DETAILED ACTION
This Office action is in response to the application filed on 09 September 2024.
Claims 1-24 are presented for examination.
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.
Claims 1-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GUNDU et al. US 2017/0280380 A1.
As to claim 1, GUNDU discloses substantially the invention as claimed, including a method comprising:
communicating by a user device (Figures 1, the user mobile communication device 100), via a first network (Figures 1, a first communication network 190), wherein the user device is connected to the first network via a first network address (Figures 1, a first Base Transceiver Station (BTS) 193 associated with its own network address or network ID (NID) indicating the SIM card network operator provider, [25]; It is obvious to one of ordinary skills in the wireless communication art to recognize that GUNDU’s user device 100 is able to communicate via the first communication network 190 by the SIM1 140, [39]),
determining, based on a signal (a signal energy of a first Sub1 signal 192 or of a second Sub2 197 signal) being received (detected) for a duration of time (during a specified time period of a first timer/a second timer, [7], [42]), a presence of a second network (Figures 1, 2, and associated paragraphs; a signal energy of a second Sub2 197 signal); active data call on Sub2 signal 197, [41]); (Figures 1, a second communication network 195 via the second RTS 198 associated with its own network address or Network ID (NID) indicating the SIM card network operator provider, [25]; It is obvious to one of ordinary skills in the wireless communication art to recognize that GUNDU’s user device 100 is able to communicate via the second communication network 195 by the SIM2 150) and a handover (transition/switch) condition ((RF condition(s) and signal strength, [37]-[39]) associated with the second network, a presence of a second network (Figures 1, 2, and associated paragraphs; active data communication on Sub2 signal 197);
sending (displaying on the user interface 172), based on the handover condition, a request (a message) to connect (to switch/to transition) to the second network (Figures 1, 2, and associated paragraphs; if the Sub1 192 goes Out-Of-Service (OOS), the control unit 110 may trigger a DDS switch from Sub1 192 to Sub2 197); and
causing, based on an acknowledgment of the request (a notification of the message), the user device to connect (to switch/to transition) to the second network via a second network address (NID) (Figures 1, 2, and associated paragraphs, in light of instant paragraph [23] describing that, “conditions (e.g., network conditions…) to determine when to transition from a network associated with a subscription/service/provider to a network associated with a different subscription/service /provider”.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the wireless communication art to recognize that in light of instant paragraphs [23], [48] that describe “conditions (e.g., network conditions…, ) to determine when to transition (e.g., to switch) from a network associated with a subscription /service/provider to a network associated with a different subscription /service/provider” ([23]) and “the user device 101 may gain attempt to connect/switch to the MSO network 117 based on a temporal condition, such as the expiration of a time duration or during a specific time/time period. The temporal condition may be determined by the user device 101, a service/ subscription parameter, and/or the MSO network 117…” are technically equivalent to the technical feature novelty in “GUNDU’s the DDS detection manager 116 may take into account consideration RF conditions and/or LTE signal strength, for example, but not limited to, received power (RxPwr), Signal-To-Interference Ratio (Ec/Io), etc., when deciding to which SIM the DDS should be switched and when to switch the DDS. In addition, the DDS detection manager 116 may cause different timers to operate when deciding to which SIM the DDS should be switch. A message on the User Interface 170 may be used to notify the user of the DDS switch, ([36],[37]);“one or more timers may be implemented to enable a mobile communication device to dynamically switch a data subscription. The DDS detection manager 116 may incorporate a hysteresis function, for example, but not to limit to, using one or more timers, to avoid ping-ponging between two SIMS,…, ([39])”) in which GUNDU achieves the same purpose of the instant title of “Methods and Systems for switching between service provider networks”.
As to claim 2, GUNDU discloses, wherein the user device comprises one or more of a dual subscriber identification module (SIM) dual standby (DSDS) device, or a multi-SIM device (Figure 1, SIM1, SIM2 in the user device 100, [27]).
As to claim 3, GUNDU discloses, wherein the handover condition comprises one or more of one or more signals that are received (the subscription goes in-service), one or more signals that are not received (the subscription goes Out-Of-Service), a device-based condition (the device in idle), or a service provider condition (the data communication activities of the SIM card network operator provider).
As to claim 4, GUNDU discloses, sending a request (displaying a message) to the first network to suspend the communicating via the first network (Figures 1, 2, and associated paragraphs; it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the wireless communication network art to understand that “GUNDU’s displaying a message to notify at the DDS switch” indicates to suspend the data inactive data call on Sub1 192).
As to claim 5, GUNDU discloses, tuning, for a time period, a transceiver of the user device to monitor for the signal (Figures 1, 2, and associated paragraphs, step 235 to indicate the monitoring the Sub1 signal 192 in the first timer).
As to claim 6, GUNDU discloses, wherein the time period is based on at least one of an operational status of the user device (In-Service or OOS), power consumption of the user device, or geo-fencing information (Figures 1, 2, and associated paragraphs, [36]-[39]).
As to claim 7, GUNDU discloses, sending, from a transceiver (Figure 1, the transceiver 122) of the user device to a modem of the user device, based on the signal, an indication of the presence of the second network (Figures 1, 2, and associated paragraphs).
As to claim 8, GUNDU discloses, sending, from a modem of the user device to an application processor of the user device, a notification that the signal is received for the duration of time and an indication (data communication activity) of the handover condition (Figures 1, 2, and associated paragraphs, [36]-[39]).
As to claim 9, GUNDU discloses, determining, by an application processor (Figure 1, the control unit 110) of the user device, that the signal is received for the duration of time (Figures 1, 2, and associated paragraphs).
As to claim 10, GUNDU discloses, receiving from the second network, via a transceiver (Figure 1, the transceiver 122) of the user device, the acknowledgment of the request (the notification of the message) to connect (to switch/to transition) to the second network (Figures 1, 2, and associated paragraphs).
As to claim 11, GUNDU discloses, sending, from a modem of the user device to an application processor of the user device, the acknowledgment of the request (the notification of the message) to connect (to switch/to transition) to the second network (Figures 1, 2, and associated paragraphs).
As to claim 12, GUNDU discloses, wherein determining, based on the signal being received for the duration of time, the presence of the second network and the handover condition associated with the second network comprises determining an indication (data communication activity) of the presence of the second network and the handover condition associated with the second network (Figures 1, 2, and associated paragraphs).
As to claim 13, GUNDU discloses, a method comprising:
attempting, by a user device (Figures 1, the user mobile communication device 100) connected to a first network (Figures 1, a first communication network 190), based on a signal (a second subscription (Sub2) signal 197 with its signal energy on a second communication network 195) that indicates a presence of a second network (a data call active or data communication activity) being received for a duration of time (the duration of the specified time period of the second timer, 42]), to connect to the second network (Figures 1, 2, and associated paragraphs, [36]-[39]);
receiving an indication of a handover (switch/transition) condition (RF condition(s) and signal strength, [37]-[39]) of the second network (Figures 1, 2, and associated paragraphs); and
canceling, based on the handover condition (idle condition on Sub2 during Timer2, steps 260, 270 in Figure 2), the attempt to connect to the second network (Figures 1, 2, and associated paragraphs).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the wireless communication art to recognize that in light of instant paragraphs [23], [48] that describe ““conditions (e.g., network conditions…, ) to determine when to transition (e.g., to switch) from a network associated with a subscription /service/provider to a network associated with a different subscription /service/provider” ([23]) and “the user device 101 may gain attempt to connect/switch to the MSO network 117 based on a temporal condition, such as the expiration of a time duration or during a specific time/time period. The temporal condition may be determined by the user device 101, a service/ subscription parameter, and/or the MSO network 117…” are technically equivalent to the technical feature novelty in “GUNDU’s the DDS detection manager 116 may take into account consideration RF conditions and/or LTE signal strength, for example, but not limited to, received power (RxPwr), Signal-To-Interference Ratio (Ec/Io), etc., when deciding to which SIM the DDS should be switched and when to switch the DDS. In addition, the DDS detection manager 116 may cause different timers to operate when deciding to which SIM the DDS should be switch. A message on the User Interface 170 may be used to notify the user of the DDS switch, ([36],[37]);“one or more timers may be implemented to enable a mobile communication device to dynamically switch a data subscription. The DDS detection manager 116 may incorporate a hysteresis function, for example, but not to limit to, using one or more timers, to avoid ping-ponging between two SIMS,…, ([39])”) in which GUNDU achieves the same purpose of the instant title of “Methods and Systems for switching between service provider networks”.
As to claim 14, GUNDU discloses, wherein the user device comprises at least one of a dual subscriber identification module (SIM) dual standby (DSDS) device, or a multi-SIM device (Figure 1, SIM1, SIM2 in the user device 100).
As to claim 15, GUNDU discloses, wherein the handover condition comprises one or more of one or more signals that are received (the subscription goes in-service), one or more signals that are not received (the subscription goes Out-Of-Service), a device-based condition (the device in idle), or a service provider condition (the data communication activities of the SIM card network operator provider).
As to claim 16, GUNDU discloses, communicating with the first network via a transceiver of the user device (Figures 1, 2, and associated paragraphs)..
As to claim 17, GUNDU discloses, tuning, for a time period, the transceiver to monitor for the signal (Figures 1, 2, and associated paragraphs)..
As to claim 18, GUNDU discloses, sending, from a transceiver of the user device to a modem of the user device, based on the signal being received for the duration of time, an indication of the presence of the second network (Figures 1, 2, and associated paragraphs)..
As to claim 19, GUNDU discloses, sending, from the modem to an application processor of the user device, a notification that the signal is received for the duration of time and the indication of the handover condition (Figures 1, 2, and associated paragraphs).
As to claim 20, GUNDU discloses, determining, by an application processor of the user device, that the signal is received for the duration of time (Figures 1, 2, and associated paragraphs).
As to claim 21, GUNDU discloses, a method comprising:
receiving (detecting), by a user device (Figures 1, the user mobile communication device 100) in communication with a first network (Figures 1, a first communication network 190), a signal (a signal energy of a first Sub1 signal 192 or of a first Sub1 signal 192) associated with a second network for a duration of time (during a specified time period of a first timer/a second timer, [7], [42]);
determining, based on receiving the signal for the duration of time, an indication (active timer) of the second network (Figures 1, 2, and associated paragraphs);
determining, based on the indication of the second network, a handover condition (active data communication condition) of the second network ; (Figures 1, 2, and associated paragraphs) and
causing, based on the handover condition, the user device to communicate with the second network (Figures 1, 2, and associated paragraphs).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the wireless communication art to recognize that in light of instant paragraphs [23], [48] that describe ““conditions (e.g., network conditions…, ) to determine when to transition (e.g., to switch) from a network associated with a subscription /service/provider to a network associated with a different subscription /service/provider” ([23]) and “the user device 101 may gain attempt to connect/switch to the MSO network 117 based on a temporal condition, such as the expiration of a time duration or during a specific time/time period. The temporal condition may be determined by the user device 101, a service/ subscription parameter, and/or the MSO network 117…” are technically equivalent to the technical feature novelty in “GUNDU’s the DDS detection manager 116 may take into account consideration RF conditions and/or LTE signal strength, for example, but not limited to, received power (RxPwr), Signal-To-Interference Ratio (Ec/Io), etc., when deciding to which SIM the DDS should be switched and when to switch the DDS. In addition, the DDS detection manager 116 may cause different timers to operate when deciding to which SIM the DDS should be switch. A message on the User Interface 170 may be used to notify the user of the DDS switch, ([36],[37]);“one or more timers may be implemented to enable a mobile communication device to dynamically switch a data subscription. The DDS detection manager 116 may incorporate a hysteresis function, for example, but not to limit to, using one or more timers, to avoid ping-ponging between two SIMS,…, ([39])”) in which GUNDU achieves the same purpose of the instant title of “Methods and Systems for switching between service provider networks”.
As to claim 22, GUNDU discloses, wherein the user device comprises one or more of a dual subscriber identification module (SIM) dual standby (DSDS) device, or a multi-SIM device (Figure 1, SIM1, SIM2 in the user device 100).
As to claim 23, GUNDU discloses, wherein the handover condition comprises one or more of one or more signals that are received (the subscription goes in-service), one or more signals that are not received (the subscription goes Out-Of-Service), a device-based condition (the user device is in idle), or a service provider condition (the data communication activities of the SIM card network operator provider).
As to claim 24, GUNDU discloses, wherein the user device is configured to connect to the second network as a primary network connection (In-Service subscription) and connect to the first network as an offload network connection (Out-Of-Service (OOS) subscription) (Figures 1, 2, and associated paragraphs).
---------------------------------------------------------
The prior art cited in this Office action are: GUNDU et al. US 2017/0280380 A1.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1-12, 21-24 are rejected on the ground of non-statutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-15, 26-31 of U.S. Patent No. 12,414,202 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claim recitations are merely reworded to recite the same limitation in different language and some of the limitations have been grouped in a slightly different manner but still overall set forth the same limitations. All the recited elements and limitations are found over claims 1-15, 17-25, 26-31 of U.S. Patent No. 12,414,202 B2.
The instant claims 1-12, 21-24 are broader than claims 1-15, 26-31 of U.S. Patent No. 12,414,202 B2.
The instant independent claims 1,21 are broader than independent claims 1,26 of U.S. Patent No. 12,414,202 B2, wherein the instant claimed element of “a handover condition” = the claimed element of “a network condition” in light of instant paragraphs [23], and in US Patent No. 12,414,202 B2 in (col. 4, lines 25-47) describing that, “…conditions (e.g., network conditions…) to determine when to transition from a network associated with a subscription/ service provider to a network associated with a different subscription/service provider” (e.g., switching or hanging over from a first network to a second network).
The instant dependent claims 3, 23 have similar limitations of claims 3-5, 28-30 of U.S. Patent No. 12,414,202 B2, in light of instant paragraph [23] and in US Patent No. 12,414,202 B2 in (col. 4, lines 25-47).
The instant claims 1;2;3;4;5;6;7;8;9;10;11;12 correspond to the claims 1;2;(3+4+5);6;7;8;9;10;11;12;13;(14+15) of U.S. Patent No. 12,414,202 B2 respectively.
The instant claims 21,22,23,24 correspond to the claims 26,27,(28+29+30),31 in of U.S. Patent No. 12,414,202 B2 respectively.
The instant independent user device method claim 1 has technical functions exchangeable with the independent computer device claim 16 in U.S. Patent No. 12,414,202 B2.
The instant method claims 2;3;10;5;7;8,9 have similar limitations of claims 18;(17+19+20);21;22;23;24;25 in U.S. Patent No. 12,414,202 B2, respectively.
-------------------------------
Claims 1-24 are rejected on the ground of non-statutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-48 of U.S. Patent No. 11,997,762 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claim recitations are merely reworded to recite the same limitation in different language and some of the limitations have been grouped in a slightly different manner but still overall set forth the same limitations. All the recited elements and limitations are found over claims 1-48 of U.S. Patent No. 11,997,762 B2.
The instant claims 1-12 correspond to the user device claims of the non-transitory computer-readable medium claims 1-12 and of the system claims 13-24 in U.S. Patent No. 11,997,762 B2.
The instant claims 13-20 correspond to the user device method claims of the non-transitory computer-readable medium claims 25-32 and of the system claims 33-40 in U.S. Patent No. 11,997,762 B2
The instant claims 21-24 correspond to the user device method claims of the non-transitory computer-readable medium claims 41-44 and of the system claims 45-48 in U.S. Patent No. 11,997,762 B2.
wherein the instant claimed element of “a handover condition” = the claimed element of “a network condition” in light of instant paragraphs [23], and in US Patent No. 11,997,762 B2 in (col. 4, lines 23-45) describing that, “…conditions (e.g., network conditions…) to determine when to transition from a network associated with a subscription/ service provider to a network associated with a different subscription/service provider” (e.g., switching or hanging over from a first network to a second network); and
wherein the instant claimed element of “a duration of time” = the claimed of “a threshold duration” in claims 1,8,9,12,13,20,21,25,30-33,38-41,45 in US Patent No. 11,997,762 B2.
-------------------------------------------
Claims 1-24 are rejected on the ground of non-statutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-21 of U.S. Patent No. 11,638,327 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claim recitations are merely reworded to recite the same limitation in different language and some of the limitations have been grouped in a slightly different manner but still overall set forth the same limitations. All the recited elements and limitations are found over claims 1-21 of U.S. Patent No. 11,638,327 B2.
The instant method claims 1,2,4-11 have similar limitations of the method claims 1-10 of U.S. Patent No. 11,638,327 B2.
The instant method claims 13,14,16-20 have similar limitations of the method claims 11,12,13,14,15,16,17 of U.S. Patent No. 11,638,327 B2.
The instant method claims 21,22,24,12 have similar limitations of the method claims 18,19,20,21 of U.S. Patent No. 11,638,327 B2.
wherein the instant claimed element of “a handover condition” = the claimed element of “a network condition” in light of instant paragraphs [23], and in U.S. Patent No. 11,638,327 B2 in (col. 4, lines 23-45) describing that, “…conditions (e.g., network conditions…) to determine when to transition from a network associated with a subscription/ service provider to a network associated with a different subscription/service provider” (e.g., switching or hanging over from a first network to a second network); and
wherein the instant claimed element of “a duration of time” = the claimed of “a threshold duration” in claims 1,7,8,11,12,16-19 in US Patent No. 11,638,327 B2.
and wherein the instant claimed elements in dependent claims 3,15,23 are described in instant paragraph [23] and in (col. 4, lines 23-45) in US Patent No. 11,638,327 B2.
----------------------
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HAI V NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-3901. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6:00AM -3:30PM.
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, Kevin Pan can be reached at 571-272-7855. 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.
/HAI V NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2649
Prosecution Insights