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 (IDSs) submitted on 11/1/2023 and 3/19/2025 have been considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 5 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 5: Lines 2-3 include “the secondary cell selected based on the parameter indicating a connection priority is the first secondary cell”, however lines 8-9 include “selecting one of the first secondary cell or the second secondary cell based on the determined load and the load threshold” and thus, is contradictory as lines 2-3 require “first secondary cell” to be selected while lines 8-9 indicate selection of “first secondary cell” is optional and “second secondary cell” may be selected. Examination continued on the assumption selecting first or second secondary cell based on load and load threshold.
Regarding claim 18: the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 5.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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.
Claim(s) 1, 5, 9-10, and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Dai et al. (US 2018/0160336 A1, made of record in the IDS filed 3/19/2025) hereinafter Dai.
Regarding claim 1, Dai teaches a method for selecting a secondary cell in a wireless communication system for carrier aggregation (add [carrier aggregation] secondary base station (BS) [secondary cell] to offload data; para. 89, adding secondary BS / multi-connection [carrier aggregation / multiple carrier simultaneously]; para. [57-59, 84-85, 109, 125, 149, 151] and Figs. [1A, 5-6], target BS selected; para. [09, 25, 77-78, 105, 126, 184, 217]), the method comprising: providing at least one parameter for each secondary cell in a plurality of secondary cells that indicates a connection priority for each secondary cell (sending [providing] priority information of each candidate secondary BS; para. [09, 25, 77-78, 105, 126, 184, 217] and Fig. 5 step 503); transmitting a set of parameters for each secondary cell to a UE, the set of parameters for each secondary cell including the parameter indicating a connection priority for the secondary cell (sending priority information of each candidate secondary BS; para. [09, 25, 77-78, 105, 126, 184, 217] and Fig. 5 step 503); receiving a request from the UE to connect with a secondary cell selected based on the parameter indicating a connection priority for the secondary cell (user equipment (UE) initiates access procedure [request] to access target secondary BS; para. 135 and Fig. 5 step 509, target BS selected based on priority information; para. [09, 25, 77-78, 105, 126, 184, 217] and Fig. 5 step 503); connecting the selected secondary cell to the UE (perform access procedure to access new secondary BS; para. 136 and Fig. 5 step 510); and transmitting data to the UE using a primary cell (master BS sends information / message [data] to UE; para. [92, 95, 102]) and the selected secondary cell (UE performs data transmission with new secondary BS; para. 140 and Fig. 5 step 514).
Regarding claim 5, Dai teaches the limitation of previous claim 1.
Dai further teaches wherein the plurality of secondary cells comprises a first secondary cell and a second secondary cell (trigger/change condition [determining] includes at least one candidate secondary cell; para. [101-102, 126, 152, 183, 195, 216, 229]) and wherein the secondary cell selected based on the parameter indicating a connection priority is the first secondary cell (sending priority information of each candidate secondary BS; para. [09, 25, 77-78, 105, 126, 184, 217] and Fig. 5 step 503, target BS selected based on priority information; para. [09, 25, 77-78, 105, 126, 184, 217]), the method further comprising: determining a load for the first secondary cell and the second secondary cell (change condition includes load of each candidate secondary BS among multiple candidate secondary BS; para. [15, 31, 75, 78]); determining if the determined load of the first secondary cell and the second secondary cell is equal to or greater than a load threshold (trigger/change condition [determining] includes load of at least one candidate secondary cell lower than [thus if equal to or greater than] a threshold; para. [101-102, 126, 152, 183, 195, 216, 229]); and selecting one of the first secondary cell or the second secondary cell based on the determined load and the load threshold (selecting candidate secondary BS as new secondary BS based on satisfying the change condition [determined load and load threshold]; para. 135 and Fig. 5 step 509).
Regarding claim 9, Dai teaches the limitation of previous claim 1.
Dai further teaches wherein the wireless communication system is a 5G new radio (NR) communication system (use of 5G new system [new radio]; para. [55-60, 111, 125, 151]).
Regarding claim 10, Dai teaches a method for selecting a secondary cell in a wireless communication system for carrier aggregation (add [carrier aggregation] secondary base station (BS) [secondary cell]; para. 89, adding secondary BS / multi-connection [carrier aggregation / multiple carrier simultaneously]; para. [57-59, 84-85, 109, 125, 149, 151] and Figs. [1A, 5-6], target BS selected; para. [09, 25, 77-78, 105, 126, 184, 217]), the method comprising: receiving a request from a UE to connect with a secondary cell (user equipment (UE) initiates access procedure [request] to access target secondary BS; para. 127 and Fig. 5 step 504); determining a load for each secondary cell in a plurality of secondary cells (change condition includes load of each candidate secondary BS among multiple candidate secondary BS; para. [15, 31, 75, 78]); determining if the determined load of at least one of the plurality of secondary cells is equal to or greater than a load threshold (trigger/change condition [determining] includes load of at least one candidate secondary cell lower than [thus if equal to or greater than] a threshold; para. [101-102, 126, 152, 183, 195, 216, 229]); selecting one of the secondary cells from the plurality of secondary cells based on the determined load and the load threshold (selecting candidate secondary BS as new secondary BS based on satisfying the change condition [determined load and load threshold]; para. 135 and Fig. 5 step 509); connecting the selected secondary cell to the UE (perform access procedure to access new secondary BS; para. 136 and Fig. 5 step 510); and transmitting data to the UE using a primary cell (master BS sends information / message [data] to UE; para. [92, 95, 102]) and the selected secondary cell (UE performs data transmission with new secondary BS; para. 140 and Fig. 5 step 514).
Regarding claim 13, Dai teaches the limitation of previous claim 10.
Dai further teaches wherein the wireless communication system is a 5G new radio (NR) communication system (use of 5G new system [new radio]; para. [55-60, 111, 125, 151]).
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
The factual inquiries 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.
Claim(s) 2-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dai in view of Santhanam et al. (US 2022/0150904 A1) hereinafter Santhanam.
Regarding claim 2, Dai teaches the limitation of previous claim 1.
While Dai discloses trigger conditions, Dai does not explicitly disclose wherein the at least one parameter indicating a connection priority is a time-to-trigger.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Santhanam teaches wherein the at least one parameter indicating a connection priority is a time-to-trigger (higher priority frequency bands have lowest time-to-trigger (TTT); para. [99-100, 108], frequency bands associated with component carriers / carrier aggregation; para. 83).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Santhanam to the system of Dai, where Dai’s higher spectral efficiency and increased system capacity (para. [03, 57]) along with Santhanam’s load balancing (para. 104) improves spectral efficiency by balancing load.
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Dai and Santhanam teaches the limitation of previous claim 2.
Dai does not explicitly disclose wherein the plurality of secondary cells comprises a first secondary cell with a first time-to-trigger and a second secondary cell with a second time-to-trigger that is longer than the first time to trigger.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Santhanam further teaches wherein the plurality of secondary cells comprises a first secondary cell with a first time-to-trigger (TTT applied to frequency bands [cells] with lower TTT [first secondary cell] to higher TTT; para. 99) and a second secondary cell with a second time-to-trigger that is longer than the first time to trigger (TTT applied to frequency bands [cells] with lower TTT to higher [longer] TTT [second secondary cell]; para. 99).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Santhanam to the modified system of Dai and Santhanam, where Dai and Santhanam’s modified system and increased system capacity (para. [03, 57]) along with Santhanam’s load balancing (para. 104) improves spectral efficiency by balancing load.
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Dai and Santhanam teaches the limitation of previous claim 3.
Dai does not explicitly disclose wherein the first secondary cell has a larger bandwidth than a bandwidth of the second secondary cell.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Santhanam further teaches wherein the first secondary cell has a larger bandwidth than a bandwidth of the second secondary cell (higher priority frequency bands have lowest TTT; para. [99-100, 108], TTT applied to frequency bands [cells] with lower TTT [first secondary cell] to higher TTT [second secondary cell]; para. 99, highest priority band have highest bandwidth; para. 100).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Santhanam to the modified system of Dai and Santhanam, where Dai and Santhanam’s modified system and increased system capacity (para. [03, 57]) along with Santhanam’s load balancing (para. 104) improves spectral efficiency by balancing load.
Claim(s) 6 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dai in view of Chindapol et al. (US 2012/0276945 A1, made of record in the IDS of 3/19/2025) hereinafter Chindapol.
Regarding claim 6, Dai teaches the limitation of previous claim 5.
While Dai discloses comparison of load against threshold in selecting BS, Dai does not explicitly disclose wherein selecting one of the first secondary cell or the second secondary cell based on the determined load comprises selecting the secondary cell with the lowest load or no load.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Chindapol teaches wherein selecting one of the first secondary cell or the second secondary cell based on the determined load comprises selecting the secondary cell with the lowest load or no load (selection of target/candidate base station based on lowest utilization / load; para. [68, 81]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Chindapol to the system of Dai, where Dai’s higher spectral efficiency and increased system capacity (para. [03, 57]) along with Chindapol’s load balancing (para. 32) improves system efficiency by balancing load among BSs and reducing overhead.
Regarding claim 11, Dai teaches the limitation of previous claim 10.
While Dai discloses comparison of load against threshold in selecting BS, Dai does not explicitly disclose wherein selecting one of the secondary cells from the plurality of secondary cells based on the determined load comprises selecting the secondary cell with the lowest load or no load.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Chindapol teaches wherein selecting one of the secondary cells from the plurality of secondary cells based on the determined load comprises selecting the secondary cell with the lowest load or no load (selection of target/candidate base station based on lowest utilization / load; para. [68, 81]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Chindapol to the system of Dai, where Dai’s higher spectral efficiency and increased system capacity (para. [03, 57]) along with Chindapol’s load balancing (para. 32) improves system efficiency by balancing load among BSs and reducing overhead.
Claim(s) 7-8 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dai in view of Alasti et al. (US 2021/0360684 A1) hereinafter Alasti.
Regarding claim 7, Dai teaches the limitation of previous claim 1.
While Dai discloses LTE and 5G NR, Dai does not explicitly disclose wherein the primary cell and the selected secondary cell have different bandwidths.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Alasti teaches wherein the primary cell and the selected secondary cell have different bandwidths (bandwidth of individual component carrier varies; para. 15).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Alasti to the system of Dai, where Dai’s higher spectral efficiency and increased system capacity (para. [03, 57]) along with Alasti’s spectrum allocation (para. 32) improves system efficiency and user satisfaction by providing devices fair opportunity to transmit.
Regarding claim 8, Dai teaches the limitation of previous claim 1.
While Dai discloses LTE and 5G NR, Dai does not explicitly disclose wherein the primary cell and the selected secondary have different uplink bandwidths and different downlink bandwidths.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Alasti teaches wherein the primary cell and the selected secondary have different uplink bandwidths and different downlink bandwidths (bandwidth of individual component carrier varies; para. 13-15 and Fig. 1 showing different bandwidths, 4G LTE and 5G NR [time-division duplexing]; para. [22, 18, 37], for uplink and downlink, UE uses [entire] component carrier (CC) [secondary cell] or a portion of each CC defined for use; para. 31).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Alasti to the system of Dai, where Dai’s higher spectral efficiency and increased system capacity (para. [03, 57]) along with Alasti’s spectrum allocation (para. 32) improves system efficiency and user satisfaction by providing devices fair opportunity to transmit.
Regarding claim 12, Dai teaches the limitation of previous claim 10.
While Dai discloses LTE and 5G NR, Dai does not explicitly disclose wherein the primary cell and the selected secondary cell have different bandwidths.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Alasti teaches wherein the primary cell and the selected secondary cell have different bandwidths (bandwidth of individual component carrier varies; para. 15).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Alasti to the system of Dai, where Dai’s higher spectral efficiency and increased system capacity (para. [03, 57]) along with Alasti’s spectrum allocation (para. 32) improves system efficiency and user satisfaction by providing devices fair opportunity to transmit.
Claim(s) 14, 18, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dai in view of Axmon et al. (US 2016/0226634 A1, made of record in the IDS of 3/19/2025) hereinafter Axmon.
Regarding claim 14, Dai teaches a base station for a wireless communication system (base station (BS) / network device; para. 60 and Figs. [1B, 5, 10-12]), the base station comprising: a transceiver configured to transmit and receive signals (transmitter/receiver 1005/1105/1004/1104/1204 receiving/transmitting; para. [208, 222, 231-232, 234] and Figs. 10-12); one or more processor devices coupled to the transceiver (processor 1001/1101/1201 connected to transmitter/receiver; para. [208, 222, 234] and Figs. 10-12); and one or more computer readable media including instructions that, when executed by the one or more processor devices, perform a process (processor implements instructions read from memory 1002/1102/1202; para. [214, 227, 239] and Figs. 10-12) comprising: providing at least one parameter for each secondary cell in a plurality of secondary cells that indicates a connection priority for each secondary cell (BS sending [providing] priority information of each candidate secondary BS; para. [09, 25, 77-78, 105, 126, 184, 217] and Fig. 5 step 503); transmitting a set of parameters for each secondary cell to a UE (BS sending priority information of each candidate secondary BS; para. [09, 25, 77-78, 105, 126, 184, 217] and Fig. 5 step 503), the set of parameters for each secondary cell including the parameter indicating a connection priority for the secondary cell (sending priority information of each candidate secondary BS; para. [09, 25, 77-78, 105, 126, 184, 217] and Fig. 5 step 503); and transmitting data to the UE using a primary cell (master BS sends information / message [data] to UE; para. [92, 95, 102]) and the selected secondary cell (BS transmits data to secondary BS and secondary BS transmits to UE; para. 82).
While Dai discloses UE transmitting request to connect and connecting to target [selected] secondary cell, Dai does not explicitly disclose receiving a request from the UE to connect with a secondary cell selected based on the parameter indicating a connection priority for the secondary cell; connecting the selected secondary cell to the UE.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Axmon teaches receiving a request from the UE to connect with a secondary cell selected based on the parameter indicating a connection priority for the secondary cell (network [BS] receives report from UE indicating set [selected] of radio resource for aggregation [secondary cell]; para. [12-14, 25, 65-66], carrier aggregation deployment using co-located cells; para. [70, 93] and Figs. 3-4, radio resource [secondary cell] selection based on priority; para. [13-14, 19, 36-37, 65-66, 125-132, 138-141]); connecting the selected secondary cell to the UE (selecting radio resource for communication with UE; para. [11, 32, 37, 59, 65, 83-85, 130-131]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Axmon to the system of Dai, where Dai’s higher spectral efficiency and increased system capacity (para. [03, 57]) along with Axmon’s resource selection (para. [10-11, 16]) improves the system by optimizing resources.
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Dai and Axmon teaches the limitation of previous claim 14.
Dai further teaches wherein the plurality of secondary cells comprises a first secondary cell and a second secondary cell (trigger/change condition [determining] includes at least one candidate secondary cell; para. [101-102, 126, 152, 183, 195, 216, 229]) and wherein the secondary cell selected based on the parameter indicating a connection priority is the first secondary cell (sending priority information of each candidate secondary BS; para. [09, 25, 77-78, 105, 126, 184, 217] and Fig. 5 step 503, target BS selected based on priority information; para. [09, 25, 77-78, 105, 126, 184, 217]), the process further comprising: determining a load for the first secondary cell and the second secondary cell (change condition includes load of each candidate secondary BS among multiple candidate secondary BS; para. [15, 31, 75, 78]); determining if the determined load of the first secondary cell and the second secondary cell is equal to or greater than a load threshold (trigger/change condition [determining] includes load of at least one candidate secondary cell lower than [thus if equal to or greater than] a threshold; para. [101-102, 126, 152, 183, 195, 216, 229]); and selecting one of the first secondary cell or the second secondary cell based on the determined load and the load threshold (selecting candidate secondary BS as new secondary BS based on satisfying the change condition [determined load and load threshold]; para. 135 and Fig. 5 step 509).
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Dai and Axmon teaches the limitation of previous claim 14.
Dai further teaches wherein the wireless communication system is a 5G new radio (NR) communication system (use of 5G new system [new radio]; para. [55-60, 111, 125, 151]).
Claim(s) 15-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dai in view of Axmon, and further in view of Santhanam.
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Dai and Axmon teaches the limitation of previous claim 14.
While Dai discloses trigger conditions, the combination of Dai and Axmon does not explicitly disclose wherein the at least one parameter indicating a connection priority is a time-to-trigger.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Santhanam teaches wherein the at least one parameter indicating a connection priority is a time-to-trigger (higher priority frequency bands have lowest time-to-trigger (TTT); para. [99-100, 108], frequency bands associated with component carriers / carrier aggregation; para. 83). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Santhanam to the modified system of Dai and Axmon, where Dai and Axmon’s modified system along with Santhanam’s load balancing (para. 104) improves spectral efficiency by balancing load.
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Dai, Axmon, and Santhanam teaches the limitation of previous claim 15.
The combination of Dai and Axmon does not explicitly disclose wherein the plurality of secondary cells comprises a first secondary cell with a first time-to-trigger and a second secondary cell with a second time-to-trigger that is longer than the first time to trigger.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Santhanam further teaches wherein the plurality of secondary cells comprises a first secondary cell with a first time-to-trigger (TTT applied to frequency bands [cells] with lower TTT [first secondary cell] to higher TTT; para. 99) and a second secondary cell with a second time-to-trigger that is longer than the first time to trigger (TTT applied to frequency bands [cells] with lower TTT to higher [longer] TTT [second secondary cell]; para. 99).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Santhanam to the modified system of Dai, Axmon, and Santhanam, where Dai, Axmon, and Santhanam’s modified system along with Santhanam’s load balancing (para. 104) improves spectral efficiency by balancing load.
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Dai, Axmon, and Santhanam teaches the limitation of previous claim 16.
While Dai discloses LTE and 5G NR, Dai does not explicitly disclose wherein the first secondary cell has a larger bandwidth than a bandwidth of the second secondary cell.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Axmon teaches wherein the first secondary cell has a larger bandwidth than a bandwidth of the second secondary cell (an SCell with larger bandwidth has higher priority than SCell with smaller bandwidth; para. 128).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Axmon to the modified system of Dai, Axmon, and Santhanam, where Dai, Axmon, and Santhanam’s modified system along with Axmon’s resource selection (para. [10-11, 16]) improves the system by optimizing resources.
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dai in view of Axmon, and further in view of Chindapol.
Regarding claim 19, the combination of Dai and Axmon teaches the limitation of previous claim 18.
While Dai discloses comparison of load against threshold in selecting BS, the combination of Dai and Axmon does not explicitly disclose wherein selecting one of the first secondary cell or the second secondary cell based on the determined load comprises selecting the secondary cell with the lowest load or no load.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Chindapol teaches wherein selecting one of the first secondary cell or the second secondary cell based on the determined load comprises selecting the secondary cell with the lowest load or no load (selection of target/candidate base station based on lowest utilization / load; para. [68, 81]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of Chindapol to the modified system of Dai and Axmon, where Dai and Axmon’s modified system along with Chindapol’s load balancing (para. 32) improves system efficiency by balancing load among BSs and reducing overhead.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Zhang et al. (US 2019/0058570 A1) discloses an enhanced mechanism of scheduling request to multiple schedulers in a wireless network with multiple connectivity.
Liu et al. (US 2014/0269313 A1) discloses a system and method for adaptation in a wireless communications system.
Khoryaev et al. (US 2020/0053675 A1) discloses carrier aggregation and high order modulation in vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) sidelink communication.
Bedekar (US 2019/0280845 A1) discloses methods and apparatus for adjusting a carrier aggregation operation in a wireless communication system.
Yui et al. (US 2016/0044539 A1) discloses load balancing schemes for idle mode user equipment.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSE L PEREZ whose telephone number is (571) 270-7348. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 11 am - 3 pm.
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/patents/uspto-automated-interview-request-air-form.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Michael Thier can be reached at (571) 272-2832. 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.
/JOSE L PEREZ/Examiner, Art Unit 2474