DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 8/15/2024, 10/31/2024, 9/9/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it should avoid using phrases which can be implied, and the form often used in patent claims should be avoided. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: CONTROLLING 5th GENERATION NON-STANDALONE CAPABILITY OF A TERMINAL.
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The term “type” in claim 1 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “type” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The word “type” extends the scope of the expression “SIM”. It is unclear what “type” is intended to convey.
The term “type” in claim 11 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “type” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The word “type” extends the scope of the expression “SIM”. It is unclear what “type” is intended to convey.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "the SIM" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear whether that limitation refers to the first SIM or the second SIM. Similar issues are in some of the other claims.
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)(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 1-3, 6-7, 9-13, 16-17 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by WO 2020/199227 (hereinafter Qualcomm).
Regarding claims 1 and 11, Qualcomm discloses a method performed by a terminal comprising a plurality of subscriber identification modules (SIMs) in a wireless communication system, the method comprising: based on a type of a SIM used for a current communication service of the terminal, determining whether to enable a dual connectivity feature of the terminal ([0051] [0061]: details For Multi-SIM (MSIM) devices (supporting multiple dedicated data subscription or DDSs) , such devices may support ENDC and 4G. In this scenario, for example, only the DDSsub (#1 sub) can support ENDC mode. When the UE switches from this DDS sub, ENDC capability should be changed to 4G. So UE should disable ENDC; for Dual SIM card devices, one SIM may support dual connectivity mode, while another SIM only support LTE mode); and transmitting information on whether to enable the dual connectivity feature to a base station ([0057]: details when UE needs to disable ENDC, the UE may send a TAU (e.g., with DCNR 0 and Dual connectivity of E-UTRA with NR capability 0) . In response, the LTE Network (eNB) that detects the ENDC capability change, eNB may send RRCReconfigurationRequest to delete/release 5G data radio bearers (DRB)" and par. [ 0058], "when the UE decides to enable ENDC, it may send a TAU (e.g., with DCNR = 1 and Dual connectivity of E-UTRA with NR capability = 1)), wherein the terminal and the base station are configured to support the dual connectivity feature ([0057], "The eNB may then send a UEcapabilityEnquiry with NR and ENDC. In response, the UE may send a UEcapabilityconfirmation to the eNB (indicating NR and ENDC capability)), wherein the plurality of SIMs comprise a first SIM and a second SIM, and the first SIM and the second SIM comprise different subscription information ([0061]: details for Dual SIM card devices, one SIM may support dual connectivity mode, while another SIM only support LTE mode. Thus, if a user switches these 2 SIMs, the UE may be triggered to send a TAU to update its capability).
Regarding claims 2 and 12, Qualcomm discloses based on use of mobile data of the terminal being initiated and the SIM used for the current communication service being the first SIM, enabling the dual connectivity feature for transmitting and receiving the mobile data to and from the base station using the first SIM ([0051]: details only the DDS sub (#1 sub) can support ENDC mode).
Regarding claims 3 and 13, Qualcomm discloses receiving first information on at least one first network from the base station; based on use of mobile data of the terminal being terminated or the SIM used for the current communication service being the second SIM, identifying a network supporting the dual connectivity feature among the at least one first network, based on the first information; and based on the network being identified, disabling the dual connectivity feature ([0051]: details When the UE switches from this DDS sub, ENDC capability should be changed to 4G).
Regarding claims 6 and 16, Qualcomm discloses receiving radio resource control (RRC) reconfiguration information for the dual connectivity from the base station; and based on the SIM used for the current communication service being the second SIM, transmitting first information indicating that the RRC reconfiguration information is ignored to the base station ([0054]: details the UE transmits a tracking area update (TAU) message to at least one of the first or second network entities to dynamically enable or disable the dual connectivity mode).
Regarding claims 7 and 17, Qualcomm discloses based on the RRC reconfiguration information, connecting to the base station; and based on the SIM used for the communication service being the second SIM, transmitting second information indicating that connection with the base station is not necessary to the base station ([0054]: details the UE transmits a tracking area update (TAU) message to at least one of the first or second network entities to dynamically enable or disable the dual connectivity mode).
Regarding claims 9 and 19, Qualcomm discloses wherein the first SIM includes a default data SIM (DDS) used for at least one service of transmission and reception of mobile data to and from the base station, a voice call, or a short message service (SMS), and wherein the second SIM includes a non-DDS used for at least one service of the voice call or the SMS information ([0051]: details For Multi-SIM (MSIM) devices (supporting multiple dedicated data subscription or DDSs), such devices may support ENDC and 4G. In this scenario, for example, only the DDS sub (#1 sub) can support ENDC mode. When the UE switches from this DDS sub, ENDC capability should be changed to 4G. So UE should disable ENDC. For a non-DDS sub (e.g., 4G), it is changed to ENDC mode from 4G and the UE should be enable ENDC mode).
Regarding claims 10 and 20, Qualcomm discloses wherein the dual connectivity feature includes an evolved universal mobile telecommunications system (UMTS) terrestrial radio access (E-UTRA)-new radio (NR) dual connectivity (ENDC) feature ([0058]: details when the UE decides to enable ENDC, it may send a TAU (e.g., with DCNR = 1 and Dual connectivity of E-UTRA with NR capability= 1). The eNB may then send a UEcapabilityEnquiry with NR and ENDC. In response, the UE may send a UEcapabilityconfirmation to the eNB (indicating NR and ENDC capability)).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 4, 5, 8, 14, 15 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Qualcomm in view of US 2023/0284304 (hereinafter Lee).
Regarding claims 4 and 14, Qualcomm does not explicitly teach receiving second information on at least one second network from the base station; and updating the first information based on the second information.
However, Lee teaches receiving second information on at least one second network from the base station; and updating the first information based on the second information ([0227][0230]: details the processor 500 (e.g., the access stratum (AS) or the LTE RRC 1004 of the second SIM 520) may configure failure in connection with the second LTE network (e.g., the second MCG network) (e.g., RRC connection failure), based on information related to the local release. The processor 500 (e.g., the AS or the LTE RRC 1004 of the second SIM 520) may switch the state of communication with the second LTE network (e.g., the second MCG network) to an idle state (e.g., RRC idle state) through tracking area update (TAU) related to occurrence of RRC connection re-establishment (RRE); the electronic device 101 may identify whether the first cellular network and/or the second cellular network supports DC (e.g., EN-DC), from “upperLayerIndication-r15” of system information block (SIB) 2 received from the first cellular network (e.g., the first LTE network) and/or the second cellular network. According to an embodiment, the electronic device 101 may identify whether the first cellular network and/or the second cellular network supports DC (e.g., EN-DC), based on a value of a “restrictDCNR bit” included in a connection acceptance (attach accept) message or tracking area update (TAU) acceptance message acquired from the first cellular network and/or the second cellular network in the process of connecting (being attracted) to the first cellular network and/or the second cellular network).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Qualcomm to incorporate the teachings of Lee and include receiving second information on at least one second network from the base station; and updating the first information based on the second information of Lee with Qualcomm. Doing so would improve quality or speed of communication (Lee, at paragraph [0072]).
Regarding claims 5 and 15, Qualcomm does not explicitly teach wherein the first information comprises at least one of an operator of each of the at least one first network, a public land mobile network (PLMN), or information on whether the dual connectivity feature is supported, wherein the second information comprises at least one of an operator of each of the at least one second network, a PLMN, or information on whether the dual connectivity feature is supported, and wherein information on a network not included in the at least one second network is removed from the first information.
However, Lee teaches wherein the first information comprises at least one of an operator of each of the at least one first network, a public land mobile network (PLMN), or information on whether the dual connectivity feature is supported, wherein the second information comprises at least one of an operator of each of the at least one second network, a PLMN, or information on whether the dual connectivity feature is supported, and wherein information on a network not included in the at least one second network is removed from the first information ([0231]: details the electronic device 101 may display NR network support information 1610 and 1620 of the first subscriber identity module 510 and the second subscriber identity module 520 on a notification bar 1600 of a display (not shown). As the UE capability related to the second cellular network (e.g., the second LTE network) is configured (or maintained) to support DC even though the DC operation related to the second subscriber identity module 520 is restricted, the electronic device 101 may display the NR network support information 1620 of the second subscriber identity module 520).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Qualcomm to incorporate the teachings of Lee and include wherein the first information comprises at least one of an operator of each of the at least one first network, a public land mobile network (PLMN), or information on whether the dual connectivity feature is supported, wherein the second information comprises at least one of an operator of each of the at least one second network, a PLMN, or information on whether the dual connectivity feature is supported, and wherein information on a network not included in the at least one second network is removed from the first information of Lee with Qualcomm. Doing so would improve quality or speed of communication (Lee, at paragraph [0072]).
Regarding claims 8 and 18, Qualcomm does not explicitly teach wherein the first information is included in secondary cell group (SCG) failure information in response to the RRC reconfiguration information, wherein the second information is included in terminal assistance information in response to the RRC reconfiguration information, and wherein the first information and the second information are transmitted in a form of an indicator of 1 bit, respectively.
However, Lee teaches teach wherein the first information is included in secondary cell group (SCG) failure information in response to the RRC reconfiguration information, wherein the second information is included in terminal assistance information in response to the RRC reconfiguration information, and wherein the first information and the second information are transmitted in a form of an indicator of 1 bit, respectively ([0134]: details, the at least one processor may transmit, when a message related to a request for handover or cell addition of the second SCG network is received from a second MCG network connected based on the second subscriber identity information of the second SIM in a state in which addition of the second SCG network is restricted, a message related to failure in the request for cell addition or handover to the second MCG network through the wireless communication circuit).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Qualcomm to incorporate the teachings of Lee and include wherein the first information is included in secondary cell group (SCG) failure information in response to the RRC reconfiguration information, wherein the second information is included in terminal assistance information in response to the RRC reconfiguration information, and wherein the first information and the second information are transmitted in a form of an indicator of 1 bit, respectively of Lee with Qualcomm. Doing so would improve quality or speed of communication (Lee, at paragraph [0072]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Selvaganapathy (US 2024/0334259) details multiple U-SIM switching in multi-RAT dual connectivity.
Vadapalli (US 2023/0112465) details dual connectivity uplink scheduling a multi-subscriber identity module UE.
Jain (US 2022/0239450) details techniques for enhancing UE performance for multiple SIM operation.
Tsai (US 2020/0015303) details supporting dual talk of multiple subscriber identities.
Chen (US 2018/0132093) details mobile data service control.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jasper Kwoh whose telephone number is (408)918-7644. The examiner can normally be reached Tuesday through Friday, 10am to 4pm Pacific.
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, Jeffrey Rutkowski can be reached at (571) 270-1215. 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.
/JASPER KWOH/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2415
Prosecution Insights