DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Application
2 This instant Office Action is in response to Amendment filed on 7/27/2026.
3. This Office Action is made Final necessitated by Amendment.
4. Claim 7 is currently cancelled.
5. Claims 1-6 are pending.
Response to Arguments
6. Applicant’s arguments regarding the amendment have been fully considered but are moot because of new grounds of rejection set forth herein with at least one new reference as necessitated by amendment.
7. In light of amendment to the claims, the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) is withdrawn herein.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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 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.
1. Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abdelghaffar et al. US 20210176626 hereafter Abdelghaffar in view of Park et al. US 20150124670 hereafter Park.
As to Claim 1. (Currently Amended) Abdelghaffar discloses a terminal [i.e. User Equipment-UE] comprising: a transceiver [Transceiver-1320] configured to perform a bidirectional communication including downlink and uplink with a base station by using a frequency division duplex [Fig. 13, Sections 0076, 0177: The UEs and base station communicate with one another via links/channels over carriers with downlink and uplink with both FDD and TDD. Full duplex FDD (frequency division duplex) capable UE includes components for bi-direction communication including a transceiver-1320],
and a processor configured to [Fig. 13, Section 0177: UE includes processor-1340] control a communication to be performed by using a time division duplex [i.e. TDD; Sections 0066, 0120, 0140: The UE maybe able to switch between TDD and FDD. One or more UEs may also be in a full duplex mode to transmit and receive in the TDD band. For example, a UE communicate with a base station using a TDD frequency block according to TDD communication mode; this communication may occur for example in which the UE in FDD communication mode switch to TDD communication mode]
Although Abdelghaffar discloses multiple UEs (i.e. terminals) capable of communicating in FDD and TDD modes, and other UEs do not support FDD (Fig. 6, 0135); however it does not disclose in “in a same cell further to the terminal” thus it does not explicitly state in a case where, in a same cell, further to the terminal there is a terminal that does not support the frequency division duplex
However, Park teaches in a case where, in a same cell, further to the terminal there is a terminal that does not support the frequency division duplex [Figs. 4 (Depicts terminals such as the FDD-TDD UE-400, TDD Terminal-420, FDD Terminal-440 in a cell/coverage area with different distances), Fig. 5, Sections 0007, 0078, 0085: The wireless communication system support a Frequency Division Duplex (FDD) and a Time Division Duplex (TDD) for UL and the DL transmission using carrier(s) are executed in a single cell. Third, TDD terminals and terminals that support the TDD-FDD CA may camp on and be connected to a TDD carrier which is a part of the FDD/TDD network that executes a joint operation. In this instance, the terminal may not support the FDD UL. Note: FDD used for UL or DL in a single cell and TDD used for UL or DL separately in a single cell (See 0062-0063)].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date to have combined the method of Abdelghaffar relating to terminal/UEs communicating in different modes such as FDD and TDD, the terminal/UE capable of switching between TDD and FDD communication modes and switching back in the TDD/FDD modes, other terminals in the same area that do not support FDD but support TDD with the teaching of Park relating to terminals operating in different modes in the same cell, and the TDD terminal may not support FDD for UL (uplink). By combining the methods/systems, the UE can switch from FDD mode to TDD communication mode when other terminals in the same cell do not support FDD in order to facilitate communication between the terminals and allow the terminal to communicate according to the supported mode in the cell as suggested by Park without undue experimentation.
As to Claim 2. (Currently Amended) Abdelghaffar discloses the terminal [i.e. User Equipment-UE] as claimed in claim 1, wherein the processor [Fig. 13, Section 0177: UE includes processor-1340] is configured to perform a fallback [i.e. Switch/change] from the communication using the frequency division duplex [i.e. FDD] to a communication using a time division duplex [Sections 0066, 0140: The UE may be able to switch between TDD and FDD. For example, a UE communicate according to TDD communication mode; this communication may occur for example in which the UE in FDD communication mode switch to TDD communication mode]
Although Abdelghaffar discloses multiple UEs (i.e. terminals) capable of communicating in FDD and TDD modes, and other UEs do not support FDD (Fig. 6, 0135); however it does not disclose in “in a same cell further to the terminal” thus it does not explicitly state in the case where in the same cell, further to the terminal there is a terminal that does not support the frequency division duplex in a same communication area.
However, Park teaches in the case where in the same cell, further to the terminal there is a terminal that does not support the frequency division duplex in a same communication area [Figs. 4 (Depicts terminals such as the FDD-TDD UE-400, TDD Terminal-420, FDD Terminal-440 in a cell/coverage area with different distances), Fig. 5, Sections 0007, 0078, 0085: The wireless communication system support a Frequency Division Duplex (FDD) and a Time Division Duplex (TDD) for UL and the DL transmission using carrier(s) are executed in a single cell (area). Third, TDD terminals and terminals that support the TDD-FDD CA may camp on and be connected to a TDD carrier which is a part of the FDD/TDD network that executes a joint operation. In this instance, the terminal may not support the FDD UL].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date to have combined the method of Abdelghaffar relating to terminal/UEs communicating in different modes such as FDD and TDD, the terminal/UE capable of switching (fallback) between TDD and FDD communication modes and switching back in the TDD/FDD modes, other terminals in the same area that do not support FDD but support TDD with the teaching of Park relating to terminals operating in different modes in the same cell, and the TDD terminal may not support FDD for UL (uplink). By combining the methods/systems, the UE can switch from FDD mode to TDD communication mode when other terminals in the same cell do not support FDD in order to facilitate communication between the terminals and allow the terminal to communicate according to the supported mode in the cell as suggested by Park without undue experimentation.
As to Claim 3. (Currently Amended) Abdelghaffar discloses the terminal [i.e. User Equipment-UE] as claimed in claim 1, wherein the processor [Fig. 13, Section 0177: UE includes processor-1340] controls a communication to be performed by using the time division duplex if the terminal is a terminal that does not support the frequency division duplex [Figs. 6-7, Sections 0066, 0120, 0135, 0147: The UE maybe able to switch between TDD and FDD. One or more UEs may transmit and receive in the TDD band. The UE may communicate in a TDD configuration. Operation may not be reserved for FDD operation]
Although Abdelghaffar discloses multiple UEs (i.e. terminals) capable of communicating in FDD and TDD modes, and other UEs do not support FDD (Fig. 6, 0135); however it does not disclose in “in a same cell further to the terminal” thus it does not explicitly state in a case where, in the same cell, further to the terminal there is a terminal that supports the frequency division duplex and a terminal that does not support the frequency division duplex
However, Park teaches in a case where, in the same cell, further to the terminal there is a terminal [i.e. FDD Terminal-440] that supports the frequency division duplex and a terminal [i.e. TDD Terminal-420] that does not support the frequency division duplex [Figs. 4 (Depicts terminals such as the FDD-TDD UE-400, TDD Terminal-420, FDD Terminal-440 in a cell/coverage area with different distances), Fig. 5, Sections 0007, 0077, 0078, 0085: The wireless communication system support a Frequency Division Duplex (FDD) and a Time Division Duplex (TDD) for UL and the DL transmission using carrier(s) are executed in a single cell. Second, legacy FDD terminals support the and camp on a FDD carrier. Third, TDD terminals and terminals that support the TDD-FDD CA may camp on and be connected to a TDD carrier which is a part of the FDD/TDD network that executes a joint operation. In this instance, the terminal may not support the FDD UL].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date to have combined the method of Abdelghaffar relating to terminal/UEs communicating in different modes such as FDD and TDD, the terminal/UE capable of switching between TDD and FDD communication modes and switching back in the TDD/FDD modes, other terminals in the same area that do not support FDD but support TDD with the teaching of Park relating to terminals operating in different modes in the same cell, and the TDD terminal may not support FDD and another terminal supports FDD. By combining the methods/systems, there can be multiple UEs operating in different modes/configuration such as a TDD terminal that supports TDD but not FDD, FDD terminal that supports FDD but not TDD and a FDD/TDD terminal that supports both modes and can switch from FDD mode to TDD communication mode or TDD to FDD when other terminals in the same cell do not support FDD or support FDD in order to facilitate communication between the terminals in the cell and allow the terminal to communicate according to the supported mode in the cell as suggested by Park without undue experimentation.
As to Claim 4. (Currently Amended) Abdelghaffar discloses the terminal [i.e. User Equipment-UE] as claimed in claim 3, further comprising: a transceiver [Transceiver-1320] configured to [Fig. 13, Sections 0177: UE includes components for bi-direction communication including a transceiver-1320],
receive information indicating a communication direction [i.e. downlink/DL and uplink/UL] for each time resource and frequency resource from the base station [Sections 0084, 0094, 0117: A subframe, a slot, or a symbol smallest scheduling unit in the time domain of the wireless communications system. Base station schedule resources for communication. Spectrum configuration illustrate resource allocations in a frequency bandwidth allocated for uplink communications, which include uplink slots (i.e. time domain resource) and allocated for downlink communications with downlink control slots]
wherein the processor [Fig. 13, Section 0177: UE includes processor-1340] controls a communication to be performed in the communication indicated by the information in a section in which an entire frequency band is allocated to uplink only or downlink [Figs. 6-7, Sections 0006, 0063, 0066, 0134: The UE is capable of operating in any one of TDD mode and FDD mode within the frequency band. The UE may operate either on uplink or downlink channels in frequency band. The UE maybe able to switch between TDD and FDD. UE 115-f have a multi-mode capability able to operate according to a dual-mode FDD configuration],
Although Abdelghaffar discloses multiple UEs (i.e. terminals) capable of communicating in FDD and TDD modes, and other UEs do not support FDD (Fig. 6, 0135); however it does not disclose in “in a same cell further to the terminal” thus it does not explicitly state in a case where, in the same cell, further to the terminal there is a terminal that supports the frequency division duplex and a terminal that does not support the frequency division duplex
However, Park teaches in a case where, in the same cell, further to the terminal there is a terminal [i.e. FDD Terminal-440] that supports the frequency division duplex and a terminal [i.e. TDD Terminal-420] that does not support the frequency division duplex [Figs. 4 (Depicts terminals such as the FDD-TDD UE-400, TDD Terminal-420, FDD Terminal-440 in a cell/coverage area with different distances), Fig. 5, Sections 0007, 0077, 0078, 0085: The wireless communication system support a Frequency Division Duplex (FDD) and a Time Division Duplex (TDD) for UL and the DL transmission using carrier(s) are executed in a single cell. Second, legacy FDD terminals support the and camp on a FDD carrier. Third, TDD terminals and terminals that support the TDD-FDD CA may camp on and be connected to a TDD carrier which is a part of the FDD/TDD network that executes a joint operation. In this instance, the terminal may not support the FDD UL].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date to have combined the method of Abdelghaffar relating to terminal/UEs communicating in different modes such as FDD and TDD, the terminal/UE capable of switching between TDD and FDD communication modes and switching back in the TDD/FDD modes, other terminals in the same area that do not support FDD but support TDD with the teaching of Park relating to terminals operating in different modes in the same cell, and the TDD terminal may not support FDD and another terminal supports FDD. By combining the methods/systems, there can be multiple UEs operating in different modes/configuration such as a TDD terminal that supports TDD but not FDD, FDD terminal that supports FDD but not TDD and a FDD/TDD terminal that supports both modes and can switch from FDD mode to TDD communication mode or TDD to FDD when other terminals in the same cell do not support FDD or support FDD in order to facilitate communication between the terminals in the cell and allow the terminal to communicate according to the supported mode in the cell as suggested by Park without undue experimentation.
As to Claim 5. (Currently Amended) Abdelghaffar discloses a base station comprising: a transceiver [Transceiver-1720] configured to perform a bidirectional communication including downlink and uplink with a terminal [i.e. User Equipment-UE] by using a frequency division duplex [Fig. 17, Sections 0076, 0210-0211: The UEs and base stations communicate with one another via links/channels with downlink and uplink according to with both FDD (frequency division duplex) and TDD. The device-1705 may be an example of a base station; the device include components for bi-directional voice and data communications including a transceiver-1720. Determine, communication format configuration for the UE that includes TDD mode and FDD mode communications for the frequency band, and transmit to the UE],
and a processor configured to [Fig. 17, Section 0210: The base station including a processor-1740] control a communication to be performed with the terminal by using a time division duplex [Fig. 6 (Depicts System-600 includes a base station-105e communicating with multiple UEs-115 with different duplexing configurations-see section 0132), Sections 0066, 0120, 0211: The UE maybe able to switch between TDD and FDD. One or more UEs may also be in a full duplex mode to transmit and receive in the TDD band. Determine, communication format configuration for the UE that includes TDD mode communications and transmit to the UE],
Although Abdelghaffar discloses multiple UEs (i.e. terminals) capable of communicating in FDD and TDD modes, and other UEs do not support FDD (Fig. 6, 0135); however it does not disclose in “in a same cell further to the terminal” thus it does not explicitly state in a case where, in the same cell, further to the terminal there is a terminal that does not support the frequency division duplex
However, Park teaches in a case where, in the same cell, further to the terminal there is a terminal that does not support the frequency division duplex [Figs. 4 (Depicts terminals such as the FDD-TDD UE-400, TDD Terminal-420, FDD Terminal-440 in a cell/coverage area with different distances), Fig. 5, Sections 0007, 0078, 0085: The wireless communication system support a Frequency Division Duplex (FDD) and a Time Division Duplex (TDD) for UL and the DL transmission using carrier(s) are executed in a single cell. Third, TDD terminals and terminals that support the TDD-FDD CA may camp on and be connected to a TDD carrier which is a part of the FDD/TDD network that executes a joint operation. In this instance, the terminal may not support the FDD UL. Note: FDD used for UL or DL in a single cell and TDD used for UL or DL separately in a single cell (See 0062-0063)].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date to have combined the method of Abdelghaffar relating to terminal/UEs communicating in different modes such as FDD and TDD, the terminal/UE capable of switching between TDD and FDD communication modes and switching back in the TDD/FDD modes, other terminals in the same area that do not support FDD but support TDD with the teaching of Park relating to terminals operating in different modes in the same cell, and the TDD terminal may not support FDD for UL (uplink), and base station communicating with terminals in either modes. By combining the methods/systems, the UE can switch from FDD mode to TDD communication mode when other terminals in the same cell do not support FDD in order to facilitate communication between the base station and terminals to communicate according to the supported mode in the cell as suggested by Park without undue experimentation.
As to Claim 6. (Currently Amended) Abdelghaffar discloses a communication method performed by a terminal [i.e. User Equipment-UE], the communication method comprising: performing a bidirectional communication including downlink and uplink with a base station by using a frequency division duplex [Fig. 13, Sections 0076, 0177: The UEs and base station communicate with one another via links/channels over carriers with downlink and uplink with both FDD and TDD. Full duplex FDD (frequency division duplex) capable UE includes components for bi-direction communication including a transceiver];
and controlling a communication to be performed by using a time division duplex [i.e. TDD; Sections 0066, 0120, 0140: The UE maybe able to switch between TDD and FDD. One or more UEs may also be in a full duplex mode to transmit and receive in the TDD band. For example, a UE communicate with a base station using a TDD frequency block according to TDD communication mode; this communication may occur for example in which the UE in FDD communication mode switch to TDD communication mode]
Although Abdelghaffar discloses multiple UEs (i.e. terminals) capable of communicating in FDD and TDD modes, and other UEs do not support FDD (Fig. 6, 0135); however it does not disclose in “in a same cell further to the terminal” thus it does not explicitly state in a case where, in the same cell, further to the terminal there is a terminal that does not support the frequency division duplex
However, Park teaches in a case where, in the same cell, further to the terminal there is a terminal that does not support the frequency division duplex [Figs. 4 (Depicts terminals such as the FDD-TDD UE-400, TDD Terminal-420, FDD Terminal-440 in a cell/coverage area with different distances), Fig. 5, Sections 0007, 0078, 0085: The wireless communication system support a Frequency Division Duplex (FDD) and a Time Division Duplex (TDD) for UL and the DL transmission using carrier(s) are executed in a single cell. Third, TDD terminals and terminals that support the TDD-FDD CA may camp on and be connected to a TDD carrier which is a part of the FDD/TDD network that executes a joint operation. In this instance, the terminal may not support the FDD UL. Note: FDD used for UL or DL in a single cell and TDD used for UL or DL separately in a single cell (See 0062-0063)].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date to have combined the method of Abdelghaffar relating to terminal/UEs communicating in different modes such as FDD and TDD, the terminal/UE capable of switching between TDD and FDD communication modes and switching back in the TDD/FDD modes, other terminals in the same area that do not support FDD but support TDD with the teaching of Park relating to terminals operating in different modes in the same cell, and the TDD terminal may not support FDD for UL (uplink). By combining the methods/systems, the UE can switch from FDD mode to TDD communication mode when other terminals in the same cell do not support FDD in order to facilitate communication between the terminals and allow the terminal to communicate according to the supported mode in the cell as suggested by Park without undue experimentation.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Mueck et al. US 20190045397.
Furthermore, each additional prior arts cited on PTO-892 but not applied in rejection contains a disclosed description related to the claimed subject matter found either in the Figures, description summary and/or disclosure.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAEL M ULYSSE whose telephone number is (571)272-1228. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5pm.
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, Chirag G. Shah can be reached at (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 published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
September 28, 2026
/JAEL M ULYSSE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2477
Prosecution Insights