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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
1. A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 5/11/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
2. Applicant's arguments, filed on 5/11/2026 with respect to pending claims in the remarks, have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
3. 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.
Claims 1, 3, 6-11, 13, 16-20 and 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Li et al. (US 2014/0128109), (hereinafter, Li) in view of Deenoo et al., (US 2019/0261287), (hereinafter, Deenoo).
Regarding claims 1 and 11, Li discloses a method performed by an apparatus, the method comprising:
receiving, by the apparatus in a power saving state, a notification during a notification opportunity at a time-frequency resource (= paging listening time, see [0091 and 0094]), wherein the notification is an apparatus-specific notification (= paging controller informs one or more base stations which mobile stations are to be paged, base stations then broadcast a paging message, which includes identifiers of the mobile station identifiers; mobile stations in idle mode wake up at certain times to listen the paging message, see [0090]);
decoding, by the apparatus, information carried by the notification (= MS monitors the paging messages at the determined timing by using it RX beams; downlink control channel can be transmitted in wide beams, see [0051]; identifiers of cells can be carried in the beams; by acquiring these channel, the mobile station can detect the identifiers, see [0052] and if a mobile station determines that its identifier is included in the paging message, then the mobile station knows it is paged, and it performs further action, see [0090, 0092 and 0216-17]).
Li explicitly fails to disclose the claimed limitations of:
“wherein the notification is received in a downlink beam pointed in a direction of the apparatus, wherein the direction of the apparatus is based on a position of the apparatus” and
“wherein the information carried in the apparatus-specific notification that is received by the apparatus in the power saving state during the notification opportunity includes a downlink beam direction or subspace.”
However, Deenoo, which is an analogous art equivalently discloses the claimed limitations of:
“wherein the notification is received in a downlink beam pointed in a direction of the apparatus, wherein the direction of the apparatus is based on a position of the apparatus”(= WTRU may be configured to transmit a heartbeat signal if the WTRU stays within a preconfigured set of TRP or cells…transmit a heartbeat signal if the WTRU stays within geographical location; and the heartbeat signal transmissions may be beneficial to allow the network to transmit DL notification to a subset of beams, cells and/or geographical locations, see [0241]) and
“wherein the information carried in the apparatus-specific notification that is received by the apparatus in the power saving state during the notification opportunity includes a downlink beam direction or subspace” (= WTRU may use one or more candidate beam pairs to monitor for a downlink notification or downlink schedule during this power saving cycle, see [0222] and WTRU wakes up to read a paging in a paging occasion, see [0250-51]).
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 combined the teaching of Deenoo with Li for the benefit of achieving a communication system that jointly performs beam management and power saving management in a wireless system.
Regarding claims 3 and 13, as mentioned in claims 1 and 11, Li further discloses the method/apparatus wherein the power saving state is a state in which the apparatus does not monitor downlink control information (DCI) until it enters a wake-up duration (see, [0090]).
Regarding claims 6 and 16, as mentioned in claims 1, Li further discloses the method/apparatus, wherein the notification includes information specific to the apparatus (see, [0101-02]).
Regarding claims 7 and 17, as mentioned in claims 6 and 16, Li further discloses the method, wherein the information specific to the apparatus includes at least one of the following: a paging message indicating that there is downlink data to transmit to the apparatus; short traffic; control information for the apparatus to trigger an action (see, [0090 and 0092]).
Regarding claims 8 and 18, as mentioned in claims 1 and 11, Li further discloses the method/apparatus, wherein a downlink beam in which the notification is received is not part of a downlink beam sweeping pattern, and wherein prior to receiving the notification the method further comprises synchronizing with a network using at least one synchronization signal in a beam of the downlink beam sweeping pattern (= BS could page multiple groups of MSs, each with a different paging listening offset…MS does not need to listen all the time, see [0094]; and timing alignment for BS and MS can be achieved by explicit signaling, see [0091]).
Regarding claims 9 and 19, as mentioned in claims 8 and 19, Li further discloses that the method/apparatus, further comprising obtaining system information from the beam of the beam sweeping pattern, wherein the system information includes at least one of the following: an indication of whether there is the notification for the apparatus; configuration information for the notification opportunity (see, [0091-92 and 0094]).
Regarding claims 10 and 20, as mentioned in claims 1 and 11, Li further discloses that the method/apparatus, wherein prior to receiving the notification the method comprises receiving control signaling, wherein the control signaling includes at least one of the following: an indication of whether there is the notification for the apparatus; an indication that the apparatus is to switch to a different operating mode; a common short message from a network (see, [0090 and 0092]).
Regarding claims 21 and 22, as mentioned in claims 1 and 11method of claim 1, Li explicitly fails to disclose the method/apparatus, wherein the position of the apparatus is indicated by the apparatus via periodic reporting or is measured by a network.
However, Deenoo, which is an analogous art equivalently discloses the method/apparatus, wherein the position of the apparatus is indicated by the apparatus via periodic reporting or is measured by a network”(= WTRU may be configured to transmit a heartbeat signal if the WTRU stays within a preconfigured set of TRP or cells…transmit a heartbeat signal if the WTRU stays within geographical location; and the heartbeat signal transmissions may be beneficial to allow the network to transmit DL notification to a subset of beams, cells and/or geographical locations, see [0241]).
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 combined the teaching of Deenoo with Li for the benefit of achieving a communication system that jointly performs beam management and power saving management in a wireless system.
CONCLUSION
4. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Kwasi Karikari whose telephone number is
571-272-8566.The examiner can normally be reached on M-Sat (6am – 10pm).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Charles Appiah can be reached on 571-272-7904.
The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8566.
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).
/Kwasi Karikari/
Primary Examiner: Art Unit 2641.
