DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in reply communication filed on 06/09/2026.
Claims 1-2, 6-15, and 19-26 are pending.
Claims 3-5, 16-18, and 27-40 are cancelled.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Argument
Applicant’s arguments, see page 13, filled on 06/09/2026, with respect to Claim Objection of claims 14 and 25 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The Claim Objection has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 18-19, filled on 06/09/2026 with respect to 35 U.S.C. §102(a)(1) rejection of claims 1-2, 10, 12, 14-15, 23, and 25 have been fully 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.
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 18-19, filled on 06/09/2026 with respect to 35 U.S.C. §103 rejection of claims 6, 9, 13, 19, 22, and 26 have been fully considered but are not persuasive. Since independent claims 12, 14, and 25 contain the same or corresponding technical features as claim 1, independent claims 12, 14, and 25, as well as their dependent claims 13, 15, 19-22, 24, and 26 are not patentable. Thus, the rejection of 35 U.S.C. §103 rejection of these claims is sustained.
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 1-2, 6-9, 11-15, 19-22, and 24-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the amended limitations “…the target information comprises one or more of the following:
a target buffer status report (BSR); or
target radio resource control (RRC) signaling,
wherein in case that the target information comprises…satisfies any one of the following:…
or in case that the MAC subheader comprises two reserved bits, the two reserved bits representing the SCG index, wherein the SCG index is used for indicating the target BSR is the BSRofwhich SCG;
wherein a format for the target BSR comprises any one of a short BSR, a long BSR, a shorttruncated BSR, a long truncated BSR or a predetermined BSR; or,
wherein in case that the target information comprises the target RRC signaling, the target RRC signaling comprises indication information of SCG having to-be-transmitted data.”.
Firstly, the claim recited that the target information comprises either BSR or RRC signaling. It is unclear whether the “wherein in case that the target information comprises……satisfies any one of the following:” is belong to target buffer status report (BSR) or target radio resource control (RRC) signaling.
Secondly, the features “wherein a format for the target BSR comprises…or, wherein in case that the target information comprises … to-be-transmitted data.” It is unclear if the semicolon “;” before “wherein a format…” was intended to indicate further options of “the target information comprises”. If the features not intended to further the options, “the target BSR” and “the target RRC signaling” are missing insufficient antecedent basis in the claim.
For the purpose of examination, examiner will interpret the claims as best understood.
Independent claims 12, 14, and 25 have been amended with the same format as claim 1. Accordingly, independent claims 12, 14, and 25 are rejected in the same manner.
All dependent claims are also rejected since they are depended to their rejected independent claims 12, 14, and 25.
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.
Claims 1-2, 10, 12, 14-15, 23, and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by TEYEB et al. (WO 2022/024092).
Regarding claim 1, TEYEB discloses a method for transmitting for transmitting buffer data status information of a secondary cell group (SCG) [see Fig. 17, ¶ 152; a method for], comprising:
determining that the SCG is in a deactivated state [see Fig. 17, ¶ 155; block 1701, monitors conditions and events for indicating that an operating mode of the second cell group (SCG), wherein the operating mode is deactivated SCG];
transmitting target information to a network device by a master cell group (MCG) [see Fig. 17, ¶ 172; transmitting the indication/(target information) to the network comprises transmitting a UE Assistance Information message], wherein the target information is used for indicating the buffer data status information of the SCG [see ¶ 172; wherein the indication is used for indicating buffer status report (e.g. concerning SCG bearers)];
the target information comprises one or more of the following:
a target buffer status report (BSR) [see Fig. 17, ¶¶ 172-173; the indication/(target information) comprises a target buffer status report (BSR)].
Regarding claim 2, TEYEB discloses the method of claim 1.
TEYEB further discloses wherein in case that the target information comprises the target BSR, any one of the following is further satisfied:
a logical channel ID (LCID) corresponding to the target BSR satisfies: the LCID corresponding to the target BSR uses a reserved codepoint and/or index parameter value [see ¶ 87; a logical channel ID (LCID) corresponding to the target BSR satisfies: the LCID corresponding to the target BSR uses index parameter value], wherein the target BSR is using a predetermined format of a BSR medium access control (MAC) control element (CE) [see ¶ 87; BSR formats are identified by MAC subheaders with LCIDs as specified in Table 6.2.1-2.], wherein the BSR MAC CE comprises one or more of the following: an SCG index: a logical channel group (LCG) bitmap; an LCG ID; the LCID; an LCID bitmap; an LCID index bitmap; an LCID index; LCID bitmap length indication information; LCID index length indication information; buffer data information [see ¶ 88; wherein the BSR MAC CE comprises one or more of the following: an SCG index: a logical channel group (LCG) bitmap; an LCG ID; the LCID].
Regarding claim 10, TEYEB discloses the method of claim 1.
TEYEB further discloses wherein in case that the target information comprises the target RRC signaling, the target RRC signaling comprises indication information of SCG having to-be-transmitted data [see ¶¶ 52-53; wherein in case that the target information comprises the target RRC signaling, the target RRC signaling comprises indication information of SCG having to-be-transmitted data].
Regarding claim 12, TEYEB discloses a method for transmitting for transmitting buffer data status information of a secondary cell group (SCG), comprising:
receiving target information transmitted from a terminal through a master cell group (MCG) [see Fig. 17, ¶ 172; transmitting the indication/(target information) to the network comprises transmitting a UE Assistance Information message] in case that an SCG is in a deactivated state [see Fig. 17, ¶ 155; block 1701, monitors conditions and events for indicating that an operating mode of the second cell group (SCG), wherein the operating mode is deactivated SCG], wherein the target information is used for indicating the buffer data status information of the SCG [see ¶ 172; wherein the indication is used for indicating buffer status report (e.g. concerning SCG bearers)];
the target information comprises one or more of the following:
a target buffer status report (BSR) [see Fig. 17, ¶¶ 172-173; the indication/(target information) comprises a target buffer status report (BSR)].
Regarding claims 14-15 and 23, the claims recite terminal, comprising a processor, a memory storing a computer program, and a transceiver for receiving or transmitting data under a control of the processor [see Fig. 22, ¶ 267; UE 4200 includes processing circuitry 4201 that is operatively coupled to input/output interface 4205, radio frequency (RF) interface 4209, network connection interface 4211, memory 4215 including random access memory (RAM) 4217, read-only memory (ROM) 4219, and storage medium 4221], wherein the computer program, when executed by the processor, causes the terminal to perform the method recited as in claims 1-2 and 10 respectively; therefore, claims 14-15 and 23 rejected along the same rationale that rejected in claims 1-2 and 10 respectively.
Regarding claim 25, the claim recites a terminal, comprising a processor, a memory storing a computer program, and a transceiver for receiving or transmitting data under a control of the processor [see Fig. 21, ¶ 240; network node 4160 includes processing circuitry 4170, device readable medium 4180, interface 4190, auxiliary equipment 4184, power source 4186, power circuitry 4187, and antenna 4162], wherein the computer program, when executed by the processor, causes the terminal to perform the method recited as in claim 12; therefore, claim 25 is rejected along the same rationale that rejected in claim 12.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived 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 6, 9, 13, 19, 22, and 26, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 unpatentable over TEYEB et al. (WO 2022/024092) in view of HONG et al. (US 2019/0268799).
Regarding claim 6, TEYEB discloses the method of claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose wherein in case that the target information comprises the target RRC signaling, the target RRC signaling comprises data radio bearer (DRB) ID information, wherein the DRB ID information is ID information of a DRB having to-be-transmitted data in the SCG and is indicated by a bitmap, wherein the bitmap comprises any one of the following: wherein the RLC bearer only comprises a split bearer of which a primary path is in the SCG in case that the RLC bearer is a split bearer.
However, HONG discloses wherein in case that the target information comprises the target RRC signaling [see ¶ 356; configure/update RRC connection, for example, to configure/modify/release a radio bearer], the target RRC signaling comprises data radio bearer (DRB) ID information [see ¶ 358; radio bearer configuration information may include data radio bearer (DRB) configuration information (e.g. drb-ToAddModList)], wherein the DRB ID information is ID information of a DRB having to-be-transmitted data in the SCG and is indicated by a bitmap [see ¶ 359; SRB configuration information (e.g. srb-ToAddMod) and the DRB configuration information (e.g. drb-ToAddMod) may include PDCP configuration information], wherein the bitmap comprises any one of the following: wherein the RLC bearer only comprises a split bearer of which a primary path is in the SCG in case that the RLC bearer is a split bearer [see ¶ 359; SCG split bearer, or the like has caused more radio bearer types to be defined than the LTE, resulting in radio bearer reconfiguration procedure].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to provide “wherein in case that the target information comprises the target RRC signaling, the target RRC signaling comprises data radio bearer (DRB) ID information, wherein the DRB ID information is ID information of a DRB having to-be-transmitted data in the SCG and is indicated by a bitmap, wherein the bitmap comprises any one of the following: wherein the RLC bearer only comprises a split bearer of which a primary path is in the SCG in case that the RLC bearer is a split bearer” as taught by HONG in the system of TEYEB, so that it would enabling a user equipment to perform the duplicate transmission of data through one radio bearer [see HONG; ¶ 8].
Regarding claim 9, TEYEB discloses the method of claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose wherein in case that the target information comprises the target RRC signaling, the target RRC signaling comprises logical channel group ID (LCG ID) information, wherein the LCG ID information is ID information of a LCG having to-be-transmitted data in the SCG, and is indicated by a bitmap or by an LCG ID list.
However, HONG discloses wherein in case that the target information comprises the target RRC signaling, the target RRC signaling comprises logical channel group ID (LCG ID) information [¶ 179; duplicate transmission bearer may have a cell identifier or a cell identifier list for each logical channel\], wherein the LCG ID information is ID information of a LCG having to-be-transmitted data in the SCG, and is indicated by a bitmap or by an LCG ID list [¶ 182; the logical channel group list may be included in cell/cell group configuration information in sequence or as a bitmap].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to provide “wherein in case that the target information comprises the target RRC signaling, the target RRC signaling comprises logical channel group ID (LCG ID) information, wherein the LCG ID information is ID information of a LCG having to-be-transmitted data in the SCG, and is indicated by a bitmap or by an LCG ID list” as taught by HONG in the system of TEYEB, so that it would enabling a user equipment to perform the duplicate transmission of data through one radio bearer [see HONG; ¶ 8].
Regarding claim 13, TEYEB discloses the method of claim 12.
TEYEB further discloses further comprising:
performing, based on the target information, one or more of the following:
reconfiguring the target bearer for the MCG and/or the SCG [see ¶ 135; SCG configuration and start operating according to the SCG configuration that is resumed (e.g. resumption of SCG bearers)];
activating the SCG [see ¶ 135; activating the PSCell and at least starting to monitor PDCCH of one of the cells of the SCG, which triggered by network signaling].
TEYEB does not explicitly disclose
wherein the target bearer is used for transmitting data corresponding to the buffer data status information of the SCG.
However, HONG wherein the target bearer is used for transmitting data corresponding to the buffer data status information of the SCG [¶¶ 161-162, 306; wherein the target bearer is used for transmitting data corresponding to the buffer data status information of the SCG].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to provide “wherein the target bearer is used for transmitting data corresponding to the buffer data status information of the SCG” as taught by HONG in the system of TEYEB, so that it would enabling a user equipment to perform the duplicate transmission of data through one radio bearer [see HONG; ¶ 8].
Regarding claims 19 and 22, the claims recite the terminal of claim 14 to perform the method recited as in claims 6 and 9 respectively; therefore, claims 19 and 22 rejected along the same rationale that rejected in claims 6 and 9 respectively.
Regarding claim 26, the claim recites the network device of claim 25 to perform the method recited as in claim 13; therefore, claim 26 rejected along the same rationale that rejected in claim 13.
Claims 7-8, 11, 20-21, and 24, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 unpatentable over TEYEB et al. (WO 2022/024092) in view of HAN et al. (CN 111182584).
Regarding claim 7, TEYEB discloses the method of claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose wherein in case that the target information comprises the target RRC signaling, the target RRC signaling comprises data radio bearer (DRB) ID, wherein the DRB ID is an ID of a DRB having to-be-transmitted data in the SCG, and is any one of the following: a DRB ID of a radio link control (RLC) bearer in an SCG; a DRB ID of an RLC bearer in an SCG, wherein the RLC bearer does not belong to a split bearer; or a DRB ID of an RLC bearer in an SCG, wherein the RLC bearer only comprises a split bearer of which a primary path is in the SCG in case that the RLC bearer is a split bearer.
However, HAN discloses wherein in case that the target information comprises the target RRC signaling, the target RRC signaling comprises data radio bearer (DRB) ID [page 10 line 44; wherein the first data radio bearer can be SCG data radio bearer or data radio bearer], wherein the DRB ID is an ID of a DRB having to-be-transmitted data in the SCG, and is any one of the following: a DRB ID of a radio link control (RLC) bearer in an SCG; a DRB ID of an RLC bearer in an SCG [page 11 lines 9-13; SCG first uplink buffer data quantity of the data radio bearer to inform the network device of the bearer identifier corresponding to first data radio bearer uplink buffer, also see page 8 lines 38-40].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to provide “wherein in case that the target information comprises the target RRC signaling, the target RRC signaling comprises data radio bearer (DRB) ID, wherein the DRB ID is an ID of a DRB having to-be-transmitted data in the SCG, and is any one of the following: a DRB ID of a radio link control (RLC) bearer in an SCG; a DRB ID of an RLC bearer in an SCG, wherein the RLC bearer does not belong to a split bearer; or a DRB ID of an RLC bearer in an SCG, wherein the RLC bearer only comprises a split bearer of which a primary path is in the SCG in case that the RLC bearer is a split bearer” as taught by HAN in the system of TEYEB, so that it would activate the SCG under the condition of receiving the SCG request sent by the user equipment, can ensure the user equipment transmits uplink data through the SCG. [see HAN; page 7 lines 36-38].
Regarding claim 8, TEYEB discloses the method of claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose wherein in case that the target information comprises the target RRC signaling, the target RRC signaling comprises logical channel ID (LCID) information, wherein the LCID information is ID information of a logical channel having to-be-transmitted data in the SCG, and is indicated by a bitmap or by an LCID list; and the LCID information satisfies any one of the following: the LCID information comprises a bearer, wherein the bearer only comprises a split bearer of which a primary path is in the SCG in case that the bearer is the split bearer; the LCID information comprises a bearer, wherein the bearer does not belong to a split bearer; or the LCID information comprises a bearer, wherein the bearer does not belong to a split bearer of which a primary path is in the MCG.
However, HAN discloses wherein in case that the target information comprises the target RRC signaling, the target RRC signaling comprises logical channel ID (LCID) information, wherein the LCID information is ID information of a logical channel having to-be-transmitted data in the SCG, and is indicated by a bitmap or by an LCID list [¶page 13 lines 42-48; reporting a BSR value for each LCG. the user equipment based the LCG to report the BSR, instead of for each logic channel to report a BSR. each of the MACCE is corresponding to one MAC sub-headers, the LCID field in each MAC header for indicating a type of control unit. can be determined corresponding to the type of the BSR through the value of MAC CE in the word head of logical channel identifier (Logical ChannelIdentify, LCID). each type of BSR are occupying one LCID (Logical Channel Identity, logical channel identifier) of the value]; and the LCID information satisfies any one of the following: the LCID information comprises a bearer, wherein the bearer only comprises a split bearer of which a primary path is in the SCG in case that the bearer is the split bearer; [¶page 2 lines 28-29; first data radio bearer in one possible embodiment, the SCG is associated as the SCG associated split data radio bearer].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to provide “wherein in case that the target information comprises the target RRC signaling, the target RRC signaling comprises logical channel ID (LCID) information, wherein the LCID information is ID information of a logical channel having to-be-transmitted data in the SCG, and is indicated by a bitmap or by an LCID list; and the LCID information satisfies any one of the following: the LCID information comprises a bearer, wherein the bearer only comprises a split bearer of which a primary path is in the SCG in case that the bearer is the split bearer; the LCID information comprises a bearer, wherein the bearer does not belong to a split bearer; or the LCID information comprises a bearer, wherein the bearer does not belong to a split bearer of which a primary path is in the MCG” as taught by HAN in the system of TEYEB, so that it would activate the SCG under the condition of receiving the SCG request sent by the user equipment, can ensure the user equipment transmits uplink data through the SCG. [see HAN; page 7 lines 36-38].
Regarding claim 11, TEYEB discloses the method of claim 1.
TEYEB further discloses wherein in case that the target information comprises the target RRC signaling [see ¶ 173; wherein in case that the target information comprises the target RRC signaling], the target RRC signaling comprises information of a size of to-be-transmitted data in the SCG [see ¶ 86; wherein in case that the target information comprises the target RRC signaling, the target RRC signaling comprises information of a size of to-be-transmitted data in the SCG].
TEYEB does not explicitly disclose wherein the size of the to-be-transmitted data in the SCG is in units of any one of per DRB, per LC, per LCG or per SCG.
However, HAN discloses wherein the size of the to-be-transmitted data in the SCG is in units of any one of per DRB, per LC, per LCG or per SCG [see page 15 lines 43-45; sending the real time according to the uplink data transmission state of the data radio bearer for SCG activation request].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to provide “wherein the size of the to-be-transmitted data in the SCG is in units of any one of per DRB, per LC, per LCG or per SCG” as taught by HAN in the system of TEYEB, so that it would activate the SCG under the condition of receiving the SCG request sent by the user equipment, can ensure the user equipment transmits uplink data through the SCG. [see HAN; page 7 lines 36-38].
Regarding claims 20-21, and 24, the claims recite the terminal of claim 14 to perform the method recited as in claims 7-8 and 11 respectively; therefore, claims 20-21, and 24 rejected along the same rationale that rejected in claims 7-8 and 11 respectively.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 mailing date of this final action.
In additional to references cited that are used for rejection as set forth above, Khoshkholgh et al. (US 2022/0377780 is also considered as relevant prior arts for rejection of in claims 1, 12, 14, and 25 (Fig. 17, 18, ¶¶ 232-235).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHONG LA whose telephone number is (571)272-2588. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday from 7:30 A.M. to 4:00 P.M. (EST).
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.
/PHONG LA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2469
Prosecution Insights