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 .
Response to Arguments
Rejections under 35 USC 102(a)(2)
Applicant’s Argument: Applicant argues that the amended claims clarify the logic in selecting the primary cell based on the second band layer as comprising a small bandwidth channel layer with bandwidth that provides less throughput. Takeda as previously cited does expressly teach that the channel with lower bandwidth is not determined and used based on the capability. Examiner notes that the distinction, as agreed upon in the Examiner interview, is that the network does not determine the lower bandwidth band layer as the primary cell in response to the capability, but rather provides several scenarios, and in some the second band layer may be the lower bandwidth layer.
Examiner’s Response: Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 10 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. As noted above, the amendments clarify that the network responds to the capability by seeking out the band layer with the lower bandwidth and lower throughput as the primary cell in response to the capability, whereas Takeda does not make this determination. The claimed amendments clarify this logic and thus change the scope of the invention necessitating an updated search and a new grounds of rejection.
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 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) 1, 3, 7, 10, 16, 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takeda et al. (“Takeda”) (WO 2024070472 A1, Examiner citing from English translation provided) in view of Kwok et al. (“Kwok”) (US 20220217595 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Takeda teaches:
A system for carrier aggregation-based band resource management, the system comprising:
one or more processors; and one or more computer-readable media storing computer-usable instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to: receive, at a base station comprising a small channel utilization manager, carrier aggregation capability information associated with a user equipment (UE) [¶0037, “The base station device 101 determines whether to change the secondary cell to the primary cell and whether to change the primary cell to the secondary cell, taking into consideration capability information (UE Capability) indicated by the terminal device 111, which includes information on the combination of frequency bands that the terminal device 111 can use when performing carrier aggregation”], wherein the base station includes at least a first band layer having a first channel bandwidth and a second band layer having a second channel bandwidth [¶0038-39, base station provides Band 41 corresponding to first band layer, and band 18 corresponding to second band layer] that provides less throughput than the first channel bandwidth [¶0037-38, band 18 being second band layer known to have less throughput than Band 1, Band 41, as it is lower frequency1];
using the small channel utilization manager:
process the carrier aggregation capability information to determine when the carrier aggregation capability information indicates that the UE supports uplink carrier aggregation using the first band layer and the second band layer; configure for the UE, at the base station, the second band layer as a primary serving cell for carrier aggregation; control the UE too use the second band layer as the primary serving cell [¶0039, capability information processed, indicates carrier aggregation of band 1 and band 18 is possible, set primary cell to band 18 being secondary band “instruct the terminal device 111 to change the primary cell to the cell of band 18”].
Takeda teaches placing the UE with carrier aggregation functionality on the band with the lower throughput but does not expressly teach based on the band layer having lower throughput, configure that band layer as the primary cell.
Kwok more clearly shows that the base station connected to a device with uplink carrier aggregation capability [see ¶0011 CA] and based on the second band layer comprising a small bandwidth channel layer having the second channel bandwidth that provides less throughput than the first channel bandwidth of the first band layer, configure for the UE, at the base station, the second band layer as a primary serving cell for carrier aggregation [¶0010, network conditions may be monitored by the network e.g. gNB to determine to switch the PCell for the UE see switch component as part of network in Figure 3, and ¶0011 “the PCell may be switched from the high bandwidth cell to the lower bandwidth cell in some examples” thus the low bandwidth is identified and configured for UE, and Figure 1 shows each cell corresponds to the gNB see ¶0023 gNB uses different cells for CA communication].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to specify identifying specifically the lower bandwidth PCell. Takeda teaches placing the UE on the lower bandwidth PCell but not identifying specifically this lower bandwidth cell for configuring the UE however it would have been obvious to do so based on UE capability as in Kwok who teaches in ¶0011 user experience is enhanced as this results in better performance.
Regarding claim 3, Takeda-Kwok teaches:
The system of claim 1, the one or more processors further to: control the UE to configure to use the second band layer as the primary serving cell further based at least on an effective range of the UE from the base station [Takeda ¶0036, established connection via primary cell and secondary cell allocated to UE in predetermined area wherein the base station is located, thus considered “effective range” and further Kwok ¶0011 as cited in claim 1, UE is moving away].
Regarding claim 7, Takeda-Kwok teaches:
The system of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors execute: a base station protocol stack comprising at least a base station Media Access Control (MAC) layer [Takeda ¶0019 teaches primary and secondary cells comprising MAC entities thus signaling based on MAC layer] and a radio resource control (RRC) layer [Takeda ¶0027, RRC layer used for L3 signaling]; and a small channel utilization manager (SCUM) in communication with at least one of the MAC layer and the RRC layer [Takeda ¶0043, wherein base station comprises processor for controlling the processing of the device as in ¶0019 and ¶0027 to use RRC and MAC layer for signaling and primary / secondary cell scheduling as in ¶0037-40, these components considered to correspond to “SCUM”], wherein the aggregation-based spectrum management logic processes the carrier aggregation capability information and controls one or both of the MAC layer and the RRC layer to reconfigure a current primary serving cell to secondary serving cell relationship configuration associated with the UE based on the carrier aggregation capability information and an effective range of the UE from the base station [Takeda ¶0043 processor and logic to perform steps, including ¶0038-40, ¶0043 setting the primary / secondary cell, see further ¶0048 cell change unit incorporates RRC messages, the connection via primary and secondary cell based on UE in predetermined area wherein the base station is located, thus considered “effective range” ¶0036, see further Kwok ¶0011 switching UE based on range see rationale for combination as in claim 1].
Regarding claim 10, Takeda teaches:
A method for carrier aggregation-based band resource management, the method comprising: determining carrier aggregation capability information of a UE in communication with a base station [¶0037, “The base station device 101 determines whether to change the secondary cell to the primary cell and whether to change the primary cell to the secondary cell, taking into consideration capability information (UE Capability) indicated by the terminal device 111, which includes information on the combination of frequency bands that the terminal device 111 can use when performing carrier aggregation”], wherein the base station includes at least a first band layer having a first channel bandwidth and a second band layer having a second channel bandwidth [¶0038-39, base station provides Band 41 corresponding to first band layer, and band 18 corresponding to second band layer] that provides less throughput than the first channel bandwidth [¶0037-38, band 18 being second band layer known to have less throughput as it is lower frequency, see footnote 1 above]; processing the carrier aggregation capability information to determine when the carrier aggregation capability information indicates that the UE supports uplink carrier aggregation using the first band layer and the second band layer; controlling the UE to use the second band layer as a primary serving cell for carrier aggregation [¶0039, capability information processed, indicates carrier aggregation of band 1 and band 18 is possible, set primary cell to band 18 being secondary band “instruct the terminal device 111 to change the primary cell to the cell of band 18”], and controlling the UE to use the first band layer as the primary serving cell based at least on an indication from the carrier aggregation capability information that the UE is not capable of uplink carrier aggregation [¶0038, UE using band 1 as primary cell, “capability information of the terminal device 111 indicates that uplink transmission is possible only in band 1 in carrier aggregation of band 1 and band 41” thus uplink carrier aggregation not possible, “when the terminal device 111 receives an instruction from the base station device 101 to set the cell using band 41 as the primary cell and the cell using band 1 as the secondary cell, the terminal device 111 may set the cell using band 41 as the primary cell”].
Takeda teaches placing the UE with carrier aggregation functionality on the band with the lower throughput but does not expressly teach based on the band layer having lower throughput, configure that band layer as the primary cell.
Kwok more clearly shows that the base station connected to a device with uplink carrier aggregation capability [see ¶0011 CA] and based on the second band layer comprising a small bandwidth channel layer having the second channel bandwidth that provides less throughput than the first channel bandwidth of the first band layer, configure for the UE, at the base station, the second band layer as a primary serving cell for carrier aggregation [¶0010, network conditions may be monitored by the network e.g. gNB to determine to switch the PCell for the UE see switch component as part of network in Figure 3, and ¶0011 “the PCell may be switched from the high bandwidth cell to the lower bandwidth cell in some examples” thus the low bandwidth is identified and configured for UE, and Figure 1 shows each cell corresponds to the gNB see ¶0023 gNB uses different cells for CA communication].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to specify identifying specifically the lower bandwidth PCell. Takeda teaches placing the UE on the lower bandwidth PCell but not identifying specifically this lower bandwidth cell for configuring the UE however it would have been obvious to do so based on UE capability as in Kwok who teaches in ¶0011 user experience is enhanced as this results in better performance.
Regarding claim 16, Takeda teaches:
A wireless communication base station system [¶0043 teaches base station], the system comprising:
at least one controller comprising one or more processing units [¶0043 hardware units] configured to execute one or more functions of a wireless communication base station, wherein the wireless communication base station is configured to communicate with one or more user equipment (UE) over one or both of uplink (UL) radio frequency (RF) signals and downlink (DL) RF signals [¶0037-41 base station configured to communicate via UL and DL RF signals via carrier aggregation, ¶0028-30 shows UL, DL signaling], wherein the wireless communication base station includes at least a first band layer having a first channel bandwidth and a second band layer having a second channel bandwidth [¶0038-39, base station provides Band 41 corresponding to first band layer, and band 18 corresponding to second band layer] that provides less throughput than the first channel bandwidth [¶0037-38, band 18 being second band layer known to have less throughput as it is lower frequency], the one or more functions including:
a base station protocol stack comprising at least a Media Access Control (MAC) layer [¶0019 teaches primary and secondary cells comprising MAC entities thus signaling based on MAC layer] and a radio resource control (RRC) layer [¶0027, RRC layer used for L3 signaling] configured to control carrier aggregation for the one or more UE using the first band layer and the second band layer [¶0043, wherein base station comprises processor for controlling the processing of the device as in ¶0019 and ¶0027 to use RRC and MAC layer for signaling and primary / secondary cell scheduling as in ¶0037-40]; and
a small channel utilization manager (SCUM) in communication with at least one of the MAC layer and the RRC layer [¶0043 processor and logic to perform steps, including ¶0043 setting the primary / secondary cell to reconfigure, see further ¶0048 cell change unit incorporates RRC messages], wherein the small channel utilization manager is configured to process the carrier aggregation capability information associated with at least a first UE of the one or more UE to determine when the carrier aggregation capability information indicates that the UE supports uplink carrier aggregation using the first band layer and the second band layer; ; configure for the UE, at the base station, the second band layer as a primary serving cell for carrier aggregation; control the UE to use the second band layer as the primary serving cell for carrier aggregation[¶0039, capability information processed, indicates carrier aggregation of band 1 and band 18 is possible, set primary cell to band 18 being secondary band “instruct the terminal device 111 to change the primary cell to the cell of band 18”], and
control the first UE to use the first band layer as the primary serving cell based at least on an indication from the carrier aggregation capability information that the first UE is not capable of uplink carrier aggregation [¶0038, UE using band 1 as primary cell, “capability information of the terminal device 111 indicates that uplink transmission is possible only in band 1 in carrier aggregation of band 1 and band 41” thus uplink carrier aggregation not possible, “when the terminal device 111 receives an instruction from the base station device 101 to set the cell using band 41 as the primary cell and the cell using band 1 as the secondary cell, the terminal device 111 may set the cell using band 41 as the primary cell”].
Takeda teaches placing the UE with carrier aggregation functionality on the band with the lower throughput but does not expressly teach based on the band layer having lower throughput, configure that band layer as the primary cell.
Kwok more clearly shows that the base station connected to a device with uplink carrier aggregation capability [see ¶0011 CA] and based on the second band layer comprising a small bandwidth channel layer having the second channel bandwidth that provides less throughput than the first channel bandwidth of the first band layer, configure for the UE, at the base station, the second band layer as a primary serving cell for carrier aggregation [¶0010, network conditions may be monitored by the network e.g. gNB to determine to switch the PCell for the UE see switch component as part of network in Figure 3, and ¶0011 “the PCell may be switched from the high bandwidth cell to the lower bandwidth cell in some examples” thus the low bandwidth is identified and configured for UE, and Figure 1 shows each cell corresponds to the gNB see ¶0023 gNB uses different cells for CA communication].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to specify identifying specifically the lower bandwidth PCell. Takeda teaches placing the UE on the lower bandwidth PCell but not identifying specifically this lower bandwidth cell for configuring the UE however it would have been obvious to do so based on UE capability as in Kwok who teaches in ¶0011 user experience is enhanced as this results in better performance.
Regarding claim 18, Takeda-Kwok teaches:
The system of claim 16, wherein the small channel utilization manager further: controls the UE to configure to use the second band layer as the primary serving cell further based at least on a determination of an effective range of the UE from the wireless communication base station [Takeda ¶0036, established connection via primary cell and secondary cell allocated to UE in predetermined area wherein the base station is located, thus considered “effective range” and further Kwok ¶0011 as cited in claim 1, UE is moving away].
Regarding claim 19, Takeda-Kwok teaches:
The system of claim 16, wherein the small channel utilization manager further:
determines the carrier aggregation capability information based at least on a capabilities report from the first UE [Takeda ¶0037, “The base station device 101 determines whether to change the secondary cell to the primary cell and whether to change the primary cell to the secondary cell, taking into consideration capability information (UE Capability) indicated by the terminal device 111”]; or receives the carrier aggregation capability information based on a query to a database.
Claims 2, 11, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takeda et al. (“Takeda”) (WO 2024070472 A1, Examiner citing from English translation provided) in view of Kwok et al. (“Kwok”) (US 20220217595 A1) and Logalbo et al. (“Logalbo”) (US 20120172083 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Takeda-Kwok teaches:
The system of claim 1, the one or more processors further to control the UE to configure to use the second band layer as the primary serving cell [Takeda ¶0037-40, change primary cell to band 18 being second band].
Takeda teaches allocating first and second bands but does not teach an updated priority.
Logalbo teaches the one or more processors further to: control the UE to configure to use the second band layer based at least on updating, at the UE, cell priority information associated with the second band layer [¶0053, update channel priority of a channel corresponding to second band layer].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to specify a priority update for the first bad and second band as in Logalbo in order to achieve uninterrupted communications for devices in different locations ¶0004, ¶0052-53.
Regarding claim 11, 20, see similar rejection for claim 2 which teaches the physical structure performing the corresponding steps.
Claims 4, 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takeda et al. (“Takeda”) (WO 2024070472 A1, Examiner citing from English translation provided) in view of Kwok et al. (“Kwok”) (US 20220217595 A1) and Huber et al. (“Huber”) (US 20170135070 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Takeda-Kwok teaches:
The system of claim 3.
Takeda teaches an effective range of a device but does not teach obtaining location information.
Huber teaches the one or more processors further to: determine the effective range of the UE from the base station based on position data received from the UE [Huber, ¶0045, mobile device communicates location data to base station, and ¶0037 base station determines if device satisfies distance parameter corresponding to “effective range”].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to specify a range condition for allocating a band for primary cell based on received location data as in Huber who teaches this allows for allocating carriers for faster downloads by leveraging services on narrower channels to increase link budget ¶0036-37.
Regarding claim 12, Takeda-Kwok teaches:
The method of claim 10, wherein the determination of when the UE supports uplink carrier aggregation is further based on the effective range [Takeda ¶0036, established connection via primary cell and secondary cell allocated to UE in predetermined area wherein the base station is located, thus considered “effective range” and further Kwok ¶0011 as cited in claim 1, UE is moving away].
Takeda-Kwok teaches an effective range of a device but does not teach obtaining location information.
Huber teaches the one or more processors further to: determine the effective range of the UE from the base station based on position data received from the UE [Huber, ¶0045, mobile device communicates location data to base station, and ¶0037 base station determines if device satisfies distance parameter corresponding to “effective range”].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to specify a range condition for allocating a band for primary cell based on received location data as in Huber who teaches this allows for allocating carriers for faster downloads by leveraging services on narrower channels to increase link budget ¶0036-37.
Claims 5, 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takeda et al. (“Takeda”) (WO 2024070472 A1, Examiner citing from English translation provided) in view of Kwok et al. (“Kwok”) (US 20220217595 A1) and Song et al. (“Song”) (US 20140200001 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Takeda-Kwok teaches:
The system of claim 3 the one or more processors further to: determine the effective range of the UE [Takeda ¶0036, effective range considered predetermined area where device establishes connection].
Takeda teaches determining a range of the UE but not based on signal quality.
Song teaches from the base station based on a signal quality measurement received from the UE [Figure 11, 1110, UE sends CQI corresponding to signal quality, ¶0171 based on quality, identify range of UE and make mobility decision].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to specify a range condition based on a signal quality of the device as in Song. Takeda teaches allocation decisions based on range of the device, and it would have been obvious to specify range determination based on signal quality in order to determine SINR ¶0170 and make mobility decisions ¶0171.
Regarding claim 13, Takeda-Kwok teaches:
The method of claim 10, the method further comprising: wherein the determination of when the UE supports uplink carrier aggregation is further based on the effective range [Takeda ¶0036, established connection via primary cell and secondary cell allocated to UE in predetermined area wherein the base station is located, thus considered “effective range” and further Kwok ¶0011 as cited in claim 1, UE is moving away].
Takeda-Kwok teaches determining a range of the UE but not based on signal quality.
Song teaches from the base station based on a signal quality measurement received from the UE [Figure 11, 1110, UE sends CQI corresponding to signal quality, ¶0171 based on quality, identify range of UE and make mobility decision].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to specify a range condition based on a signal quality of the device as in Song. Takeda teaches allocation decisions based on range of the device, and it would have been obvious to specify range determination based on signal quality in order to determine SINR ¶0170 and make mobility decisions ¶0171.
Claims 6, 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takeda et al. (“Takeda”) (WO 2024070472 A1, Examiner citing from English translation provided) in view of Kwok et al. (“Kwok”) (US 20220217595 A1) and Mok et al. (“Mok”) (US 20200245389 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Takeda-Kwok teaches:
The system of claim 1, and receive a capabilities report from the UE that includes the carrier aggregation capability information [Takeda ¶0037, ¶0039 capability received from UE with carrier aggregation information].
Takeda teaches reporting capabilities but not a request.
Mok teaches the one or more processors further to: transmit a capabilities request to UE [¶0152 enquiry].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to specify a request for capabilities as in Mok who teaches this allows for determining CA configuration information that can be supported by the UE ¶0152.
Regarding claim 15, see the rejection for claim 6 which teaches the physical structure performing the corresponding steps.
Claims 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takeda et al. (“Takeda”) (WO 2024070472 A1, Examiner citing from English translation provided) in view of Kwok et al. (“Kwok”) (US 20220217595 A1) and Huang et al. (“Huang”) (WO 2021190270 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Takeda-Kwok teaches:
The system of claim 1, wherein the base station is coupled to a telecommunications network comprising a network operator core [Takeda ¶0043 “The base station device may also have a wired communication circuit used when communicating with other base station devices or nodes in the core network.”].
Takeda teaches a base station executing the small channel utilization manager but not an external node in the core network.
Huang teaches wherein the small channel utilization manager is executed on a node of the telecommunications network distinct from the base station [page 11-13, “Among them, as mentioned above, dual connectivity means that the network side (including the core network and the access network) configures the primary serving cell group MCG and the secondary serving cell group SCG for the connected terminal” thus the core network includes a module for small channel utilization as it configures the primary and secondary cells].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to specify a node for allocating a channel being operated on an external core network device as in Huang as this would have been an obvious combination of prior art elements according to known techniques to include the core network in allocating dual connectivity to a UE page 11-13.
Claims 9, 14, 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takeda et al. (“Takeda”) (WO 2024070472 A1, Examiner citing from English translation provided) in view of Kwok et al. (“Kwok”) (US 20220217595 A1) and Ishii (WO 2010074235 A1)
Regarding claim 9, Takeda-Kwok teaches:
The system of claim 1, wherein the second band layer is a small bandwidth channel layer comprising either: a frequency-division duplex (FDD) band layer [Takeda ¶0037-40, band 18 is LTE FDD Band 18].
Takeda teaches using band 18 but does not expressly indicate 5 MHz bandwidth.
Ishii teaches having a channel bandwidth of 5 MHz or less [page 33 “For example, the maximum transmission power control unit 1083 specifies “E-UTRA Band” = “18” in the above-described control signal, the system bandwidth (Channel Bandwidth) is “5 MHz””]; or a time-division duplex (TDD) band layer having a channel bandwidth of 60 MHz or less.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to specify the second layer band being 5 MHz. Takeda teaches band 18, which is known to comprise a bandwidth of 5 MHz, thus it would have been obvious to specify this bandwidth as in Ishii as this is a combination of prior art elements according to known techniques according to E-UTRA Band parameters page 33.
Regarding claim 14, 17, see the rejection for claim 9 which teaches the physical structure performing the corresponding steps.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAY L. VOGEL whose telephone number is (303)297-4322. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8AM-4:30 PM MT.
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, Joseph Avellino can be reached at 571-272-3905. 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.
/JAY L VOGEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2478
1 ETSI TS 136 101 V13.4.0 (2016-09), “LTE; Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access (E-UTRA); User Equipment (UE) radio transmission and reception (3GPP TS 36.101 version 13.4.0 Release 13)” page 33, E-UTRA operating bands are shown, including bands 1, 18, 41, wherein band 18 corresponds to least throughput on bands 880-915 MHz as known in the art compared to higher frequencies