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 .
DETAILED ACTION
a. Claims 1-20 in the present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA :
- claims 1-3, 6, 8, 10-12, 15, 17, and 19-20 are amended
- claims 4-5, 9, 13-14, and 18 are canceled
b. This is a final action on the merits based on Applicant’s claims submitted on 04/06/2026.
Response to Arguments
Regarding claims 1, 3, 4, 6, 8-10, 12, 13, 15, 17-19 previously objected for informalities, claims1, 3, 4, 6, 8-10, 12, 13, 15, 17-19 have been amended according to the examiner's recommendation and thus the previous objection has been withdrawn.
Regarding claims 1-2, 5-11, and 14-20 previously rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103, Applicant's arguments, see “Applicant respectfully submits that prior art document Vivo, CATT and Mattam do not disclose, teach or suggest at least the following distinguishing technical feature: feature (a): stopping, by a terminal, performing a first random access in a case that the terminal receives a secondary cell group (SCG) deactivation command, during a process of performing the first random access on primary secondary cell (PSCell) of the SCG by the terminal.” on page 10, filed on 04/06/2026, with respect to , have been fully considered but are moot, over the limitations of “stopping, by a terminal, performing a first random access in a case that the terminal receives a secondary cell group (SCG) deactivation command, during a process of performing the first random access on primary secondary cell (PSCell) of the SCG by the terminal”. Said limitations are newly added to the amended Claims 1, 10, and 19, and have been addressed in instant office action, as shown in section 35 USC 103 rejection below, with newly identified disclosures in previously applied reference Mattam, or in combination with previously applied references Vivo and CATT, thus rendering said Applicant’s arguments moot.
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.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. Claim 6 recites the limitation “first configuration information” in “wherein the during the process… if the terminal receives first configuration information” (underlined emphasis). There is already established antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The Examiner suggests that this sentence be modified as such to overcome this 112(b) rejection: “wherein the during the process… if the terminal receives the first configuration information”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 1-2, 10-11, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Mattam et al. US Pub 2022/0132333, claiming foreign application priority 2020-10-22 (hereinafter “Mattam”).
Regarding claim 1 (Currently Amended)
Mattam discloses a processing method for random access (“a method for operating user equipment (UE) actions upon secondary cell group (SCG) deactivation is provided. The method includes determining a deactivation of a SCG in which a UE is operating.” [0022]), comprising:
stopping (“the implementation of the ALT2 includes block the triggering of the RACH procedure to the target cell. That is, RACH procedure is not performed on target cell.” [0307] and furthermore “At operation 511, the method 500 includes suspending the transmission and the reception over the SCG for the DRBs. Further, an uplink data processing may not be prohibited during SCG deactivation e.g., for acknowledged mode (AM) DRBs, even though the transmission is suspended during SCG deactivation.” [0068]), by a terminal (i.e. “UE” [0307]), performing a first random access in a case that the terminal receives a secondary cell group (SCG) deactivation command (“At operation 501-A: The method 500, includes determining a deactivation of a Secondary Cell Group (SCG) in which a UE is operating. Based on the determination of deactivation of the Secondary Cell Group (SCG), the UE performs one or more UE actions at operation 501-B.” [0062]; Fig. 5), during a process of performing the first random access on a primary secondary cell (PSCell) of the SCG by the terminal (“restricting initiation of Random Access Channel (RACH) process when a need of a Primary Secondary Cell (PSCell) or SCG to be in one of an activation state or a deactivation state.” [0306]).
Regarding claim 2 (Currently Amended)
Mattam previously discloses the method according to claim 1,
Mattam further discloses during the process of performing the first random access on the PSCell of the SCG (“After the successful completion of RACH procedure, UE may either Revert to the SCG suspended state, as the trigger to reactivate SCG was for mobility” [0179-0180]),
in a case that the terminal initiates a second random access (“initiating, when a handover occurs to a new cell, the RACH process to a target cell and start/restart the TA timer upon reception of a timing advance command, wherein the RACH process is initiated based on a need of a Primary Secondary Cell (PSCell) or SCG to be in one of an activation state or a deactivation state.” [0305]), the terminal stops performing the first random access (“As an example, the implementation of the ALT2 includes block the triggering of the RACH procedure to the target cell. That is, RACH procedure is not performed on target cell.” [0307]);
wherein at least one of the first random access and the second random access is triggered when the SCG is in deactivated state (“In an implementation an ALT1 for third set of UE action are as follows if timeAlignmentTimer continues to run when SCG is deactivated” [0307]).
Regarding claim 10 (Currently Amended)
Mattam discloses a terminal (“UE 107” in Fig. 3; [0052]), comprising a processor (“processor 301” in Fig. 3; [0054]), a memory (“a storage unit or a memory unit 305” in Fig. 3; [0054]), and a program or instructions stored in the memory and capable of running on the processor (“the unit for processing at least one function or operation and may be implemented in hardware, software, or a combination of hardware and software.” [0053]), wherein the program or instructions are executed by the processor to implement steps of:
stopping performing a first random access in a case that the terminal receives a secondary cell group (SCG) deactivation command, during a process of performing the first random access on a primary secondary cell (PSCell) of the SCG.
The scope and subject matter of apparatus claim 10 is drawn to the apparatus of using the corresponding method claimed in claim 1. Therefore apparatus claim 10 corresponds to method claim 1 and is rejected for the same reasons of anticipation as used in claim 1 rejection above.
Regarding claim 11 (Currently Amended)
The terminal according to claim 10, wherein during the process of performing the first random access on the PSCell of the SCG. in a case that the terminal initiates a second random access, the terminal stops performing the first random access;
wherein at least one of the first random access and the second random access is triggered when the SCG is in deactivated state.
The scope and subject matter of apparatus claim 11 is drawn to the apparatus of using the corresponding method claimed in claim 2. Therefore apparatus claim 11 corresponds to method claim 2 and is rejected for the same reasons of anticipation as used in claim 2 rejection above.
Regarding claim 19 (Currently Amended)
A non-transitory readable storage medium, wherein the non-transitory readable storage medium stores a program or instructions, and the program or instructions are executed by a processor to implement steps of:
stopping performing a first random access in a case that a terminal receives a secondary cell group (SCG) deactivation command, during a process of performing the first random access on a primary secondary cell (PSCell) of the SCG.
The scope and subject matter of non-transitory computer readable medium claim 19 is drawn to the computer program product of using the corresponding method claimed in claim 1. Therefore computer program product claim 19 corresponds to method claim 1 and is rejected for the same reasons of anticipation as used in claim 1 rejection above.
Regarding claim 20 (Currently Amended)
The non-transitory readable storage medium according to claim 19, wherein during the process of performing the first random access on the PSCell of the SCG, in a case that the terminal initiates a second random access, the terminal stops performing the first random access;
wherein at least one of the first random access and the second random access is triggered when the SCG is in deactivated state.
The scope and subject matter of non-transitory computer readable medium claim 20 is drawn to the computer program product of using the corresponding method claimed in claim 2. Therefore computer program product claim 20 corresponds to method claim 2 and is rejected for the same reasons of anticipation as used in claim 2 rejection above.
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.
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.
Claims 6-7, 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mattam et al. US Pub 2022/0132333, claiming foreign application priority 2020-10-22 (hereinafter “Mattam”), and in view of Vivo NPL “UE behavior when SCG is deactivated” 3GPP R2-2102872, April 12th - April 20th, 2021 (hereinafter “Vivo”).
Regarding claim 6 (Currently Amended)
Mattam previously discloses the method according to claim 1, the method further comprises:
Mattam further discloses during the process of performing the first random access on the PSCell of the SCG, in a case that the terminal receives a first configuration information (“the method 500, further includes determining the CPC is configured and associated conditions for a configuration are satisfied during the deactivation of the SCG. Based on the determination that the CPC is configured and associated conditions for the configuration are satisfied, resume the suspended SRB3, apply the configuration of the target cell and initiate a random access channel (RACH) process to send complete RRC reconfiguration required upon execution of the CPC.” [0174]), the terminal stops performing the first random access (“the implementation of the ALT2 includes block the triggering of the RACH procedure to the target cell. That is, RACH procedure is not performed on target cell.” [0307] and furthermore “At operation 511, the method 500 includes suspending the transmission and the reception over the SCG for the DRBs. Further, an uplink data processing may not be prohibited during SCG deactivation e.g., for acknowledged mode (AM) DRBs, even though the transmission is suspended during SCG deactivation.” [0068]);
wherein the first configuration information is used for triggering bandwidth part (BWP) switching and/or a third random access (“triggering a beam failure recovery (BFR) process based on a detection of the beam failure associated with a secondary cell (SCell) or initiate a random access channel (RACH) process based on a detection of the beam failure associated with a primary secondary cell (PSCell)” [0124]);
Mattam does not specifically teach wherein the during the process of performing the first random access on the PSCell of the SCG, if the terminal receives first configuration information, the terminal stops performing the first random access comprising:
stopping performing, by the terminal, the first random access in a case that a fourth condition is satisfied; wherein the fourth condition comprises at least one of the following: the first configuration information comprises dedicated random access resources; the first configuration information triggers a primary secondary cell change; and the first configuration information triggers SCG activation.
In an analogous art, Vivo discloses wherein the during the process of performing the first random access on the PSCell of the SCG, if the terminal receives first configuration information, the terminal stops performing the first random access comprising:
stopping performing, by the terminal, the first random access in a case that a fourth condition is satisfied (“Option 1: When SCG is deactivated, the UE stops CPC.
Option 2: When SCG is deactivated, the UE can apply CPC configuration if the execution condition is satisfied, but delay RACH until there is data needs to be sent on the SCG.” On page 6, section 2.7); wherein
the fourth condition comprises at least one of the following:
the first configuration information comprises dedicated random access resources (“It is most likely to keep timeAlignmentTimer running when the SCG is deactivated in order to skip RACH upon SCG activation, thus it would be good that UE can perform periodic CSI-RS measurements until timeAlignmentTimer expires. Considering CSI-RS result is delay sensitive, if it is reported to SN via MN, the results may be inaccurate due to inter-node latency, hence PUCCH resources should be kept upon SCG deactivation until timeAlignmentTimer expires.” On page , section 2.3);
the first configuration information triggers a primary secondary cell change (“Option 1: When SCG is deactivated, the UE stops CPC.
Option 2: When SCG is deactivated, the UE can apply CPC configuration if the execution condition is satisfied, but delay RACH until there is data needs to be sent on the SCG.” On page 6, section 2.7); and
the first configuration information triggers SCG activation (“The UE behaviour when the SCG activation is indicated to the UE via the MCG is one or more of the following options:
- option 1) similar to reconfiguration with sync, i.e. the UE always initiates random access to the PSCell.” On pages 1-2, section 1).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Mattam’s method performed by the UE on a secondary cell group (SCG) activation and deactivation, to include Vivo’s method for determining UE behavior when SCG is deactivated, in order to maximize resource efficiency (Vivo [Introduction]). Thus, a person of ordinary skill would have appreciated the ability to incorporate Vivo’s method for determining UE behavior when SCG is deactivated into Mattam’s method performed by the UE on a secondary cell group (SCG) activation and deactivation since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 7
Mattam, as modified by Vivo, previously discloses the method according to claim 6, wherein that the terminal receives the first configuration information comprises:
Mattam further discloses receiving, by the terminal, the first configuration information in a case that the SCG is in deactivated state (“it is indicated to the UE by the network entity whether to continue or stop monitoring of at least one of RLM and BFD upon SCG deactivation. This can be indicated along with the SCG deactivation message. When it is indicated and no new configurations are provided for the at least one of RLM and BFD, UE pursues after the SCG deactivation at least one of RLC and BFD with utilizing existing configurations for RLM and BFD, that is, configurations which were applicable as before SCG deactivation.” [0126]).
Regarding claim 15 (Currently Amended)
The terminal according to claim 10, wherein during the process of performing the first random access on the PSCell of the SCG, in a case that the terminal receives a first configuration information, the terminal stops performing the first random access, the program or instructions are executed by the processor to implement steps of:
stopping performing the first random access in a case that a fourth condition is satisfied; wherein
the fourth condition comprises at least one of the following:
the first configuration information comprises dedicated random access resources;
the first configuration information triggers a primary secondary cell change; and
the first configuration information triggers SCG activation;
wherein the first configuration information is used for triggering bandwidth part (BWP) switching and/or a third random access.
The scope and subject matter of apparatus claim 15 is drawn to the apparatus of using the corresponding method claimed in claim 6. Therefore apparatus claim 15 corresponds to method claim 6 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 6 rejection above.
Regarding claim 16
The terminal according to claim 15, wherein that the terminal receives the first configuration information, the program or instructions are executed by the processor to implement steps of:
receiving the first configuration information in a case that the SCG is in deactivated state.
The scope and subject matter of apparatus claim 16 is drawn to the apparatus of using the corresponding method claimed in claim 7. Therefore apparatus claim 16 corresponds to method claim 7 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 7 rejection above.
Claims 8 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mattam et al. US Pub 2022/0132333, claiming foreign application priority 2020-10-22 (hereinafter “Mattam”), and in view of CATT NPL “BWP switching with on-going Random Access procedure” 3GPP R2-1813847, 8th – 12th October 2018 (hereinafter “CATT”).
Regarding claim 8 (Currently Amended)
Mattam previously discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein during the process of performing the first random access on the PSCell of the SCG, in a case that the terminal receives the first configuration information, after the terminal stops performing the first random access, the method further comprises at least one of the following:
Mattam does not specifically teach performing, by the terminal, BWP switching based on the first configuration information; initiating, by the terminal, a third random access based on the first configuration information; and performing, by the terminal, BWP switching based on the first configuration information and initiating, by the terminal, a random access on the switched-to BWPBWP; wherein the first configuration information is used for triggering BWP switching and/or a third random access.
In an analogous art, CATT discloses performing, by the terminal, BWP switching based on the first configuration information (“If the MAC entity receives a PDCCH for BWP switching for a Serving Cell while a Random Access procedure associated with that Serving Cell is ongoing in the MAC entity, it is up to UE implementation whether to switch BWP or ignore the PDCCH for BWP switching” on page 2, section 5.15);
initiating, by the terminal, a third random access based on the first configuration information (“if the MAC entity decides to perform BWP switching, the MAC entity shall stop the ongoing Random Access procedure and initiate a Random Access procedure after performing the BWP switching” on page 2, section 5.15); and
performing, by the terminal, BWP switching based on the first configuration information and initiating, by the terminal, a random access on the switched-to BWP (“Proposal 1: Rel-15 NR should allow running concurrently a Random Access procedure initiated on a FDD SCell and a DL BWP switch on this SCell.” On page 2, section 2; see also Fig. 1).
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Mattam’s method performed by the UE on a secondary cell group (SCG) activation and deactivation, to include CATT’s BWP switching method, in order to determine whether it is necessary to interrupt/postpone random access procedure after the BWP switch or not (CATT [Discussion]). Thus, a person of ordinary skill would have appreciated the ability to incorporate CATT’s BWP switching method into Mattam’s method performed by the UE on a secondary cell group (SCG) activation and deactivation since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 17 (Currently Amended)
The terminal according to claim 10, wherein during the process of performing the first random access on the PSCell of the SCG, in a case that the terminal receives the first configuration information, after the terminal stops performing the first random access, the program or instructions are executed by the processor to implement at least one of the following steps of:
performing BWP switching based on the first configuration information;
initiating a third random access based on the first configuration information; and
performing BWP switching based on the first configuration information and initiating, by the terminal, a random access on the switched-to BWP;
wherein the first configuration information is used for triggering BWP switching and/or a third random access.
The scope and subject matter of apparatus claim 17 is drawn to the apparatus of using the corresponding method claimed in claim 8. Therefore apparatus claim 17 corresponds to method claim 8 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 8 rejection above.
Claims 3 and 12 and are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mattam, in view of Vivo, and further in view of Zhang et al. US Pub 2021/0051767 (hereinafter “Zhang”).
Regarding claim 3 (Currently Amended)
Mattam previously discloses the method according to claim 1, the method further comprises:
Mattam further discloses during the process of performing the first random access on the PSCell of the SCG, in a case that the terminal initiates the second random access (“restricting initiation of Random Access Channel (RACH) process when a need of a Primary Secondary Cell (PSCell) or SCG to be in one of an activation state or a deactivation state.” [0306]), the terminal stops performing the first random access (“the implementation of the ALT2 includes block the triggering of the RACH procedure to the target cell. That is, RACH procedure is not performed on target cell.” [0307] and furthermore “At operation 511, the method 500 includes suspending the transmission and the reception over the SCG for the DRBs. Further, an uplink data processing may not be prohibited during SCG deactivation e.g., for acknowledged mode (AM) DRBs, even though the transmission is suspended during SCG deactivation.” [0068]);
wherein the during the process of performing the first random access on the PSCell of the SCG, in a case that the terminal initiates the second random access, the terminal stops performing the first random access (“restricting initiation of Random Access Channel (RACH) process when a need of a Primary Secondary Cell (PSCell) or SCG to be in one of an activation state or a deactivation state.” [0306]) comprising:
the first random access is triggered by uplink data arrival at the SCG when the SCG is in deactivated state (“Further, uplink data processing may not be prohibited during SCG deactivation e.g., for acknowledged mode (AM) DRBs, even though transmission is suspended during SCG deactivation” [0079]); and
the first random access is triggered by beam failure recovery (BFR) (“continuing monitoring for detection of a beam failure in cells in the SCG, and triggering a beam failure recovery (BFR) process based on a detection of the beam failure associated with a secondary cell (SCell) or initiate a random access channel (RACH) process based on a detection of the beam failure associated with a primary secondary cell (PSCell), or suspending MAC configurations and stop the monitoring for the detection of the beam failure in cells in the SCG.” [Claim 6 text]).
Mattam does not specifically teach stopping, by the terminal, performing the first random access in a case that a second condition is satisfied, if the second random access is triggered by a conditional primary secondary cell change (CPC) being executed ; wherein the second condition comprises at least one of the following: the first random access is triggered by uplink data arrival at the SCG and the SCG being not uplink synchronized when the SCG is in deactivated state.
the first random access is triggered by uplink data arrival at the SCG and the terminal having no uplink resource for scheduling request SR transmission when the SCG is in deactivated state;
In an analogous art, Vivo discloses stopping, by the terminal (i.e. “UE”), performing the first random access in a case that a second condition is satisfied (“satisfies the corresponding CPC execution condition”), if the second random access is triggered by a conditional primary secondary cell change CPC being executed (“If at least one CPC candidate PSCell satisfies the corresponding CPC execution condition, the UE detaches from the source PSCell, applies the stored corresponding configuration for that selected candidate PSCell and synchronizes to that candidate PSCell. The UE completes the CPC execution procedure by sending an RRCReconfigurationComplete message to the new PSCell.” On pages 5-6, section 2.7); wherein
the second condition comprises at least one of the following:
the first random access is triggered by uplink data arrival at the SCG and the SCG being not uplink synchronized when the SCG is in deactivated state (“When SCG is deactivated, all transmission on the DRBs, SRB3 and the SCG leg of the split bearer should be suspended. For the split bearer, the transmission path in downlink is selected by the network. For uplink, if the primary path is configured at SCG leg before the SCG is switched to deactivated, then the UE shall switch its primary path from SCG leg to MCG leg automatically. And upon the SCG is activated, the UE can transition the path back to SCG automatically.” On page 4, section 2.4);
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Mattam’s method performed by the UE on a secondary cell group (SCG) activation and deactivation, to include Vivo’s method for determining UE behavior when SCG is deactivated, in order to maximize resource efficiency (Vivo [Introduction]).
Mattam and Vivo do not specifically teach the second condition comprises at least one of the following: the first random access is triggered by uplink data arrival at the SCG and the terminal having no uplink resource for scheduling request SR transmission when the SCG is in deactivated state.
In an analogous art, Zhang discloses the first random access is triggered by uplink data arrival at the SCG and the terminal having no uplink resource for scheduling request SR transmission when the SCG is in deactivated state (“in the deactivated state, UE is not required to perform the following operations on the primary cell (PCell) of the SCG: monitor Physical Downlink Control Channel (PDCCH); transmit SRS or CSI report; perform RLM; transmit scheduling request (SR);” [0194] and furthermore “If, in the SCG deactivated state, the UE determines that an amount of uplink data available for transmission to the SN is greater than an amount threshold, the UE may activate the SCG directly, e.g., by transmitting a scheduling request to the SN. In response to receiving a grant of uplink resources from the SN, the UE may transmit (or start transmitting) the uplink data to the SN. The scheduling request and uplink data transmission as indicated at 1422.” [0230];
Before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Mattam’s method performed by the UE on a secondary cell group (SCG) activation and deactivation, as modified by Vivo, to include Zhang’s method performed by the UE on a secondary cell group (SCG) activation and deactivation, in order to save power when transitioning to a mode of reduced activity (e.g., processing and/or RF activity) relative to the secondary cell group (SCG) (Zhang [Abstract]). Thus, a person of ordinary skill would have appreciated the ability to incorporate Zhang’s method performed by the UE on a secondary cell group (SCG) activation and deactivation into Mattam’s method performed by the UE on a secondary cell group (SCG) activation and deactivation since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Regarding claim 12 (Currently Amended)
The terminal according to claim 10, wherein during the process of performing the first random access on the PSCell of the SCG, in a case that the terminal initiates the second random access, the terminal stops performing the first random access, the program or instructions are executed by the processor to implement steps of:
stopping performing the first random access in a case that a second condition is satisfied, if the second random access is triggered by a conditional primary secondary cell change (CPC) being executed; wherein
the second condition comprises at least one of the following:
the first random access is triggered by uplink data arrival at the SCG when the SCG is in deactivated state;
the first random access is triggered by uplink data arrival at the SCG and the SCG being not uplink synchronized when the SCG is in deactivated state;
the first random access is triggered by uplink data arrival at the SCG and the terminal having no uplink resource for scheduling request SR transmission when the SCG is in deactivated state; and
the first random access is triggered by beam failure recovery (BFR).
The scope and subject matter of apparatus claim 12 is drawn to the apparatus of using the corresponding method claimed in claim 3. Therefore apparatus claim 12 corresponds to method claim 3 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used in claim 3 rejection above.
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 CHUONG M NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-8184. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:00am - 6:30pm.
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, Derrick Ferris can be reached at 571-272-3123. 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.
/CHUONG M NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2411
Prosecution Insights