CTFR 18/491,124 CTFR 85680 Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Claims 1-28 are pending. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 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. Examiner also like to point out that examiner interprets a conflict as a collision, or channel interference. The claimed first and second resource are essentially downlink and uplink resources. It is common knowledge that uplink transmission takes place after downlink transmission. Finally, the claimed condition in claim 1 is not spelled out. The condition may or may not take place. Also, it could be interpreted as the condition is the claim language of: detected conflict between the first resources and the second resources. 07-30-03-h AIA Claim Interpretation 07-30-03 AIA The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f): (f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. 07-30-05 The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked. As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: (A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function; (B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and (C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function. Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Claim 28 invokes means plus function, claimed means for receiving, means for detecting and means for dynamically adjusting all meet the three-prong test. Means for detecting has a corresponding algorithm in Fig. 7B, and Means for dynamically adjusting has an algorithm in Fig. 8. So both means has corresponding disclosure in the specification to modify a processor to perform the functions of the means. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15 AIA Claim s 1- 10, 12, 14-23, 25, 27-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Mujtaba, US 2013/0288624 . For claim 1, Mujitaba teaches an apparatus for wireless communication at a user equipment (UE), comprising: at least one memory comprising computer-executable instructions; and one or more processors, individually or collectively, configured to execute the computer- executable instructions and cause the UE to: (Mujitaba, Fig 10 show each of these elements). receive configuration information configuring the UE with first resources for receiving at least one downlink signal and second resources for transmitting at least one uplink signal (Mujitaba, Fig. 3, Step 302 teaches receive configuration info PP64; also scheduling for the downlink and uplink is well known, see PP121); detect a conflict between the first resources and the second resources; (Mujitaba, Fig. 3, Step 306 teaches when capacity and connectivity condition are NOT met, this would be detecting a conflict; examiner interprets a conflict as a collision, or channel interference) and dynamically adjust an adaptive reception diversity (ARD) mode (this could be interpreted as turning off RxD when channel quality is bad; Mujitaba, Fig. 4B and Fig. 5B illustrate state machines for changing ARD modes, PP83-93, PP95-98) based on the detected conflict between the first resources and the second resources (Mujitaba, Fig. 4A and Fig. 5A teaches detecting conflict, PP81 to 93, and PP94; note PP89 teaches sub-carrier indiex, which would distinguish first resource and second resource) if one or more conditions are met after detecting the conflict (the claims do not recite what the conditions are, also it could be interpreted as repeating the claim language detected conflict between the first resources and the second resources as a condition; but take a closer look at PP97). For claim 14, Mujitaba teaches a method for wireless communications at a user equipment (UE), comprising: receiving configuration information configuring the UE with first resources for receiving at least one downlink signal and second resources for transmitting at least one uplink signal; (Mujitaba, Fig. 3, Step 302 teaches receive configuration info PP64; also scheduling for the downlink and uplink is well known, see PP121) detecting a conflict between the first resources and the second resources (Mujitaba, Fig. 3, Step 306 teaches when capacity and connectivity condition are NOT met, this would be detecting a conflict; examiner interprets a conflict as a collision, or channel interference); and dynamically adjusting an adaptive reception diversity (ARD) mode (this could be interpreted as turning off RxD when channel quality is bad; Mujitaba, Fig. 4B and Fig. 5B illustrate state machines for changing ARD modes, PP83-93, PP95-98) based on the detected conflict between the first resources and the second resources (Mujitaba, Fig. 4A and Fig. 5A teaches detecting conflict, PP81 to 93, and PP94; note PP89 teaches sub-carrier indiex, which would distinguish first resource and second resource) if one or more conditions are met after detecting the conflict (the claims do not recite what the conditions are, also it could be interpreted as condition is repeating the claim language detected conflict between the first resources and the second resources; but take a closer look at PP97). For claim 27, Mujtaba teaches a non-transitory computer readable medium at a user equipment (UE) having instructions stored thereon which, when executed by one or more processors, individually or collectively, cause the UE to: (Mujitaba, Fig 10 show each of these elements). receive configuration information configuring the UE with first resources for receiving at least one downlink signal and second resources for transmitting at least one uplink signal (Mujitaba, Fig. 3, Step 302 teaches receive configuration info PP64; also scheduling for the downlink and uplink is well known, see PP121); detect a conflict between the first resources and the second resources; (Mujitaba, Fig. 3, Step 306 teaches when capacity and connectivity condition are NOT met, this would be detecting a conflict; examiner interprets a conflict as a collision, or channel interference) and dynamically adjust an adaptive reception diversity (ARD) mode (this could be interpreted as turning off RxD when channel quality is bad; Mujitaba, Fig. 4B and Fig. 5B illustrate state machines for changing ARD modes, PP83-93, PP95-98) based on the detected conflict between the first resources and the second resources (Mujitaba, Fig. 4A and Fig. 5A teaches detecting conflict, PP81 to 93, and PP94; note PP89 teaches sub-carrier indiex, which would distinguish first resource and second resource) if one or more conditions are met after detecting the conflict (the claims do not recite what the conditions are, also it could be interpreted as repeating the claim language detected conflict between the first resources and the second resources as a condition; but take a closer look at PP97). For claim 28, Mujtaba teaches An apparatus for wireless communication at a user equipment (UE), comprising: means for receiving configuration information configuring the UE with first resources for receiving at least one downlink signal and second resources for transmitting at least one uplink signal; (Mujitaba, Fig. 3, Step 302 teaches receive configuration info PP64; also scheduling for the downlink and uplink is well known, see PP121; also Fig. 2 show RF receivers as the means) means for detecting a conflict between the first resources and the second resources; (Mujtaba, Fig. 10, Process 1010 is means for detecting, Fig. 3, Step 306 teaches when capacity and connectivity condition are NOT met, this would be detecting a conflict; examiner interprets a conflict as a collision, or channel interference) and means for dynamically adjusting an adaptive reception diversity (ARD) mode (this could be interpreted as turning off RxD when channel quality is bad; Mujitaba, Fig. 2, ARD Logic 210 is the means; Fig. 4B and Fig. 5B illustrate state machines for changing ARD modes, PP83-93, PP95-98) based on the detected conflict between the first resources and the second resources (Mujitaba, Fig. 4A and Fig. 5A teaches detecting conflict, PP81 to 93, and PP94; note PP89 teaches sub-carrier indiex, which would distinguish first resource and second resource) if one or more conditions are met after detecting the conflict (the claims do not recite what the conditions are, also it could be interpreted as condition is repeating the claim language detected conflict between the first resources and the second resources; but take a closer look at PP97). For claims 2-3 and 15-16, Mujtaba teaches the one or more conditions are based on whether the conflict is detected for a threshold time duration (Mujtaba, PP78 teaches timer expiration would enable diversity) and the one or more conditions are based on at least one of: a capability of the UE to adjust the ARD mode (Fig. 3, Step 302 discusses capability as for ARD, PP121); a configuration of the at least one uplink signal; or whether the ARD mode is enabled or disabled (Fig. 5B shows a state machine comprising RxD-On Connected and RxD-Off Connected modes, as well as RxD-On Idle). For claims 4 to 5, and 17-18, Mujtaba teaches in order to dynamically adjust the ARD mode, the one or more processors, individually or collectively, are further configured to cause the UE to disable the ARD mode based on detecting the conflict (Fig. 5B, RxD-on Connected to RxD-Off Connected) and wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the UE to enable the ARD mode if the conflict is not detected (Fig. 5B, RxD-Off Idle to RxD-On-Idle to RxD-on Connected). For claims 6 to 7 and 19 to 20, Mujtaba teaches in order to dynamically adjust the ARD mode, the one or more processors, individually or collectively, are further configured to cause the UE to at least one of: adjust a first quantity of antennas utilized by the UE for receiving the at least one downlink signal (PP7 describes reception diversity and transmit diversity; see also PP9 and 10; PP87, two antenna receivers); or adjust a second quantity of antennas utilized by the UE for transmitting the at least one uplink signal (Examiner chose not to address this limitation after the OR condition). And one of the first quantity of antennas and one of the second quantity of antennas are shared by a common radio frequency (RF) front end (Fig. 2 shows two RF receivers. This makes first quantity one and second quantity also one. They are connected by 2x2 RF switch). For claims 8 to 9, and 21 to 22 Mujtaba teaches the uplink signal comprises a sounding reference signal (SRS) and the SRS is transmitted periodically, aperiodically, or semi-persistently (Mujtaba, PP85-86 teaches reference signal, PP97 teaches UE has been reporting a consistent R1 rank for a number of consecutive subframes; this implies the reference signal is sent repeatedly). For claims 10 and 23, Mujtaba teaches the downlink signal comprises a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) transmission. (PP54) The apparatus of claim 2, wherein the one or more conditions are based on at least one of: a capability of the UE to adjust the ARD mode; a configuration of the at least one uplink signal; or whether the ARD mode is enabled or disabled. For claims 12 and 25 (Original) The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the first resources and the second resources comprise time and frequency resources (PP7 teaches that those of ordinary skill in the related arts will readily appreciate that various other types of diversity exist and are commonly used (e.g., time diversity, frequency diversity, spatial diversity, polarization diversity, etc.) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-103 AIA The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 11 13, 24 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang et al. (US20240031852A1), hereinafter JIANG , in view of Zhang et al. (US20210289583A1), hereinafter ZHANG . For claims 11, 13, 24 and 26, Mujtaba teaches the parent claim of claim 1, Mujtaba does no teach the first resources are configured for a frequency division duplexing (FDD) mode; and the second resources are configured for a time division duplexing (TDD) mode, and the downlink signal and the uplink signal are associated with multiple subscriber identity modules (SIMs). Jiang teaches the first resources are configured for a frequency division duplexing (FDD) mode; and the second resources are configured for a time division duplexing (TDD) mode. ( JIANG , paragraph 55 teaches using FDD and TDD modes.) And the downlink signal and the uplink signal are associated with multiple subscriber identity modules (SIMs). ( JIANG , paragraphs 78-79, teach multiple SIMs corresponding to uplink and downlink signals.) Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the teachings of JIANG to configure the first resources and second resource of Mujtaba in the analogous of MIMO to improve the performance of a dual-sim device (Jiang, PP3). Conclusion 07-40 AIA 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 Charles C Jiang whose telephone number is (571)270-7191. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Thursday 7 am to 5 pm Eastern Time. 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, TC Group director, Deborah Reynolds can be reached at (571) 272-0734. 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. /CHARLES C JIANG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2412 Application/Control Number: 18/491,124 Page 2 Art Unit: 2412 Application/Control Number: 18/491,124 Page 3 Art Unit: 2412 Application/Control Number: 18/491,124 Page 4 Art Unit: 2412 Application/Control Number: 18/491,124 Page 5 Art Unit: 2412 Application/Control Number: 18/491,124 Page 6 Art Unit: 2412 Application/Control Number: 18/491,124 Page 7 Art Unit: 2412 Application/Control Number: 18/491,124 Page 8 Art Unit: 2412 Application/Control Number: 18/491,124 Page 9 Art Unit: 2412 Application/Control Number: 18/491,124 Page 10 Art Unit: 2412 Application/Control Number: 18/491,124 Page 11 Art Unit: 2412 Application/Control Number: 18/491,124 Page 12 Art Unit: 2412 Application/Control Number: 18/491,124 Page 13 Art Unit: 2412
Prosecution Insights