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.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 2/3/2026 has been entered. Claims 1, 3, 5-7, 10-11, 14, 16, 18-21 and 23-25 are pending.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 3, 5-7, 10-11, 14, 16, 18-21 and 23-25 are objected to because of the following informalities:
They include numerous grammatical errors that should be corrected. For example, “frequencies… overlaps” of claim 1 should be changed to “frequencies… overlap”. Appropriate corrections are required.
Regarding claims 3, 16, and 21, the acronyms “SSB” and “SSBs” should be spelled out at least once for clarity.
Regarding claims 5, 18, and 23, the acronyms “SSB” and “SSBs” should be spelled out, and “the” of “the sub-frame boundary”, “the frame boundary”, and “the timings” should be deleted for clarity.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 3, 5-7, 10-11, 14, 16, 18-21 and 23-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over R4-2000460 “Inter-frequency measurement requirement without gap” (hereinafter Mediatek) in view of US 2021/0084511 (hereinafter Harada).
Regarding claims 1, 10 and 14, Mediatek teaches a medium/UE/method for transmission, applied to a User Equipment (UE), comprising: determining that: frequencies of inter-frequency measurements overlaps at least partially with frequencies of the serving cell, or symbols to be measured of the inter-frequency measurements are comprised in a Bandwidth Part (BWP) activated by the UE (Section 2 Discussion: details UE can perform inter-frequency measurement without MG if the SSB is completely contained in the DL active BWP; it would be beneficial to provide an explicit network signaling to tell UE if the synchronization between an inter-frequency MO and one UE’s serving cell can be assumed), or both the frequencies of inter-frequency measurements overlaps at least partially with frequencies of the serving cell, or the symbols to be measured of the inter-frequency measurements are comprised in the BWP activated by the UE; in response to determining that: frequencies of inter-frequency measurements overlaps at least partially with frequencies of the serving cell, or symbols to be measured of the inter-frequency measurements are comprised in a Bandwidth Part (BWP) activated by the UE (Section 2 Discussion: details UE can perform inter-frequency measurement without MG if the SSB is completely contained in the DL active BWP; it would be beneficial to provide an explicit network signaling to tell UE if the synchronization between an inter-frequency MO and one UE’s serving cell can be assumed), or both the frequencies of inter-frequency measurements overlaps at least partially with frequencies of the serving cell, or the symbols to be measured of the inter-frequency measurements are comprised in the BWP activated by the UE, determining that a cell of the inter-frequency measurements is synchronous with the serving cell (Section 2 Discussion: details UE can perform inter-frequency measurement without MG if the SSB is completely contained in the DL active BWP; it would be beneficial to provide an explicit network signaling to tell UE if the synchronization between an inter-frequency MO and one UE’s serving cell can be assumed); and performing, by the UE, inter-frequency measurements without measurement gap (Section 2 Discussion: details UE can perform inter-frequency measurement without MG), wherein: in response to the cell of the inter-frequency measurements being synchronous with the serving cell, the UE being not expected to transmit on a first symbol (Section 2 Discussion; proposal 3: details OFDM symbols with scheduling restriction can be reduced from the entire SMTC duration to only those SSB symbols and those OFDM symbols adjacent to SSB; synchronization relation; for the scheduling restriction requirements for inter-frequency measurement without gap, if the synchronization signaling is provided, the scheduling restriction is applied only to those SSB symbols and OFDM symbols adjacent to SSB, as not expected to transmit on first symbol); wherein the method further comprises: sending second information (Section 2 “MeasObjectNR”); wherein the second information indicates whether the UE supports a first capability (Section 2 “MeasObjectNR”: details data reception); and the first capability comprises: performing at least one operations of receiving data from the serving cell (Section 2 “MeasObjectNR”: details UE perform measurement and data reception) or measuring the neighbor cell, when a sub-carrier spacing of a serving cell is different from a sub-carrier spacing of an inter-frequency neighbor cell (claimed in the alternative and includes a conditional limitation so no patentable weight).
Mediatek does not explicitly teach wherein the first symbol comprises one or more items of: symbols to be measured, one or more symbols before the symbols to be measured, and one or more symbols after the symbols to be measured.
However, Harada teaches wherein the first symbol comprises one or more items of: symbols to be measured, one or more symbols before the symbols to be measured, and one or more symbols after the symbols to be measured (FIG. 9: details symbols to be measured and not to be measured).
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 Mediatek to incorporate the teachings of Harada and include wherein the first symbol comprises one or more items of: symbols to be measured, one or more symbols before the symbols to be measured, and one or more symbols after the symbols to be measured of Harada with Mediatek. Doing so would suppress a decrease in throughput (Harada, paragraph [0013]).
Regarding claims 3, 16 and 21, Mediatek teaches receiving first information (Section 2 Discussion: details it would be beneficial to provide an explicit network signaling to tell UE if the synchronization between an inter-frequency MO and one UE’s serving cell can be assumed); wherein the first information indicates one or more of: whether sub-frame boundary across the serving cell and the inter-frequency neighbor cells is aligned; whether System Frame Number (SFN) across a serving cell and inter-frequency neighbor cells is aligned; and whether frame boundary across the serving cell and the inter-frequency neighbor cells is aligned; whether timings of SSBs across the serving cell and the inter-frequency cells are aligned; and whether the UE can utilize the serving cell timing to derive an SSB index of inter-frequency neighbor cell (Section 2 Discussion: details UE; “can utilize” merely require the ability to utilize without actually requiring performance of any utilization).
Regarding claims 5, 18 and 23, Mediatek teaches wherein the cell of the inter-frequency measurements being synchronous with the serving cell represents one or more of: the sub-frame boundary across the serving cell and the inter-frequency neighbor cells is aligned; System Frame Number (SFN) across a serving cell and inter-frequency neighbor cells is aligned; the frame boundary across the serving cell and the inter-frequency neighbor cells is aligned; the timings of SSBs across the serving cell and the inter-frequency cells are aligned; and the UE can utilize the serving cell timing to derive the SSB index of inter-frequency neighbor cell (Section 2 Discussion: details UE; “can utilize” merely require the ability to utilize without requiring actual performance of the utilization).
Regarding claims 6, 19 and 24, Mediatek teaches the first capability further comprises: the inter-frequency measurements without measurement gap (Section 2 Discussion: details UE can perform inter-frequency measurement without MG; it would be beneficial to provide an explicit network signaling to tell UE if the synchronization between an inter-frequency MO and one UE’s serving cell can be assumed).
Regarding claims 7, 20 and 25, Mediatek teaches receiving a measurement configuration; wherein the measurement configuration comprises one or more of: the measurement window; and information indicating the inter-frequency measurements without measurement gap (Section 2 Discussion: details UE can perform inter-frequency measurement without MG; MeasObjectNR).
Regarding claim 11, Mediatek teaches wherein the processor is a baseband processor (Section 2 Discussion: details the UE can perform processing such as radio functions so baseband processor is inherent).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2/3/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant alleges that Mediatek does not teach determining that frequencies of inter-frequency measurements overlaps at least partially with frequencies of the serving cell or symbols to be measured of the inter-frequency measurements are comprised in a Bandwidth Part (BWP) activated by the UE. Applicant also alleges that Mediatek does not teach determining that the inter-frequency MO is synchronous with the serving cell in response to the determining. Applicant also alleges that Mediatek discloses the case of the same SCS, which is different than the claim limitation. Examiner respectfully disagrees.
First, Mediatek clearly teaches “symbols to be measured of the inter-frequency measurements are comprised in a Bandwidth Part (BWP) activated by the UE” in Section 2 Discussion, which details UE can perform inter-frequency measurement without MG if the SSB is completely contained in the DL active BWP. Examiner notes that “frequencies of inter-frequency measurements overlaps at least partially with frequencies of the serving cell” is claimed in the alternative; therefore it has no patentable weight.
Second, Mediatek teaches the second determining step in response to the first determining step as claimed because Mediatek, for example in Section 2 Discussion, teaches determining symbols associated with an inter-frequency MO that are included then determining whether synchronization, associated with the inter-frequency MO, can be assumed. The second determining step utilizes features functionally related to signaling or information associated with the first determining step. Thus, Mediatek teaches the second determining step performed in response to the first determining step. Examiner suggests clarifying “in response to” and explicitly recite the functional relationships between the two determining steps to distinguish from the prior art.
Third, Applicant alleges that the different sub-carriers as claimed are not disclosed by Mediatek because Mediatek discloses the SCS of both UE’s serving cell and the target SSB are 15KHz. However, the claims do not recite that SCS frequencies are different. The claims do not recite how the sub-carrier spacings are different. They merely require that the sub-carrier spacing of the serving cell and inter-frequency neighbor cell are different. Thus, any difference would teach the claim limitation. Applicant admits that the SCSs are on different grids. Also, the serving cell and inter-frequency neighbor cell are difference cells. Therefore, Mediatek teaches “different” as claimed. In addition, this limitation is a conditional limitation; therefore, it has no patentable weight.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
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