DETAILED ACTION
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
2. 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.
Status of Claims
1. The following is a non-final office action in response to the applicant’s arguments/remarks received 10/20/2025.
2. Claims 1, 3 - 4, 9, 15, 17 – 18, 21, 53 and 67 are currently pending and have been examined.
3. Claims 1, 9, 15, 21, 53 and 67 have been amended.
4. Claims 2, 5 – 8, 10 – 14, 16, 19 - 20, 22 - 52, 54 – 66 and 68 - 79 have been cancelled.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 10/20/2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
The arguments/remarks presented by the applicant/applicant’s representative on 09/29/2025 along with the amendments made to the independent claims were thoroughly reviewed resulting in the scope of the independent claims being changed. A further search and reconsideration was conducted, see new claim rejection presented below.
Claim interpretation
1. Limitations appearing in the specification but not recited in the claim should not be read into the claim. E-Pass Techs., Inc. v. 3Com Corp., 343 F.3d 1364, 1369, 67 USPQ2d 1947, 1950 (Fed. Cir. 2003) (claims must be interpreted "in view of the specification" without importing limitations from the specification into the claims unnecessarily) [MPEP 2106 Sec I, C]. “Though understanding the claim language may be aided by explanations contained in the written description, it is important not to import into a claim limitations that are not part of the claim. For example, a particular embodiment appearing in the written description may not be read into a claim when the claim language is broader than the embodiment.” Superguide Corp. v. DirecTV Enterprises, Inc., 358 F.3d 870, 875, 69 USPQ2d 1865, 1868 (Fed. Cir. 2004). [MPEP 2111.01 Sec II]. Thus, the Examiner interprets Applicant’s claims "in view of the specification" and does not “import into a claim limitation that are not part of the claim”.
2. When multiple limitations are connected with “OR”, one of the limitations does not have any patentable weight since both of the limitations are optional.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 1, 9, 15, 21, 53 and 67 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu et al. (US 2021/0136532 A1, the provisional application date is relied on for support) in view of Chen et al. (WO 2021/098056 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Liu discloses: A method for signal transmission, performed by user equipment (UE),(see ¶ 0074, that is, considering the UE) comprising:
receiving a target reference signal resource indicated by a base station through preset signaling; (see ¶ 0074, that is the RRC message (preset signaling) sends TRS configuration indicating the resources (target reference resource) on which the base station will send TRS) and
receiving a reference signal according to the target reference signal resource, (see ¶ 0074 : that is the RRC message (preset signaling) sends TRS configuration indicating the resources (target reference resource) on which the base station will send TRS in combination with ¶ 0075: The UE receives the TRS) wherein UE is in RRC idle/RRC inactive mode, (see first sentence of ¶ 0074) and the reference signal is a periodic tracking reference signal (TRS).[¶ 0074, the TRS may be a periodic TRS].
[see ¶ 0077 and ¶ 0079 of the provisional application for support]
Liu does not disclose: and wherein the preset signalling comprises system information and paging information, or the preset signalling comprises system information and random access response information, or the preset signalling comprises random access response information and paging information.
The above limitation is in alternate form, the first condition is taken into consideration, that is “…and wherein the preset signalling comprises system information and paging information.”., which is disclosed by Chen, beginning at step 1 on page 23 (bottom), a first signaling is being sent to the UE that possesses reference signal configuration, further step 3 on page 24, discloses the wireless device can be either idle/inactive mode. The above steps are consistent with the primary reference (analogous art). The signaling disclosed in step 1 on page 23 is further seen in step 4 on page 24 that can be used to transmit SIB and paging information.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Liu’s system in view of Chen. The motivation for making the above modification would have been for the reduction of power consumption of the UE in RRC idle/inactive/connected mode [See page 3, third paragraph of the reference Chen].
Claims 15, 53 and 67 recites similar features using respective language and are also rejected by the applied references for similar reasons as claim 1. Such elements as a processor, memory and program instructions are all disclosed in the reference of Liu, see ¶ 0137.
Regarding claim 9, Liu and Chen discloses: The method of claim 1wherein in case that the preset signaling is the random access response information and the paging information, the receiving the target reference signal resource indicated by the base station through the preset signaling comprises:
receiving a first reference signal resource set indicated by the base station through the random access response information, wherein the first reference signal resource set comprises one or more reference signal resources;
receiving an index value of the target reference signal resource indicated by the base station through the paging information; and
obtaining the target reference signal resources from the first reference signal resource set according to the index value;
or in case that the preset signaling is the random access response information and the system information, the receiving the target reference signal resource indicated by the base station through the preset signaling comprises:
receiving a first reference signal resource set indicated by the base station through the random access response information, wherein the first reference signal resource set comprises one or more reference signal resources;
receiving an index value of the target reference signal resource indicated by the base station through the system information; and
obtaining the target reference signal resources from the first reference signal resource set according to the index value.
[It should be noted art is not necessary in the rejection of claim 9, since claim 9 inherits the limitations of claim 1, claim 1 possess three options, and the examiner selects option: “…and wherein the preset signalling comprises system information and paging information.”., in the rejection of claim 1. However, claim 9 requires one of the other options as highlighted in claim 9 above which was not given patentable weight (When multiple limitations are connected with “OR”, one of the limitations does not have any patentable weight since both of the limitations are optional. )].
Claim 21 recites similar features using respective language and are also rejected by the applied references for similar reasons as claim 9.
Claim(s) 3 – 4, 17 – 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu et al. (US 2021/0136532 A1) in view of Chen et al. (WO 2021/098056 A1). Manolakos et al. (US 2020/0150254 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Liu discloses: The method of claim 1 (see rejected claim 1)
Liu in view of Chen does not disclose: wherein the target reference signal resource comprises one or more scrambling identifications. In the same field of endeavor, Manolakos discloses the above missing feature, see ¶ 110 in view of ¶ 0086, whereby the resources of the TRS can be scrambled with a scrambling ID. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Liu’s system in view of Chen and Manolakos. The motivation for making the above modification would have been to distinguish the resources in view of the plurality of transmission points [¶ 0086 of Manolakos].
Claim 17 recites similar features using respective language and are also rejected by the applied references for similar reasons as claim 3.
Claim 4, Manolakos further discloses: The method of claim 1, wherein the number of the target reference signal resources is determined by the base station according to a first preset rule. [¶ 0091 and ¶ 0097, the tracking resource set received by the UE is formulated by the serving bases station as seen in figure 9A-D. In other words, a rule is implied since the UE must know as to what position in time and frequency the TRS is being transmitted. “Also for each tracking resource set of each resource setting, a subcarrier offset of the plurality of RS resources of that tracking resource set may be different from subcarrier offsets of the plurality of RS resources of all other tracking resource sets of that resource setting. Each resource setting can be associated with one of a plurality of transmission points in which each transmission point can be distinct from all others of the plurality of transmission points.”].
Claim 18 recites similar features using respective language and are also rejected by the applied references for similar reasons as claim 4.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAHARISHI V KHIRODHAR whose telephone number is (571)270-7909. The examiner can normally be reached 6:00 AM - 3:00 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, Nawaz M Asad can be reached at 571-272-3988. 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.
MAHARISHI V. KHIRODHAR
Examiner
Art Unit 2463
/MAHARISHI V KHIRODHAR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2463