (Abstract; Fig. 2-5 deactivation procedures; paragraph 31, 65, etc.; SCG deactivation); monitoring scheduling of a SN (paragraph 2, 31, 42, 81; monitoring PDCCH of activated SCell/secondary node (SN) scheduling the activated SCG), activating the SCG (Fig. 6-10; paragraph 3, 6, 31-33, etc.; SCG activation procedure) or starting a first timer configured by the network side or defined by a protocol (Abstract; Background; paragraph 50-55, 78-89, 161, 167, 182, 192; RRC configuration over Xn interface under 3GPP) that, when running, causes the terminal to not send an SCG activating request or the first information, or starting/restarting a second timer (inactivity timer; paragraph 50-55, 78-89) which when running, the terminal monitors scheduling of SN or sets the SCG to be in an activated status (paragraph 55, 78-89; the UE may (re-)start the inactivity time if any transmission occurs on uplink or downlink on the activated SCG).
Regarding claims 23 and 24,
Zhang discloses, in a case that the terminal has received the second information, performing a second operation of setting the SCG to be in an activated status or keeping the SCG in the activated status (Fig. 6-10; paragraph 3, 6, 31-33, etc.; SCG activation procedure).
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.
Claims 9 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang in view of Teyeb et al. (US20230308905A1), hereafter Teyeb.
Regarding claims 9 and 26,
Zhang does not expressly disclose, after starting the second timer, in a case that a second condition is satisfied, stopping, by the terminal, the second timer, wherein the second condition comprises at least one of: that the second information has been received; that a mobility process occurs to the terminal, or that an upper layer requests stop of initiating SCG activation.
Teyeb discloses analogous art (Title: UE Triggered SCG Suspension/Dormancy/Deactivation/Resumption; paragraph 205, 273; SCG activation/deactivation) including, after starting the second timer, in a case that a second condition is satisfied, stopping, by the terminal, the second timer, wherein the second condition comprises at least one of: that the second information has been received (paragraph 299); that a mobility process occurs to the terminal (paragraphs 295, 300; mobility state; specific type of movement), or that an upper layer requests stop of initiating SCG activation (paragraph 299; timer is stopped when the terminal receives a command to leave the operating mode).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing to modify Zhang by, after starting the second timer, in a case that a second condition is satisfied, stopping, by the terminal, the second timer, wherein the second condition comprises at least one of: that the second information has been received; that a mobility process occurs to the terminal, or that an upper layer requests stop of initiating SCG activation, as shown by Teyeb, thereby enabling different deployment options for multi-radio dual-connectivity.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 5/11/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In the Remarks on pg. 13-17 of the Amendment, Applicant argues previously cited portions of Zhang discuss deactivation process details whereas the amended claims are directed to activation of the SCG. Applicant further contests some (not all) of the previously cited disclosure in Zhang.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Applicant’s arguments related to cited disclosure from Zhang related to SCG deactivation rather than activation are largely irrelevant given the present amendments, which have removed previous alternative language reciting “deactivation” and “deactivated status” considerations that are no longer relevant or limiting by the pending claims. As now shown in the rejection, Zhang (Fig. 7 and related paragraphs are exemplary) does disclose the exchange, as now claimed, of sending first information by a UE to a network side through a MCG and receiving, from the MCG, second information sent by the network side via RRC responding to the first information for SCG activation of uplink/downlink resources including PDCCH/PDSCH. Thus, rejections based on Zhang are properly maintained.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GREGORY B SEFCHECK whose telephone number is (571)272-3098. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 6AM-4PM.
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, Chirag Shah can be reached at 571-272-3144. 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.
/GREGORY B SEFCHECK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2477
Prosecution Insights