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
This is in reply to an amendment filed on 02/19/2026. Status of claims are:
** Claims 23-30, 32-39, and 41-42 are pending.
** Claims 23, 33, and 42 are amended
** Claims 31 and 40 are cancelled.
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments filed in the amendment dated 02/19/2026, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The reasons are set forth below.
The Applicant argues in mid-page 1 of arguments:
The claims now expressly define that the actual cell status is “known status” and the presumed or earlier indicated cell status is “unknown status” – not an activated or deactivated status. The cell status refers to a known status or an unknown status. In particular, if the first device may detect or identify the deactivated cell directly, the cell status of the deactivated cell would be regarded as a known status; otherwise, it would be regarded as an unknown status.
In response, the examiner respectfully submits:
Examiner respectfully indicates that Zhou reference teaches the same concept wherein UE knows timing information being known or being unknown and performs activation accordingly. Specifically, Zhou in para[0016] and Fig 11, #1106 and #1108, teaches UE performing a first secondary cell activation within first time period based on the timing information being known, or performing a second secondary cell activation within a second time period based on the timing information being unknown.
The Applicant argues in top-page 3 of arguments:
Zhou does not teach or suggest this alignment mechanism where the UE detects a discrepancy between an actual known status and a presumed unknown status and indicates the actual status to be network based on that detection to correct a misalignment. Zhou’s UE merely determines known/unknown timing status for its own activation delay calculation, not to inform the network of a status discrepancy.
In response, the examiner respectfully submits:
Examiner respectfully indicates that Applicant is arguing somethings that are not in the claims. In response to applicants’ argument that Zhou references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., alignment mechanism reported by UE to the network based on discrepancy detected by UE) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Zhou expressly discloses determining secondary cell activation based on timing information being known or unknown in paragraph 0016, as cited in the rejection. This is all that the claims expressly require. Applicant’s all other arguments are based on above already answered core arguments, that are repeated for other claims.
Information Disclosure Statement PTO-1449
The Information Disclosure Statement submitted by applicant on 06/09/2026 has been considered. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Form PTO-1449 signed and attached hereto.
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.
Claim(s) 23-30, 33-39, and 42 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 20220182951 A1 to Zhou et al, (hereinafter Zhou).
Claim 23. A first device (i.e., UE), comprising: at least one processor; and at least one memory including computer program codes; wherein the at least one memory and the computer program codes are configured to, with the at least one processor, cause the first device to:
receive an activation command (i.e., SCell activation command) for a deactivated cell (i.e., deactivated SCell) from a second device (i.e., a network node);
(Zhou: See para[0041]-[0043] “SCell activation delay procedure” for a “deactivated SCell of a UE”, wherein the UE receives “SCell activation command” from a network node (i.e., a second device) for activating its deactivated SCell)
in response to receiving the activation command, (i.e., UE receiving SCell activation command) determine an actual cell status of the deactivated cell; (i.e., UE determines/detects SCell is deactivated) wherein the actual cell status is known and the presumed or earlier indicated cell status is unknown; (Zhou: See para[0016], Fig 11, #1106 and #1108, for UE performing a first secondary cell activation within first time period based on the timing information being known, or performing a second secondary cell activation within a second time period based on the timing information being unknown) detect that the actual cell status of the deactivated cell (i.e., actual status being deactivated which is different than before) is different from a presumed or earlier indicated cell status of the deactivated cell; (i.e., earlier, the UE reported to network node, status of the same deactivated SCell as being active/activated) based on the detecting, indicate the actual cell status to the second device (i.e., send CSI report indicating SCell as being activated/deactivated etc.).
(Zhou: see Fig. 11, and para[0041]-[0043], UE is able to activate its deactivated SCell within a time period, upon receiving “SCell activation command” from network node, and transmitting “valid CSI report” and include in the CSI report information related to the SCell activation. Before UE receives the “SCell activation command”, the UE has sent a measurement report, for the same SCell, to the network node, indicating that “the SCell is active” (i.e., earlier indicated cell status that was reported indicating SCell was active/activated) but now UE knows it is deactivated as UE receives SCell activation command for the SCell.)
Claim 24. The first device of claim 23, wherein the first device (i.e., UE) is further caused to determine the actual cell status (i.e., SCell activated via valid CSI sent) of the deactivated cell if a first condition for cell status determination of the deactivated cell is satisfied, wherein the first condition for cell status determination of the deactivated cell includes at least one of:
reception of a request for reporting the cell status of the deactivated cell from the second device;
obtainment of a measurement for the deactivated cell at the first device (i.e., UE);
(Zhou: See para[0042]-[00043] before reception of the “SCell activation command”, the UE prepares and sends a valid measurement report for the deactivated SCell that is being activated)
expiration of a timer configured at the first device for cell status determination; or initiation of a data transmission between the first device and the second device.
Claim 25. The first device of claim 23, wherein the first device is caused to determine the actual cell status of the deactivated cell based on one or more measurements of the deactivated cell available at the first device (i.e., UE).
(Zhou: See para[0042]-[00043] before reception of the “SCell activation command”, the UE has sent a valid measurement report for the deactivated SCell that is being activated)
Claim 26. The first device of claim 23, wherein the first device (i.e., UE) is further caused to indicate the actual cell status (i.e., SCell activated via CSI sent) to the second device (i.e., network node) if a second condition for cell status indication is satisfied, wherein the second condition for cell status indication includes at least one of:
reception of the activation command for the deactivated cell from the second device (i.e., network node);
(Zhou: See para[0041]-[0043] “SCell activation procedure” for a “deactivated SCell of UE”, wherein the UE receives “SCell activation command” from a network node for activating its deactivated SCell)
reception of a request for reporting the cell status of the deactivated cell from the second device; expiration of a timer configured at the first device for cell status indication; or initiation of a data transmission between the first device and the second device.
Claim 27. The first device of claim 23, wherein: the presumed cell status is determined based on one or more measurement reports of the deactivated cell within a time period before reception of the activation command for the deactivated cell from the second device,
(Zhou: see Fig. 11, and para[0041]-[0043], UE is able to activates its deactivated SCell within a time period, upon receiving SCell activation command” and transmitting “valid CSI report” and apply actions related to the activation command for the SCell that is activated in the CSI report. Before UE receives “SCell activation command”, the UE sends a measurement report for the same SCell to the network node, indicating that “the SCell is active” (i.e., earlier indicated cell status that was reported indicated SCell was active/activated))
or
the presumed cell status is determined without considering one or more measurements of the deactivated cell available at the first device.
Claim 28. The first device of claim 23, wherein detection that the actual cell status of the deactivated cell is different from the presumed or earlier indicated cell status of the deactivated cell is based on at least one of:
whether a predetermined time period starting from reporting a measurement report has expired; whether a latest measurement report is still valid;
whether the deactivated cell is detectable;
(Zhou: see Fig. 11, and para[0041]-[0043], UE is able to activates its deactivated SCell within a time period, upon receiving SCell activation command” and transmitting “valid CSI report” and apply actions related to the activation command for the SCell that is activated in the CSI report. Before UE receives “SCell activation command”, the UE sends a measurement report for the same SCell to the network node, indicating that “the SCell is active” (i.e., earlier indicated cell status that was reported indicated SCell was active/activated))
or
whether the deactivated cell is co-located with another activated or known cell.
Claim 29. The first device of claim 23, wherein the at least one memory and the computer program code are configured to, with the at least one processor, further cause the first device to: activate the deactivated cell based on the indicated actual cell status and the activation command.
(Zhou: See para[0004] for UE receives a command to activate a secondary cell SCell and activates the SCell within a firs time period and communicating over wireless network using the activated secondary cell (SCell))
Claim 31. The first device of claim 23, wherein the actual cell status is known (i.e., known timing information of SCell) and the presumed or earlier indicated cell status is unknown (i.e., unknown timing information of SCell)
(Zhou: See Fig 11, #1106 and #1108, and para[0063] for UE performing SCell activation within a first timing period, if timing information of SCell is known, and performs SCell activation within a second time period if timing information of SCell is unknown.)
Claim 33. A method for a first device, comprising:
receiving an activation command (i.e., SCell activation command) for a deactivated cell (i.e., deactivated SCell) from a second device (i.e., a network node);;
in response to receiving the activation command, (i.e., SCell activation command) determining an actual cell status of the deactivated cell; (i.e., UE determines/detects SCell is deactivated) detecting that the actual cell status of the deactivated cell (i.e., actual status being deactivated) is different from a presumed or earlier indicated cell status of the deactivated cell; (i.e., earlier, the UE reported the same deactivated SCell as being active/activated) based on the detecting, (i.e., if activated and/or deactivated) indicating the actual cell status to the second device. (i.e., send CSI report i indicating SCell as activated/deactivated etc.).
(Zhou: see Fig. 11, and para[0041]-[0043], UE is able to activates its deactivated SCell within a time period, upon receiving SCell activation command” and transmitting “valid CSI report” and apply actions related to the activation command for the SCell that is activated in the CSI report. Before UE receives “SCell activation command”, the UE sends a measurement report for the same SCell to the network node, indicating that “the SCell is active” (i.e., earlier indicated cell status that was reported indicated SCell was active/activated))
Claim 34. The method of claim 33, wherein determining the actual cell status of the deactivated cell comprises determining the actual cell status of the deactivated cell based on one or more measurements of the deactivated cell available at the first device (i.e., UE).
(Zhou: See para[0042]-[00043] before reception of the “SCell activation command”, the UE has sent a valid measurement report for the deactivated SCell that is being activated)
Claim 35. The method of claim 33, wherein indicating the actual cell status to the second device comprises indicating the actual cell status to the second device if a second condition for cell status indication is satisfied, wherein the second condition for cell status indication includes at least one of:
reception of an activation command for the deactivated cell from the second device(i.e., network node);
(Zhou: See para[0041]-[0043] “SCell activation procedure” for a “deactivated SCell of UE”, wherein the UE receives “SCell activation command” from a network node for activating its deactivated SCell)
reception of a request for reporting the cell status of the deactivated cell from the second device; expiration of a timer configured at the first device for cell status indication; or initiation of a data transmission between the first device and the second device.
Claim 36. The method of claim 33, wherein the presumed cell status is determined based on one or more measurement reports of the deactivated cell within a time period before reception of the activation command for the deactivated cell from the second device,
(Zhou: see Fig. 11, and para[0041]-[0043], UE is able to activates its deactivated SCell within a time period, upon receiving SCell activation command” and transmitting “valid CSI report” and apply actions related to the activation command for the SCell that is activated in the CSI report. Before UE receives “SCell activation command”, the UE sends a measurement report for the same SCell to the network node, indicating that “the SCell is active” (i.e., earlier indicated cell status that was reported indicated SCell was active/activated))
or
the presumed cell status is determined without considering one or more measurements of the deactivated cell available at the first device.
Claim 37. The method of claim 33, wherein detection that the actual cell status of the deactivated cell is different from the presumed or earlier indicated cell status of the deactivated cell is based on at least one of:
whether a predetermined time period starting from reporting a measurement report has expired; whether a latest measurement report is still valid;
whether the deactivated cell is detectable;
(Zhou: see Fig. 11, and para[0041]-[0043], UE is able to activates its deactivated SCell within a time period, upon receiving SCell activation command” and transmitting “valid CSI report” and apply actions related to the activation command for the SCell that is activated in the CSI report. Before UE receives “SCell activation command”, the UE sends a measurement report for the same SCell to the network node, indicating that “the SCell is active” (i.e., earlier indicated cell status that was reported indicated SCell was active/activated))
or
whether the deactivated cell is co-located with another activated or known cell.
Claim 38. The method of claim 33, further comprising: activating the deactivated cell based on the indicated actual cell status and the activation command.
(Zhou: See para[0041]-[0043] “SCell activation delay procedure” for a “deactivated SCell of UE”, wherein the UE receives “SCell activation command” from a network node for activating its deactivated SCell. See para[0051] the “SCell activation delay requirement” of 24 ms for know SCell including 4 ms for MAC CE decoding time and 20 ms for AGC tracking and time tracking)
Claim 39. The method of claim 38, wherein activating the deactivated cell comprises: determining an activation delay requirement for activating the deactivated cell based on the indicated actual cell status, and completing activation of the deactivated cell within the activation delay requirement.
(Zhou: See para[0041]-[0043] “SCell activation delay procedure” for a “deactivated SCell of UE”, wherein the UE receives “SCell activation command” from a network node for activating its deactivated SCell. See para[0051] the “SCell activation delay requirement” of 24 ms for know SCell including 4 ms for MAC CE decoding time and 20 ms for AGC tracking and time tracking)
Claim 42. A non-transitory computer readable medium comprising program instructions for causing a first device to perform a method comprising:
receiving an activation command (i.e., SCell activation command) for a deactivated cell (i.e., deactivated SCell) from a second device (i.e., a network node);
(Zhou: See para[0041]-[0043] “SCell activation delay procedure” for a “deactivated SCell of a UE”, wherein the UE receives “SCell activation command” from a network node (i.e., a second device) for activating its deactivated SCell)
in response to receiving the activation command (i.e., SCell activation command), determining an actual cell status of the deactivated cell; (i.e., UE determines/detects SCell is deactivated) detecting that the actual cell status of the deactivated cell (i.e., actual status being deactivated) is different from a presumed or earlier indicated cell status of the deactivated cell; (i.e., earlier, the UE reported the same deactivated SCell as being active/activated) based on the detecting, (i.e., if activated and/or deactivated) indicating the actual cell status to the second device. (i.e., send CSI report indicating SCell as activated/deactivated etc.).
(Zhou: see Fig. 11, and para[0041]-[0043], UE is able to activates its deactivated SCell within a time period, upon receiving SCell activation command” and transmitting “valid CSI report” and apply actions related to the activation command for the SCell that is activated in the CSI report. Before UE receives “SCell activation command”, the UE sends a measurement report for the same SCell to the network node, indicating that “the SCell is active” (i.e., earlier indicated cell status that was reported indicated SCell was active/activated))
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. 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.
Claims 32 and 41 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20220182951 A1 to Zhou et al., (hereinafter Zhou) in view of US 20220353938 A1 to Siomina et al., (hereinafter Siomina).
Claim 32. Zhou teaches the first device of claim 23, as well as indicating in CSI report information that it sends to network node, about SCell status being as activated/deactivated (See para[0041]-[0043] ) but it does not explicitly teach or suggest, UE being able to stop transmitting CSI report that includes SCell status information in it, or abandoning activation of SCell, for example, under a condition or a rule that can be defined for the UE, such as if cell status has not changed, as understood alternatively by the applied claim language of:
wherein the first device is caused to: detect that the actual cell status of the deactivated cell (i.e., UE determines/detects SCell is deactivated) is not different from a presumed or earlier indicated cell status of the deactivated cell; (i.e., earlier, the UE reported the same deactivated SCell also as being deactivated) wherein the actual cell status is known and the presumed or earlier indicated cell status is unknown; (Zhou: (See para[0016], Fig 11, #1106 and #1108, for performing a first secondary cell activation within first time period based on the timing information being known, or performing a second secondary cell activation within a second time period based on the timing information being unknown) and based on the detecting, refrain from indicating the actual cell status to the second device.
However, in a similar field, Siomina, in para[0189] teaches that a rule can be pre-defined by a network node, or as a function of one or more defined parameters, wherein a UE can be made to stop transmitting CSI report and even abandon the SCell activation procedure altogether.
Zhou teaches SCell activation delay techniques, wherein UE is able to activate its deactivated SCell within a time period, upon receiving “SCell activation command” from network node, and transmitting “valid CSI report” and apply actions in the CSI report related to the SCell activation. (Zhou: see Fig. 11, and para[0041]-[0043])
Siomina teaches SCell activation delay techniques, wherein rules that can be defined for a UE to stop transmitting CSI reports and abandoning SCell activation procedures (Siomina: See para[0189])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing, to have included abandoning SCell activation procedure and stopping the CSI report transmissions, as taught by Siomina, with the teachings of Zhou, in order to benefit from enhancement of having a network node, that can pre-define a rule as a function of one or more defined parameters, wherein a UE can be made to stop transmitting CSI report and even abandon the SCell activation procedure under certain pre-defined conditions. (Siomina: See para[0189])
Claim 41. Zhou teaches the method of claim 33, as well as indicating in CSI report information that it sends to network node, about SCell status being as activated/deactivated (See para[0041]-[0043] ) but it does not explicitly teach or suggest, UE being able to stop transmitting CSI report that includes SCell status information in it, or abandoning activation of SCell, for example, under a condition or a rule that can be defined for the UE, such as if cell status has not changed, as understood alternatively by the applied claim language of:
further comprising: detecting that the actual cell status of the deactivated cell (i.e., UE determines/detects SCell is deactivated) is not different from a presumed or earlier indicated cell status of the deactivated cell (i.e., earlier, the UE reported the same deactivated SCell also as being deactivated); and based on the detecting, refraining from indicating the actual cell status to the second device.
However, in a similar field, Siomina, in para[0189] teaches that a rule can be pre-defined by a network node, or as a function of one or more defined parameters, wherein a UE can be made to stop transmitting CSI report and even abandon the SCell activation procedure altogether.
Zhou teaches SCell activation delay techniques, wherein UE is able to activate its deactivated SCell within a time period, upon receiving “SCell activation command” from network node, and transmitting “valid CSI report” and apply actions in the CSI report related to the SCell activation. (Zhou: see Fig. 11, and para[0041]-[0043])
Siomina teaches SCell activation delay techniques, wherein rules that can be defined for a UE to stop transmitting CSI reports and abandoning SCell activation procedures (Siomina: See para[0189])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing, to have included abandoning SCell activation procedure and stopping the CSI report transmissions, as taught by Siomina, with the teachings of Zhou, in order to benefit from enhancement of having a network node, that can pre-define a rule as a function of one or more defined parameters, wherein a UE can be made to stop transmitting CSI report and even abandon the SCell activation procedure under certain pre-defined conditions. (Siomina: See para[0189])
Conclusion
8. 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAJID ESMAEILIAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7830. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Chirag Shah can be reached on 571-272-3144. 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.
/M. E./
Examiner, Art Unit 2477
/GREGORY B SEFCHECK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2477
Prosecution Insights