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 .
Applicant’s amendment filed 8/26/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 1, 3, and 5 are amended.
Claims 2, 4, and 6 are canceled.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 8/26/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Amendments filed on 8/26/2026 are entered for prosecution. Claims 1, 3, and 5 remain pending in the application.
Applicant’s amendments to claims 1, 3, and 5 have overcome the objections to claims 1, 3, and 5 previously set forth in the Final Action mailed on 6/26/2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
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 nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 3, and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Samsung (“Open issues on network switching for Multi-USIM devices”, 3GPP TSG-RAN WG2 Meeting #114-e, R2-2105437, May 19-27, 2021, hereinafter Samsung) in view of 3GPP TS 38.331 (“3GPP; TSG RAN; NR; RRC protocol specification (Release 16)”, June 2021, hereinafter TS 38.331) further in view of China Telecom (“Analysis on UE switching with leaving RRC_CONNECTED state”, 3GPP TSG-RAN WG2 Meeting #114e, R2-2105196, May 19-27, 2021, hereinafter China Telecom).
Regarding claim 1:
Samsung teaches an apparatus comprising: a memory storing a program; and one or more processors configured to execute the program to: communicate with a first network and a second network (see, Samsung: Section 1 states that the Multi-SIM work item concerns a UE notifying “Network A” of switching from Network A, where Network A is NR and Network Be can be LTE or NR. More specifically, Section 2.1 states that RRC signaling is used for a UE temporality switching to Network B without leaving RRC_CONNECTED in Network A, wherein Network A is equivalent to the first network and Network B is equivalent to the second network of the instant application.).
Although it is implied, Samsung does not explicitly teach wherein the apparatus is configured to receive, from a base station in the first network, a radio resource control (RRC) reconfiguration (RRCReconfiguration) message including first information for instructing a transmission of a User Equipment Assistance Information (UEAssistancelnformation) message.
In the same field of endeavor, TS 38.331 teaches the standardized implementation framework for the existing UE Assistance Information procedure that Samsung proposes to reuse. Specifically, TS 38.331, pp. 271-272, defines RRCReconfiguration as a network-to-UE command and provide otherConfig/otherConfig-v1610 within the RRCReconfiguration structure; Section 5.3.5.9, pp. 86-88, specifies that receipt of applicable assistance configuration causes the UE to consider itself configured to provide corresponding assistance information under Section 5.7.4; Section 5.7.4.1, p. 187, Figure 5.7.4.1-1, expressly depicts RRCReconfiguration followed by UEAssistanceInformation.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Samsung in combination of the teachings of TS 38.331 in order for the network to re-configure scheduling gap configuration based on reception of the UEAssistanceInformation message by using RRC reconfiguration procedure (see, TS 38.331: Section 5.7.4.1 and Samsung: Section 2.1).
Samsung further teaches the UEAssistanceInformation message including second information (see, Samsung: Section 2.1 states that the UE provides scheduling-gap assistance information indicating when and how long it wants to temporarily switch to Network B. “In order to indicate a preference about when and how long UE wants to temporarily switch to network B, UE can provide scheduling gap assistant information to network A.”).
Samsung in view of TS 38.331 does not explicitly teach wherein the second information indicates a value of a periodicity for a periodic gap and a value of a length for the periodic gap.
In the same field of endeavor, China Telecom teaches wherein the second information (i.e., UEAssistanceInformation) indicates a value of a periodicity for a periodic gap and a value of a length for the periodic gap (see, China Telecom: Section 2.1, “The network configures the pattern based on information provided by UE which means the network is in control of the configuration of the gap.” and Proposal 2 provides that the UE supplies the gap-pattern information and the network decides whether and how to configure the gap. The information supplied by the UE includes duration time and repetition period, as expressly stated in Section 2.2, Proposal 7, “UE can provide information of offset, duration time and repetition period to network”).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Samsung in view of TS 38.331 in combination of the teachings of China Telecom in order for the network to re-configure scheduling gap configuration based on reception of the UEAssistanceInformation message by using RRC reconfiguration procedure (see, China Telecom: Section 2.1 and Proposal 2.).
Samsung and China Telecom teach wherein the UE is configured to transmit, based on the reception of the first information, to the base station in the first network, the UEAssistanceInformation message including the second information for indicating the value of the periodicity for the periodic gap and the value of the length for the periodic gap, in a case where the apparatus is in an RRC connected state in the first network (see, Samsung: Section 2.1, Proposal 1 expressly teaches using UE Assistance Information to provide scheduling-gap assistance without leaving RRC_CONNECTED. “Proposal 1: UE Assistance information procedure is used to provide scheduling gap assistance information for switching procedure without leaving RRC_CONNECTED state.”; China Telecom: Section 2.1, Proposals 2-3 similarly teaches that, when the UE is in RRC_CONNECTED on Network A, the UE provides the gap-pattern information to Network A and that UE Assistance Information can be reused to send that gap-pattern information. “When UE enters RRC_CONNECTED state on network A, UE can negotiate with network A to configure the gap pattern. The gap pattern configuration procedure is similar to measurement gap configuration, but the main difference is network A has no idea about the activities in network B, and don’t know how to configure gap pattern. So it’s UE’s responsibility to report the relevant information to network A. The UE assistance information message can be reused for UE to send gap pattern information to network A. The network configures the pattern based on information provided by UE which means the network is in control of the configuration of the gap.”; Proposal 2 provides that the UE supplies the gap-pattern information and the network decides whether and how to configure the gap. The information supplied by the UE includes duration time and repetition period, as expressly stated in Section 2.2, Proposal 7, “UE can provide information of offset, duration time and repetition period to network”);
receive, from the base station in the first network, an RRCReconfiguration message including third information (i.e., reconfigured switching gap configuration by the network A) for configuring the value of the periodicity for the periodic gap and the value of the length for the periodic gap, as indicated by the second information (see, Samsung: Section 2.1, Proposal 2, “RRC reconfiguration procedure is used to (re-)configure switching gap configuration based on reception of the UEAssistanceInformation message for switching procedure without leaving RRC_CONNECTED state.”.; China Telecom: Section 2.1, “The network configures the pattern based on information provided by UE which means the network is in control of the configuration of the gap.” and Proposal 2 provides that the UE supplies the gap-pattern information and the network decides whether and how to configure the gap. The information supplied by the UE includes duration time and repetition period, as expressly stated in Section 2.2, Proposal 7, “UE can provide information of offset, duration time and repetition period to network”); and
acquire, from a base station in the second network, a system information block (SIB) within the periodic gap configured by the third information (see, Samsung: Section 2.1 expressly identifies SI acquisition as an activity the UE performs on Network B. “UE may need to perform one or multiple activities on network B. Each required activity on network B can be one-shot (e.g. SI acquisition) or periodic (e.g. paging monitoring, serving cell measurements).”. Samsung further states that the scheduling gaps accommodate those temporary Network B activities, “Proposal 4: Common switching procedure is used for any kind of temporary activities (e.g. periodic and/or one-shot) on network B without leaving RRC_CONNECTED state in network A.”; China Telecom: Section 2, case 3 expressly states: “UE should switch from network A without leaving RRC_CONNECTED state. … Scenario 2: Leaving for short time aperiodic activities in USIM B; case 3: UE perform SI acquisition”).
Regarding claim 3:
Claim 3 recites a base station in the first network (see, Samsung: Network A) comprising: a memory (i.e., memory of Network A, not shown) storing a program; and one or more processors (i.e., processor(s) of Network A, not shown) configured to execute the program to: perform the features of claim 1 from the perspective of the base station in the first network, and contains no additional limitations. Therefore, claim 3 is rejected by applying the same rationale used to reject claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 5:
Claim 5 recites the method performed by the apparatus of claim 1 and contains no additional limitations. Therefore, claim 5 is rejected by applying the similar rationale used to reject claim 1 above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JI-HAE YEA whose telephone number is (571) 270-3310. The examiner can normally be reached on MON-FRI, 7am-3pm, 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, SUJOY K KUNDU can be reached on (571) 272-8586. 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JI-HAE YEA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2471
Prosecution Insights