CTFR 18/700,345 CTFR 82210 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Response to Arguments 07-38 Applicant's arguments with respect to claim s 1-3 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kumar et al. (U.S. Patent Application Number: 2023/0026279) in view of Harada et al. (U.S. Patent Application Number: 2020/0337103) in view of Kim et al. (U.S. Patent Application Number: 2022/0022067) . Consider claim 1 ; Kumar discloses a terminal apparatus for communicating with a base station apparatus (par. 80, lines 6-13), the terminal apparatus comprising: processing circuitry (par. 115, lines 3-7) configured to communicate using an MCG and an SCG (par. 80, lines 6-13); and a receiver (par. 115, lines 3-7) configured to receive signalling from the base station apparatus (par. 80, lines 6-13), wherein the MCG includes at least a Pcell (par. 80, lines 6-13), the SCG includes at least a PSCeII (par. 80, lines 6-13; par. 81, lines 10-11), the processing circuitry (par. 115, lines 3-7) deactivates the SCG in a case of receiving from the base station apparatus the signalling notifying that the SCG is to be in a deactivated state (par. 81, lines 18-22), and determines whether the signalling includes information indicating that radio link monitoring is to be performed in the deactivated state of the SCG [e.g. no information is provided (par. 82, lines 12-16)]. Kumar discloses the claimed invention except: the timer is started in a case that {this limitation becomes invalid if this condition is not met} a predetermined number of consecutive out-of- sync indications notified from a PHY entity of the terminal apparatus are received, and is stopped in a case that {this limitation becomes invalid if this condition is not met} a predetermined number of in-sync indications are received from the PHY entity of the terminal apparatus, and in a case that {this limitation becomes invalid if this condition is not met} the timer expires, the processing circuitry performs an SCG failure information procedure. In an analogous art Harada discloses the timer is started in a case that {this limitation becomes invalid if this condition is not met} a predetermined number of consecutive out-of- sync indications notified from a PHY entity of the terminal apparatus are received (par. 36, lines 1-6; par. 40, lines 1-2), and is stopped in a case that {this limitation becomes invalid if this condition is not met} a predetermined number of in-sync indications are received from the PHY entity of the terminal apparatus (par. 34, lines 1-4; par. 42, lines 3-6), and in a case that {this limitation becomes invalid if this condition is not met} the timer expires (par. 34, lines 4-5; par. 42, lines 6-9), the processing circuitry (par. 157, lines 7-12) performs an SCG failure information procedure (par. 34, lines 4-5; par. 42, lines 6-9). It is an object of Kumar’s invention to provide a method of data collection. It is an object of Harada’s invention to provide a method of radio communication. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Kumar by including a timer, as taught by Harada, for the purpose of effectively managing communication in a wireless network. Kumar and Harada disclose the claimed invention except: in a case of {this limitation becomes invalid if this condition is not met} determining that the signalling includes no information indicating that the radio link monitoring is to be performed in the deactivated state of the SCG, the processing circuitry stops a timer for the PSCeII of the SCG. In an analogous art Kim discloses in a case of {this limitation becomes invalid if this condition is not met} determining that the signalling includes no information indicating that the radio link monitoring is to be performed in the deactivated state of the SCG, the processing circuitry stops a timer for the PSCeII of the SCG [“…the terminal may perform procedures for…deactivating the SCG according to an embodiment of the disclosure, and may stop radio link monitoring for the SCG. This is because data is not transmitted or received for the….deactivated SCG….” (par. 767, lines 4-8) “…the terminal may stop the timers according to the following conditions. When the SCG is deactivated… When the second timer (e.g. T310) corresponding to the cell….is running, the terminal may stop the second timer (e.g. T310).” (par. 767, line 10 – par. 768, line 1; par. 769, lines 1-3)]. It is an object of Kumar’s invention to provide a method of data collection. It is an object of Harada’s invention to provide a method of radio communication. It is an object of Kim’s invention to provide a method of activating and deactivating cell groups. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Kumar and Harada by including a deactivated state, as taught by Kim, for the purpose of power preservation in a wireless communication system. Consider claim 2 ; Kumar discloses a base station apparatus for communicating with a terminal apparatus (par. 80, lines 6-13), the base station apparatus comprising: processing circuitry (par. 150, lines 3-8) configured to communicate with the terminal apparatus (par. 80, lines 6-13); and a transmitter (par. 150, lines 3-8) configured to transmit signalling to the terminal apparatus (par. 80, lines 6-13), wherein an SCG configured for the terminal apparatus includes at least a PSCeII (par. 80, lines 6-13; par. 81, lines 10-11), the signalling notifying that the SCG is to be in a deactivated state is transmitted to the terminal apparatus to cause the terminal apparatus to deactivate the SCG (par. 81, lines 18-22), and the terminal apparatus is caused to determine whether the signalling includes information indicating that radio link monitoring is to be performed in the deactivated state of the SCG {this is a non-functional limitation that carries no patentable weight. It has no bearing on the supposed patentable limitation of the base station. See MPEP § 2111.04 and 2111.05} [e.g. no information is provided (par. 82, lines 12-16)]. Kumar discloses the claimed invention except: the timer is started in a case that a predetermined number (N310) of out-of-sync indications notified from a PHY entity of the terminal apparatus are received, and is stopped in a case that a predetermined number of in-sync indications are received from the PHY entity of the terminal apparatus, and in a case that {this limitation becomes invalid if this condition is not met} the timer expires, the terminal apparatus is caused to perform an SCG failure information procedure {this is a non-functional limitation that carries no patentable weight. It has no bearing on the supposed patentable limitation of the base station. See MPEP § 2111.04 and 2111.05}. In an analogous art Harada discloses the timer is started in a case that a predetermined number (N310) of out-of-sync indications notified from a PHY entity of the terminal apparatus are received (par. 36, lines 1-6; par. 40, lines 1-2), and is stopped in a case that a predetermined number of in-sync indications are received from the PHY entity of the terminal apparatus (par. 34, lines 1-4; par. 42, lines 3-6), and in a case that {this limitation becomes invalid if this condition is not met} the timer expires (par. 34, lines 4-5; par. 42, lines 6-9), the terminal apparatus is caused to perform an SCG failure information procedure {this is a non-functional limitation. It has no bearing on the supposed patentable limitation of the base station. See MPEP § 2111.04 and 2111.05} (par. 34, lines 4-5; par. 42, lines 6-9). It is an object of Kumar’s invention to provide a method of data collection. It is an object of Harada’s invention to provide a method of radio communication. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Kumar by including a timer, as taught by Harada, for the purpose of effectively managing communication in a wireless network. Kumar and Harada disclose the claimed invention except: in a case of {this limitation becomes invalid if this condition is not met} determining that the signalling includes no information indicating that the radio link monitoring is to be performed in the deactivated state of the SCG, the processing circuitry stops a timer for the PSCeII of the SCG {this is a non-functional limitation that carries no patentable weight. It has no bearing on the supposed patentable limitation of the base station. See MPEP § 2111.04 and 2111.05}. In an analogous art Kim discloses in a case of {this limitation becomes invalid if this condition is not met} determining that the signalling includes no information indicating that the radio link monitoring is to be performed in the deactivated state of the SCG, the processing circuitry stops a timer for the PSCeII of the SCG [“…the terminal may perform procedures for…deactivating the SCG according to an embodiment of the disclosure, and may stop radio link monitoring for the SCG. This is because data is not transmitted or received for the….deactivated SCG….” (par. 767, lines 4-8) “…the terminal may stop the timers according to the following conditions. When the SCG is deactivated… When the second timer (e.g. T310) corresponding to the cell….is running, the terminal may stop the second timer (e.g. T310).” (par. 767, line 10 – par. 768, line 1; par. 769, lines 1-3)] {this is a non-functional limitation that carries no patentable weight. It has no bearing on the supposed patentable limitation of the base station. See MPEP § 2111.04 and 2111.05}. It is an object of Kumar’s invention to provide a method of data collection. It is an object of Harada’s invention to provide a method of radio communication. It is an object of Kim’s invention to provide a method of activating and deactivating cell groups. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Kumar and Harada by including a deactivated state, as taught by Kim, for the purpose of power preservation in a wireless communication system. Consider claim 3 ; Kumar discloses a method for a base station apparatus for communicating with a terminal apparatus (par. 80, lines 6-13), the method comprising: communicating with the terminal apparatus (par. 80, lines 6-13); and transmitting signalling to the terminal apparatus (par. 80, lines 6-13), wherein an SCG configured for the terminal apparatus includes at least a PSCeII (par. 80, lines 6-13; par. 81, lines 10-11), the signalling notifying that the SCG is to be in a deactivated state is transmitted to the terminal apparatus to cause the terminal apparatus to deactivate the SCG (par. 81, lines 18-22), and the terminal apparatus is caused to determine whether the signalling includes information indicating that radio link monitoring is to be performed in the deactivated state of the SCG {this is a non-functional limitation. It has no bearing on the supposed patentable limitation of the base station. See MPEP § 2111.04 and 2111.05} [e.g. no information is provided (par. 82, lines 12-16)], in a case that {this limitation becomes invalid if this condition is not met} the terminal apparatus determines that the signalling includes no information indicating that radio link monitoring is to be performed in the deactivated state of the SCG {this is a non-functional limitation. It has no bearing on the supposed patentable limitation of the base station. See MPEP § 2111.04 and 2111.05} [e.g. no information is provided (par. 82, lines 12-16)]. Kumar discloses the claimed invention except: the timer is started in a case that a predetermined number (N310) of out-of-sync indications notified from a PHY entity of the terminal apparatus are received, and is stopped in a case that a predetermined number of in-sync indications are received from the PHY entity of the terminal apparatus, and in a case that {this limitation becomes invalid if this condition is not met} the timer expires, the terminal apparatus is caused to perform an SCG failure information procedure {this is a non-functional limitation that carries no patentable weight. It has no bearing on the supposed patentable limitation of the base station. See MPEP § 2111.04 and 2111.05}. In an analogous art Harada discloses the timer is started in a case that a predetermined number (N310) of out-of-sync indications notified from a PHY entity of the terminal apparatus are received (par. 36, lines 1-6; par. 40, lines 1-2), and is stopped in a case that a predetermined number of in-sync indications are received from the PHY entity of the terminal apparatus (par. 34, lines 1-4; par. 42, lines 3-6), and in a case that {this limitation becomes invalid if this condition is not met} the timer expires (par. 34, lines 4-5; par. 42, lines 6-9), the terminal apparatus is caused to perform an SCG failure information procedure {this is a non-functional limitation that carries no patentable weight. It has no bearing on the supposed patentable limitation of the base station. See MPEP § 2111.04 and 2111.05} (par. 34, lines 4-5; par. 42, lines 6-9). It is an object of Kumar’s invention to provide a method of data collection. It is an object of Harada’s invention to provide a method of radio communication. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Kumar by including a timer, as taught by Harada, for the purpose of effectively managing communication in a wireless network. Kumar and Harada disclose the claimed invention except: in a case of {this limitation becomes invalid if this condition is not met} determining that the signalling includes no information indicating that the radio link monitoring is to be performed in the deactivated state of the SCG, the processing circuitry stops a timer for the PSCeII of the SCG {this is a non-functional limitation that carries no patentable weight. It has no bearing on the supposed patentable limitation of the base station. See MPEP § 2111.04 and 2111.05}. In an analogous art Kim discloses in a case of {this limitation becomes invalid if this condition is not met} determining that the signalling includes no information indicating that the radio link monitoring is to be performed in the deactivated state of the SCG, the processing circuitry stops a timer for the PSCeII of the SCG [“…the terminal may perform procedures for…deactivating the SCG according to an embodiment of the disclosure, and may stop radio link monitoring for the SCG. This is because data is not transmitted or received for the….deactivated SCG….” (par. 767, lines 4-8) “…the terminal may stop the timers according to the following conditions. When the SCG is deactivated… When the second timer (e.g. T310) corresponding to the cell….is running, the terminal may stop the second timer (e.g. T310).” (par. 767, line 10 – par. 768, line 1; par. 769, lines 1-3)] {this is a non-functional limitation that carries no patentable weight. It has no bearing on the supposed patentable limitation of the base station. See MPEP § 2111.04 and 2111.05}. It is an object of Kumar’s invention to provide a method of data collection. It is an object of Harada’s invention to provide a method of radio communication. It is an object of Kim’s invention to provide a method of activating and deactivating cell groups. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Kumar and Harada by including a deactivated state, as taught by Kim, for the purpose of power preservation in a wireless communication system . Conclusion 07-40 AIA Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL . See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any 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 Joel Ajayi whose telephone number is (571) 270-1091. The Examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday from 7:30am to 5:00pm and Friday 7:30am to 4:00 pm. If attempts to reach the Examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner’s supervisor, Jeanette Parker can be reached on (571) 270-3647. 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) or 703-305-3028. Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or proceeding should be directed to the receptionist/customer service whose telephone number is (571) 272-2600. /JOEL AJAYI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2646 Application/Control Number: 18/700,345 Page 2 Art Unit: 2646 Application/Control Number: 18/700,345 Page 3 Art Unit: 2646 Application/Control Number: 18/700,345 Page 4 Art Unit: 2646 Application/Control Number: 18/700,345 Page 5 Art Unit: 2646 Application/Control Number: 18/700,345 Page 6 Art Unit: 2646 Application/Control Number: 18/700,345 Page 7 Art Unit: 2646 Application/Control Number: 18/700,345 Page 8 Art Unit: 2646 Application/Control Number: 18/700,345 Page 9 Art Unit: 2646 Application/Control Number: 18/700,345 Page 10 Art Unit: 2646 Application/Control Number: 18/700,345 Page 11 Art Unit: 2646
Prosecution Insights