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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 02/02/2024, 02/21/2024, and 11/26/2024 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 11, 17 and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1; “…generates first information…”, “…transmits the first information through the first serving cell group…”, and “…transmits the first information through a second serving cell group…” should read as “…generating first information…”, “…transmitting the first information through the first serving cell group…”, and “…transmitting the first information through a second serving cell group…”.
In claim 1; “…a SCG and an MCG…” should read “…a secondary cell group (SCG) and a master cell group (MCG)…”.
In claim 11; “…generates first information…”, “…transmits the first information through the first serving cell group…”, and “…transmits the first information through a second serving cell group…” should read as “…generating first information…”, “…transmitting the first information through the first serving cell group…”, and “…transmitting the first information through a second serving cell group…”.
In claim 11; “…a SCG and an MCG…” should read “…a secondary cell group (SCG) and a master cell group (MCG)…”.
In claim 17; “…a SCG and an MCG…” should read “…a secondary cell group (SCG) and a master cell group (MCG)…”.
In claim 20; “…a SCG and an MCG…” should read “…a secondary cell group (SCG) and a master cell group (MCG)…”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148
USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining
obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating
obviousness or non-obviousness.
Claims 1, 11, 17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hsu et al. (US 20150215945 A1) hereinafter Hsu in view of Teyeb et al. (US 20190182881 A1) hereinafter Teyeb.
Regarding claim 1,
Hsu teaches a first node used for wireless communications, comprising: a first receiver, generates first information, and the first information indicates a buffer state of a first serving cell group (UE comprising a buffer status report, BSR, module calculating the buffer status of multiple cell groups [0007] and [0030]); and a first transmitter transmits the first information through the first serving cell group (UE comprises a transceiver which transmits BSR through an SCG based on a split threshold [0007] and [0026]-[0030]; fig. 3); and transmits the first information through the second serving cell group (transmitting BSR through an MCG based on a split threshold [0007] and [0026]-[0030]; fig. 3); wherein the first serving cell group and the second serving cell group are respectively an SCG and an MCG (SCG and MCG [0007] and [0026]-[0030]; fig. 3).
Hsu does not explicitly teach transmitting through the first serving cell when the first serving cell group is in an active state; and transmitting through the second serving cell group when the first serving cell group is in an inactive state.
Teyeb teaches transmitting through the first serving cell when the first serving cell group is in an active state (transmitting using the SCG when the SCG is active [0029]-[0040]); and transmitting through the second serving cell group when the first serving cell group is in an inactive state (transmitting using MCG when the SCG is inactive [0029]-[0040]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Teyeb to the teachings of Hsu. One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would enhance link continuity (Teyeb [0008]).
Claim 11 “first node device” is rejected under the same reasoning as claims 1 “first node method”.
Regarding claim 17,
Hsu teaches a second node used for wireless communications, comprising : a second receiver, receiving first information through a second serving cell group (base station comprising a transceiver for receiving BSR through MCG [0007] and [0026]-[0030]; Figs. 2-3); wherein the first information indicates a buffer state of a first serving cell group (base station receives BSR through an SCG based on a split threshold [0007] and [0026]-[0030]; Fig. 2-3); the first serving cell group and the second serving cell group are respectively an SCG and an MCG (SCG and MCG [0007] and [0026]-[0030]; fig. 3).
Hsu does not explicitly teach the first serving cell group is in an inactive state; when the first serving cell group is in an active state, the first information is transmitted through the first serving cell group;
Teyeb teaches the first serving cell group is in an inactive state (using the SCG when the SCG is active [0029]-[0040]); when the first serving cell group is in an active state, the first information is transmitted through the first serving cell group (transmitting using the SCG when the SCG is active [0029]-[0040]); and transmitting through the second serving cell group when the first serving cell group is in an inactive state (transmitting using MCG when the SCG is inactive [0029]-[0040]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Teyeb to the teachings of Hsu. One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would enhance link continuity (Teyeb [0008]).
Claim 20 “second node device” is rejected under the same reasoning as claims 17 “first node method”.
Claims 10 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hsu and Teyeb, and further in view of Al et al. (US 20210168893 A1) hereinafter Al.
Regarding claim 10,
Hsu and Teyeb teach all the features of claim 1.
Hsu further teaches the first information comprises a first buffer size (buffer status includes data size [0036]), and the first buffer size indicates a size of data available (buffer status includes available data size [0036])
Hsu and Teyeb do not explicitly teach the first information comprises a first logical channel group identity; the first logical channel group identity is allocated to the first serving cell group; size of data available to a logical channel group identified by the first logical channel group identity;
Al teaches the first information comprises a first logical channel group identity (an ID for indicating logical channel of the logical channel [0059]); the first logical channel group identity is allocated to the first serving cell group (ID mapped in an SCG [0059]); size of data available to a logical channel group identified by the first logical channel group identity (the ID used for indicating information about the amount of data [0059]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Al to the teachings of Hsu and Teyeb. One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would enhance link continuity (Al [0004]-[0006]).
Claim 16 “first node device” is rejected under the same reasoning as claim 10 “first node method”.
Allowable subject matter
Claims 2-9, 12-15, and 18-19 are objected as being rejected based on their dependency on a base rejected claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form.
The closest prior art, Hsu teaches rule-based allocation split under dual connectivity scenarios. Hsu does not explicitly teach or render obvious that a signal is monitored on the MCG and when the signal is detected, monitoring a signal on the SCG.
Hsu also does not explicitly teach that the first information is used to trigger the first SR and the radio resources used by the first SR are used to determine whether the buffer state indicated by the first information is for the first serving cell group or the second serving cell group.
None of the prior art referenced teach or render obvious the features recited in combination with the other features of the aforementioned claims. Dependent claims 3-8, 13-14 contain the allowable subject matter of claims 2 and 12, respectively.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABDUL AZIZ SANTARISI whose telephone number is (703)756-4586. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 AM - 5:00 PM ET. 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, Ayman Abaza can be reached on (571)270-0422. 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.
/ABDUL AZIZ SANTARISI/Examiner, Art Unit 2465
/AYMAN A ABAZA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2465
Prosecution Insights