DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to the application filed on 7 August 2024.
Claims 4-5 are under examination.
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 .
Specification
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 § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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.
Claims 4 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Jang et al. (US 2023/0371109 A1) (“Jang”) in view of Lee et al. (US 2017/0374688 A1) (“Lee”).
Regarding claim 4, Jang discloses A terminal apparatus for communicating with a base station apparatus, the terminal apparatus comprising: a processing unit configured to perform communication by using a Master Cell Group (MCG) and a Secondary Cell Group (SCG); and a receiver configured to receive signaling from the base station apparatus, wherein, the MCG includes at least a Primary Cell (PCell), the SCG includes at least a Primary SCG Cell (PSCell), the processing unit performs processing in a Medium Access Control (MAC) entity and processing in a Radio Resource Control (RRC) entity, and the MAC entity determines whether a TimeAlignmentTimer (TAT) associated with a Timing Advance Group (TAG) including the PSCell has expired. Jang discloses a UE configured for dual connectivity using an MCG and an SCG, wherein the MCG includes a PCell and the SCG includes a PSCell, and further describes MAC and RRC processing at the UE (Jang ¶¶[0038]–[0041], [0050]–[0051]). Jang further teaches TAGs and TATs associated with serving cells, including the PSCell (Jang ¶[0095]). In the context of activation of a deactivated SCG, Jang teaches determining whether the TAT associated with the PSCell is running and that, when the TAT is not running or has expired, random access to the PSCell is required to obtain timing advance and activate/resume communication with the SCG (Jang ¶¶[0101]–[0103], [0131]–[0133]).
Jang does not expressly disclose based on the determination that the TAT associated with the TAG including the PSCell has expired, provides a notification to the RRC entity, the notification indicating that a random access procedure is needed for activation of the SCG.
Lee discloses interlayer RRC/MAC processing associated with TAT status and random access. Lee teaches that the UE receives an RRC signal relating to cell configuration and determines whether the TAT associated with the relevant TAG is running, and initiates a random access procedure when the TAT is not running (Lee ¶¶[0008]–[0009]). Lee expressly teaches that the random access procedure is initiated by a MAC entity (Lee ¶[0010]). Lee further teaches that an RRC entity performs cell reconfiguration (Lee ¶[0012]) and provides an indication to the MAC entity, in response to which the MAC entity determines whether the TAT associated with the TAG is running and, when the TAT is not running, initiates the random access procedure (Lee ¶¶[0013]–[0014]). Lee additionally teaches, in its TAT-expiration procedure, that the MAC entity maintains a TAT for each TAG and notifies RRC upon expiration of a TAT, thereby establishing MAC-to-RRC notification as a known interlayer response to TAT expiration.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify Jang to employ Lee's known MAC/RRC interlayer signaling associated with TAT expiration and random access such that, when the MAC entity determines that the TAT associated with the TAG including the PSCell has expired, the MAC entity notifies the RRC entity that random access is needed for activation of the SCG. Jang expressly teaches that expiration or non-running status of the PSCell TAT results in random access being required for SCG activation, while Lee teaches that the MAC entity evaluates TAT status, initiates random access when the TAT is not running, and communicates TAT-expiration consequences between the MAC and RRC entities. The modification would have predictably provided the RRC entity responsible for radio-resource configuration with the MAC-layer TAT status and resulting random-access requirement necessary to coordinate activation of the SCG.
Regarding claim 5, Jang discloses A method for a terminal apparatus for communicating with a base station apparatus, the method comprising: performing communication by using a Master Cell Group (MCG) and a Secondary Cell Group (SCG), wherein the MCG includes at least a Primary Cell (PCell), the SCG includes at least a Primary SCG Cell (PSCell), and a Medium Access Control (MAC) entity of the terminal apparatus determines whether a TimeAlignmentTimer (TAT) associated with a Timing Advance Group (TAG) including the PSCell has expired, and based on the determination that the TAT associated with the TAG including the PSCell has expired, provides a notification to a Radio Resource Control (RRC) entity of the terminal apparatus, the notification indicating that a random access procedure is needed for activation of the SCG in part, for substantially the same reasons set forth above with respect to claim 4. Jang teaches the MCG/SCG and PCell/PSCell architecture, TAG/TAT processing, and determining that random access is required when the PSCell TAT is expired or not running during SCG activation (Jang ¶¶[0038]–[0041], [0050]–[0051], [0095], [0101]–[0103], [0131]–[0133]).
Jang does not expressly disclose based on the determination that the TAT associated with the TAG including the PSCell has expired, provides a notification to a Radio Resource Control (RRC) entity of the terminal apparatus, the notification indicating that a random access procedure is needed for activation of the SCG.
Lee teaches the MAC/RRC interlayer processing described above, including determining TAT status and initiating random access at the MAC entity when the TAT is not running (Lee ¶¶[0008]–[0010], [0013]–[0014]) and MAC-to-RRC notification associated with TAT expiration. It would have been obvious to combine Lee's known MAC/RRC TAT-expiration notification mechanism with Jang's determination that expiration of the PSCell TAT requires random access for SCG activation for the same reasons set forth above with respect to claim 4.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure (see form 892).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LUAT PHUNG whose telephone number is (571)270-3126. The examiner can normally be reached on M-Th 7:30 AM - 6:30 PM.
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, Marcus Smith can be reached on 571-27. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Luat Phung/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2468
Prosecution Insights