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 .
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.
Claims 33-52 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 33 recites “a first timer” in line 7. It is unclear whether or not it is referring to “a plurality of timers” in line 5. For the purpose of examination, examiner will interpret the claim as best understood.
Claim 33 recites “a second timer” in line 9. It is unclear whether or not it is referring to “a plurality of timers” in line 5. For the purpose of examination, examiner will interpret the claim as best understood.
Claim 34 recites “one frequency band” in line 4. It is unclear whether or not it is referring to “one frequency band” in line 2. For the purpose of examination, examiner will interpret the claim as best understood.
Claim 34 recites “a third timer” in line 5. It is unclear whether or not it is referring to “a plurality of timers” in claim 33, line 5. For the purpose of examination, examiner will interpret the claim as best understood.
Claim 36 recites “the timers” in line 1. It is unclear whether or not it is referring to a) “a plurality of timers” or b) “a first timer and a second timer”. For the purpose of examination, examiner will interpret the claim as best understood.
Claim 39 recites “the timers” in line 1. It is unclear whether or not it is referring to a) “a plurality of timers” or b) “a first timer and a second timer”. For the purpose of examination, examiner will interpret the claim as best understood.
Claim 41 recites “a first timer” in line 9. It is unclear whether or not it is referring to “a plurality of timers” in line 6. For the purpose of examination, examiner will interpret the claim as best understood.
Claim 41 recites “a second timer” in line 11. It is unclear whether or not it is referring to “a plurality of timers” in line 6. For the purpose of examination, examiner will interpret the claim as best understood.
Claim 42 recites “one frequency band” in lines 4-5. It is unclear whether or not it is referring to “one frequency band” in line 2. For the purpose of examination, examiner will interpret the claim as best understood.
Claim 42 recites “a third timer” in line 5. It is unclear whether or not it is referring to “a plurality of timers” in claim 41, line 6. For the purpose of examination, examiner will interpret the claim as best understood.
Claim 44 recites “the timers” in lines 1-2. It is unclear whether or not it is referring to a) “a plurality of timers” or b) “a first timer and a second timer”. For the purpose of examination, examiner will interpret the claim as best understood.
Claim 46 recites “the timers” in lines 1-2. It is unclear whether or not it is referring to a) “a plurality of timers” or b) “a first timer and a second timer”. For the purpose of examination, examiner will interpret the claim as best understood.
Claim 47 recites “a first timer” in line 6. It is unclear whether or not it is referring to “a plurality of timers” in line 4. For the purpose of examination, examiner will interpret the claim as best understood.
Claim 47 recites “a second timer” in lines 8-9. It is unclear whether or not it is referring to “a plurality of timers” in line 4. For the purpose of examination, examiner will interpret the claim as best understood.
Claim 49 recites “one frequency band” in lines 5-6. It is unclear whether or not it is referring to “one frequency band” in line 2. For the purpose of examination, examiner will interpret the claim as best understood.
Claim 49 recites “a third timer” in line 6. It is unclear whether or not it is referring to “a plurality of timers” in claim 47, line 4. For the purpose of examination, examiner will interpret the claim as best understood.
Claim 50 recites “a first timer” in line 8. It is unclear whether or not it is referring to “a plurality of timers” in line 5. For the purpose of examination, examiner will interpret the claim as best understood.
Claim 50 recites “a second timer” in lines 10-11. It is unclear whether or not it is referring to “a plurality of timers” in line 5. For the purpose of examination, examiner will interpret the claim as best understood.
Claim 52 recites “one frequency band” in line 6. It is unclear whether or not it is referring to “one frequency band” in line 2. For the purpose of examination, examiner will interpret the claim as best understood.
Claim 52 recites “a third timer” in lines 6-7. It is unclear whether or not it is referring to “a plurality of timers” in claim 50, line 5. For the purpose of examination, examiner will interpret the claim as best understood.
Claims 35, 37-38, 40, 43, 45, 48, and 51 are also rejected since they are depended on the rejected claims set forth above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(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.
Claims 33-36, 39, 41-44, and 46 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ha et al. (US 2010/0020725 A1, hereinafter “Ha”).
Regarding claims 33 and 41, Ha discloses a terminal device [see Fig. 2A, para. 36; mobile terminal 100] comprising:
processing circuitry and a memory [see Fig. 2A, para. 36-44; control unit 160 and storage unit 170], the memory containing instructions executable by the processing circuitry whereby the terminal device is configured to [see Fig. 2A, para. 36-44; the storage unit containing instructions executable by the control unit whereby the mobile terminal is configured to]:
connect to a Visited Public Land Mobile Network (VPLMN) [see Fig. 1, para. 30, Fig. 5, step S501, para. 63; connect to a visited network (base station 20)]; and
while connected to the VPLMN, search for a Home Public Land Mobile Network (HPLMN) each time any of a plurality of timers expires [see Fig. 2C, 3, para. 31, 44, 48; while connected to the visited network, search for a home network (base station 10) each time any of a plurality of timers expires];
wherein to search for the HPLMN [see Fig. 5, para. 63-65; to search for the home network (HPLMN)], the terminal device is configured to:
search across a plurality of frequency bands supported by the terminal device in response to a first timer expiring [see Fig. 3 below, para. 54, Fig. 5, step S502, para. 63; full scan is started after a first timer (2 minutes after roaming) expires]; and
search across a subset of the plurality of frequency bands supported by the terminal device in response to a second timer expiring [see Fig. 3 below, Fig. 5, step S511, para. 64; scan the frequencies listed in the ACQ DB in response to a second timer (T1) expires. Note the second timer = T1 controls the partial/subset scan].
PNG
media_image1.png
430
844
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 34 and 42, Ha discloses wherein: the subset of the plurality of frequency bands comprises more than one frequency band [see Fig. 3, 5, para. 54, 64; the frequencies listed in the ACQ DB comprises more than one frequency band]; and to search for the HPLMN, the terminal device is further configured to search across one frequency band supported by the terminal device in response to a third timer expiring [see Fig. 3 below, Fig. 5, step S509, para. 65; scan all frequencies around the mobile terminal in response to a third timer (T2) expires].
PNG
media_image2.png
431
832
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 35 and 43, Ha discloses wherein to search across the one frequency band supported by the terminal device in response to the third timer expiring, the terminal device is configured to search a last known frequency band supported by the HPLMN [see para. 31; the mobile terminal is configured to scan a last known frequency band supported by the home network (an ACQ DB stored in the mobile terminal or a Higher Priority PLMN List stored in a SIM card)].
Regarding claims 36 and 44, Ha discloses adjust one or more of the timers based on an extent to which the terminal device is mobile [see para. 7; timers are set to a short timeout value based on an extent to which the mobile terminal is moving].
Regarding claims 39 and 46, Ha discloses adjust one or more of the timers based on distance from the terminal device to a geographic location [see para. 7, 63; timers are set to a short timeout value based on the proximity of the HPLMN].
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 47-52 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ha in view of Rune et al. (US 2019/0045424 A1, hereinafter “Rune”).
Regarding claims 47 and 50, Ha discloses a base station [see Fig. 1, para. 29-32; a base station]:
whereby the base station is configured to configure a terminal device to search for a Home Public Land Mobile Network (HPLMN) each time any of a plurality of timers expires [see Fig. 2C, 3, para. 31, 44, 48; mobile terminal 100 is configured to search for a home network (base station 10) each time any of a plurality of timers expires], wherein to configure the terminal device the base station is configured to:
configure the terminal device to search across a plurality of frequency bands supported by the terminal device in response to a first timer expiring [see Fig. 3 below, para. 54, Fig. 5, step S502, para. 63; mobile terminal 100 is configured to full scan after a first timer (2 minutes after roaming) expires]; and
configure the terminal device to search across a subset of the plurality of frequency bands supported by the terminal device in response to a second timer expiring [see Fig. 3 below, Fig. 5, step S511, para. 64; mobile terminal 100 is configured to scan the frequencies listed in the ACQ DB in response to a second timer (T1) expires. Note the second timer = T1 controls the partial/subset scan].
PNG
media_image1.png
430
844
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Ha does not explicitly disclose the base station “comprising: processing circuitry and a memory, the memory containing instructions executable by the processing circuitry”.
However, Rune teaches a base station [see Fig. 11, para. 111-115; access node 1100] comprising: processing circuitry and a memory, the memory containing instructions executable by the processing circuitry [see Fig. 11, para. 111-115; processor 1150 and memory 1160, the memory containing instructions executable by the processor], whereby the base station is configured to configure a terminal device to search across a plurality of frequency bands in response to a plurality of time intervals [see Fig. 4-7, para. 8-13; the access node is configured to configure a UE to scan multiple carrier frequencies in response to a plurality timing information].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide “a base station comprising: processing circuitry and a memory, the memory containing instructions executable by the processing circuitry, whereby the base station is configured to configure a terminal device to search across a plurality of frequency bands in response to a plurality of time intervals”, as taught by Rune, into the system of Ha so that it would provide controlling access to a cellular network [see Rune, para. 86].
Regarding claims 48 and 51, Ha discloses wherein to configure the terminal device to search for the HPLMN each time any of the plurality of timers expires, the base station is configured to configure the terminal device to search for the HPLMN while the terminal device is connected to a Visited Public Land Mobile Network (VPLMN) [see Fig. 2C, 3, para. 31, 44, 48; while the mobile terminal is connected to the visited network, search for a home network (base station 10) each time any of a plurality of timers expires].
Regarding claims 49 and 52, Ha discloses wherein: the subset of the plurality of frequency bands comprises more than one frequency band [see Fig. 3, 5, para. 54, 64; the frequencies listed in the ACQ DB comprises more than one frequency band]; and to configure the terminal device to search for the HPLMN each time any of the plurality of timers expires, the base station is configured to configure the terminal device to search across one frequency band supported by the terminal device in response to a third timer expiring [see Fig. 3 below, Fig. 5, step S509, para. 65; scan all frequencies around the mobile terminal in response to a third timer (T2) expires].
PNG
media_image2.png
431
832
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Swaminathan et al. (US 2015/0056985 A1), see para. 7-11, discloses implementation of a manual scan for a public land mobile network (PLMN) in a wireless communication system.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN T LE whose telephone number is (571)270-5615. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9AM-6PM.
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, IAN MOORE can be reached on 571-272-3085. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/BRIAN T LE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2469