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 .
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 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.
Claim(s) 16-31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung et al. (U.S. 2025/0287195), hereinafter Jung, in view of Shi et al. (U.S. 2025/0168704), hereinafter Shi.
With respect to Claim 16, Jung teaches a method performed by a terminal in a wireless communication system, the method comprising:
receiving, from a base station, a first message including information on a configuration for the terminal to report information for a gap preference (¶ 0260, “base station 1 12-02 may transmit the otherConfig-r17 contained in a predetermined RRC message to the SIM1 UE 12-01 of the multi-SIM UE… The otherConfig-r17 may include information (MUSIM-SwitchingGapPreferenceConfig) indicating that the SIM1 UE 12-01 of the multi-SIM UE is able to request a gap from base station 1 12-02 to perform operations on another SIM.”)
transmitting, to the base station, a second message including information on a multi universal subscriber identity module (MUSIM) gap preferred by the terminal (¶ 0269, “As an example, the predetermined message may mean UEAssistanceInformation. In an embodiment of the disclosure, the gap may be referred to as NoActivityPreferenceGaps for convenience of description. In other words, NoActivityPreferenceGaps may mean a gap required for the SIM1 UE 12-01 of the multi-SIM UE to perform no separate operation with base station 1 12-02 for a short time, and for the SIM2 UE 12-04 of the multi-SIM UE to perform the above-described predetermined operation and this may mean a gap for a multi-SIM operation.”) and
Jung fails to explicitly teach receiving, from the base station, a third message including information for determining a system frame number (SFN) and a subframe associated with the MUSIM gap.
Shi teaches receiving, from the base station, a third message including information for determining a system frame number (SFN) and a subframe associated with the MUSIM gap (¶ 0014, “MUSIM-Starting-SFN-AndSubframe-r17”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the application to combine the invention of Jung with the invention of Shi in order to better indicate the specifics of gap information in the system of Jung.
With respect to Claim 17, Jung teaches the method of claim 16, Jung teaches wherein, in case that the MUSIM gap preferred by the terminal is periodic, the information on the MUSIM gap preferred by the terminal includes at least one of information on a length, information on a gap repetition period, or information on a gap offset (¶ 0271, “As an example, a plurality of gap offsets may be included in one long period (mgrp), and the switching gap length or switching gap timing advance mapped to each gap offset may be included. Or, the gap offset, switching gap duration, and switching gap timing advance for each period may be included. Or, a specific no activity gap pattern among a plurality of no activity gap patterns may include an indicator indicating that it occurs one-shot rather than periodically.”)
With respect to Claim 18, Jung teaches the method of claim 16, Jung teaches wherein, in case that the MUSIM gap preferred by the terminal is aperiodic, the information on the MUSIM gap preferred by the terminal includes at least one of information on a length, information on a starting SFN, or information on a starting subframe (¶ 0271, “As an example, a plurality of gap offsets may be included in one long period (mgrp), and the switching gap length or switching gap timing advance mapped to each gap offset may be included. Or, the gap offset, switching gap duration, and switching gap timing advance for each period may be included. Or, a specific no activity gap pattern among a plurality of no activity gap patterns may include an indicator indicating that it occurs one-shot rather than periodically.”)
With respect to claim 19, Jung teaches the method of claim 16, Jung fails to explicitly teach wherein the SFN and the subframe are associated with a primary cell (PCell) of a master node (MN).
Shi teaches wherein the SFN and the subframe are associated with a primary cell (PCell) of a master node (MN) (¶ 0014, “MUSIM-Starting-SFN-AndSubframe-r17.” Note: there are only two real possibilities, either the frame timing of the master or the secondary, and it would be obvious to pick the primary as the information is being communicated to the primary and it would reduce complexity of the message as the device would otherwise need to include information about which timing is being used.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the application to combine the invention of Jung with the invention of Shi in order to better indicate the specifics of gap information in the system of Jung.
With respect to Claims 20-23, the claims are the method of the corresponding base station, which communicates with and corresponds to the method of a terminal of Claim 16-19, and are rejected accordingly.
With respect to Claims 24-27, the claims are the terminal corresponding to the method of Claims 16-19, and are rejected accordingly.
With respect to Claims 28-31, the claims are the base station device, which communicates with and corresponds to the method of a terminal of Claim 16-19, and are rejected accordingly.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANGELA NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-5660. 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, Jae Y Lee can be reached at 571-270-3936. 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.
/ANGELA NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2479
Prosecution Insights