Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/432,375

SECONDARY CELL GROUP CONTROL METHOD AND APPARATUS AND TERMINAL

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Feb 05, 2024
Examiner
TANG, KIET G
Art Unit
2469
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Vivo Mobile Communication Co., Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
90%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 90% — above average
90%
Career Allow Rate
708 granted / 787 resolved
+32.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+12.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
34 currently pending
Career history
821
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
8.8%
-31.2% vs TC avg
§103
55.4%
+15.4% vs TC avg
§102
15.8%
-24.2% vs TC avg
§112
8.1%
-31.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 787 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . Claims 1-20 are pending. Claim Objections Claims 17-20 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 17 recites “A terminal, comprising a processor and a memory, wherein an instruction is stored in the memory, the instruction, when being executed by the processor, implements:”. Please insert a colon ":" after comprising so that a processor and a memory are in the body of the claim. Claims 18-19 are depending on claim 17 and therefore they are also objected. Claim 20 recites “the storage medium” in lines 1-2. For clarity and consistency, it is suggested to revise as “the non-transitory computer readable storage medium”. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 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 1-3, 8, 17-18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Wang et al. (Pub. No.: US 20220167445 A1), hereinafter Wang. With respect to claim 1, Wang teaches A secondary cell group control method ([0006], a method to control secondary cell group), comprising: receiving, by a terminal, a first command ([0118, 0121], a terminal receives a deactivation indication/command); controlling, by the terminal, a state of a secondary cell group (SCG) according to the first command ([0118, 0121], the terminal deactivates a secondary cell group (SCG) according to the deactivation indication/command); and performing, by the terminal, a first operation based on the state of the SCG, wherein the first operation comprises at least one of the following: reconfiguring or switching a radio bearer related to the SCG ([0133], the terminal suspends an SCG RLC bearer associated with a bearer of the SN; [0138], change a bearer type related to the SCG). With respect to claim 2, Wang teaches wherein the controlling, by the terminal, a state of a serving cell of the SCG based on the state of the SCG comprises at least one of the following: in a case that the SCG is in a deactivated state, controlling, by the terminal, states of some or all serving cells of the SCG to be the deactivated state ([0127], [0129], The terminal retains a configuration of the SCG; [0133], The terminal suspends an SCG RLC bearer associated with a bearer of the SN; [0142], The terminal stops all or some of physical layer operations for the PSCell; [0144-0145]). With respect to claim 3, Wang teaches wherein the first MAC CE is an SCell activation or deactivation MAC CE, and when a reserved bit of the SCell activation or deactivation MAC CE is a first value, the reserved bit is used to indicate that the SCell activation or deactivation MAC CE is applied to the SCG ([0124], The MAC CE includes one reserved bit (denoted as R in the figure) and 31 activation/deactivation bits, the reserved bit is used to indicate that the SCell activation or deactivation MAC CE is applied to the SCG). With respect to claim 8, Wang teaches wherein in a case that the SCG is in a deactivated state, a first configuration received by the terminal does not trigger SCell activation of the SCG, and the first configuration is used to indicate to activate an SCell of the SCG or is used when the SCell of the SCG is in an activated state ([0124], The configuration of the SCell includes a correspondence between an SCell identifier and an index (index) indicating the SCell. As shown in FIG. 5, for an SCell whose index is i, Ci indicates an activated/deactivated state of the SCell). With respect to claim 17, Wang teaches A terminal ([0118], a terminal), comprising a processor and a memory (fig. 12, [0283], a processor and a memory), wherein an instruction is stored in the memory (fig. 12, [0289], program stores in the memory), the instruction, when being executed by the processor (fig. 12, [0289], program executes by the processor), implements: receiving a first command ([0118, 0121], a terminal receives a deactivation indication/command); controlling a state of a secondary cell group (SCG) according to the first command ([0118, 0121], the terminal deactivates a secondary cell group (SCG) according to the deactivation indication/command); and performing a first operation based on the state of the SCG, wherein the first operation comprises at least one of the following: reconfiguring or switching a radio bearer related to the SCG ([0133], the terminal suspends an SCG RLC bearer associated with a bearer of the SN; [0138], change a bearer type related to the SCG). With respect to claim 18, this claim recites the method of claim 2, and it is rejected for at least the same reasons. With respect to claim 20, Wang teaches A non-transitory computer readable storage medium, wherein the storage medium stores an instruction, and the instruction, when executed by a processor (fig. 12, [0289], program stores in the memory, program executes by the processor), implements: receiving a first command ([0118, 0121], a terminal receives a deactivation indication/command); controlling a state of a secondary cell group (SCG) according to the first command ([0118, 0121], the terminal deactivates a secondary cell group (SCG) according to the deactivation indication/command); and performing a first operation based on the state of the SCG, wherein the first operation comprises at least one of the following: reconfiguring or switching a radio bearer related to the SCG ([0133], the terminal suspends an SCG RLC bearer associated with a bearer of the SN; [0138], change a bearer type related to the SCG). 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. 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. 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 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang, in view of AWONIYI-OTERI et al. (Pub. No.: US 20230224129 A1), hereinafter AWONIYI-OTERI. With respect to claim 10, Wang teaches wherein before the receiving, by a terminal, a first command (fig. 9. [0229], S901. The SN determines to deactivate the SCG). Wang does not explicitly teach sending, by the terminal, an SCG activation request to a network side device; wherein the SCG activation request carries one of the following: a type of a serving cell expected to be activated. However, AWONIYI-OTERI teaches sending, by the terminal, an SCG activation request to a network side device ([0079]); wherein the SCG activation request carries one of the following: a type of a serving cell expected to be activated ([0079-0080]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of AWONIYI-OTERI, sending, by the terminal, an SCG activation request to a network side device; wherein the SCG activation request carries one of the following: a type of a serving cell expected to be activated, into the teachings of Wang, in order for the UE may perform measurements of one or more cells of the SCG and report the measurement to the SN (AWONIYI-OTERI, [0037]). Claims 11 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang, in view of Park et al. (Pub. No.: US 20210014893 A1), hereinafter Park. With respect to claim 11, Wang teaches wherein the reconfiguring or switching, by the terminal based on the state of the SCG ([0133], [0138]), a radio bearer related to the SCG comprises at least one of the following: switching, by the terminal, a bearer type of at least one radio bearer in a case that the SCG is in a deactivated state ([0133], the terminal suspends an SCG RLC bearer associated with a bearer of the SN; [0138], change a bearer type in a case that the SCG is in a deactivated state). Wang does not explicitly teach from an SCG bearer to a split bearer. However, Park teaches from an SCG bearer to a split bearer ([0166]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Park, from an SCG bearer to a split bearer, into the teachings of Wang, in order for the UE to receive/transmit packets of the MCG bearer via one or more cells of the MCG, and/or to receive/transmit packets of the SCG bearer via one or more cells of the SCG (Park, [0163]). With respect to claim 19, this claim recites the method of claim 11, and it is rejected for at least the same reasons. Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang, in view of Chen et al. (Pub. No.: US 20190254117 A1), hereinafter Chen. With respect to claim 12, Wang teaches in a case that the SCG is in a deactivated state ([0118, 0121]). Wang does not explicitly teach wherein the controlling, by the terminal, a state of a PDCP duplication function based on the state of the SCG comprises at least one of the following: deactivating, by the terminal, a PDCP duplication function of at least one radio bearer. However, Chen teaches wherein the controlling, by the terminal, a state of a PDCP duplication function based on the state of the SCG comprises at least one of the following: deactivating, by the terminal, a PDCP duplication function of at least one radio bearer ([0147]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Chen, wherein the controlling, by the terminal, a state of a PDCP duplication function based on the state of the SCG comprises at least one of the following: deactivating, by the terminal, a PDCP duplication function of at least one radio bearer, into the teachings of Wang, in order to achieve higher reliability on data transmission (Chen, [0003]). Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang, in view of Wang et al. (Pub. No.: US 20230254866 A1), hereinafter ‘866. With respect to claim 15, Wang teaches wherein the performing, by the terminal, a measurement-related operation based on the state of the SCG at least one of the following ([0143, 0176]): performing, by the terminal, at least one of measurement and measurement reporting in a case that the SCG is in a deactivated state ([0143, 0176], the terminal performs measurement and measurement reporting in a case that the SCG is in a deactivated state). Wang does not explicitly teach an SCG activation request sent by the terminal is rejected. However, ‘866 teaches an SCG activation request sent by the terminal is rejected (fig. 4, [0106, 0114]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of ‘866, an SCG activation request sent by the terminal is rejected, a PDCP duplication function of at least one radio bearer, into the teachings of Wang, in order for a terminal device to perform uplink transmission with second network device serving the terminal device (‘866, [0005]). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 4-7, 9, 13-14, and 16 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Pub. No.: US 20220217801 A1; “CHANG”, ([0026]) Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KIET TANG whose telephone number is (571)270-7193. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:00-5:00. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, IAN MOORE can be reached on (571) 272-3085. 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. /KIET TANG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2469
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 05, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 24, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12596167
UE POSITIONING SIGNAL TRANSMISSION DURING UNCONNECTED OR INACTIVE STATE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12598617
SCHEDULING METHOD, SCHEDULING SYSTEM, AND SCHEDULING APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12581353
UTILIZATION OF VIRTUALIZED DISTRIBUTED UNITS AT CELL SITES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12574942
METHOD, DEVICE AND COMPUTER READABLE MEDIUM FOR PHYSICAL UPLINK SHARED CHANNEL REPETITION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12556320
METHOD FOR FEEDING BACK HYBRID AUTOMATIC REPEAT REQUEST ACKNOWLEDGEMENT (HARQ-ACK) AND TERMINAL DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
90%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+12.6%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 787 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month