2DETAILED 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 .
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed 11/20/2025 has been entered. Claims 1 and 20 have been amended. Claims 5-6 and 10-19 are canceled. Claims 21-32 are newly added. Claims 1-4,7-9 and 20-32 are pending, out of which claim 31 is withdrawn from consideration.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/20/2025, have been fully considered and entered. Regarding the independent claims 1 and 20, they are moot based on new grounds for rejection.
Election/Restrictions
Claim 31 is withdrawn from consideration, as it is directed to non-elected group/species.
Claim Objections
Claims 29 and 30 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claims 29 and 30; “The method…” should read as “The one or more non-transitory computer readable media…”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
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 non-obviousness.
Claims 1, 20-21 and 24-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ningyu et al. (WO 2018077014 A1) hereinafter Ningyu in view of Shahi et al. (US 20220394712 A1) hereinafter Shahi, NOTE: the English translation of Ningyu is used for rejection purposes hereinafter.
Regarding claim 1,
Ningyu teaches a method for improving energy efficiency of a user equipment (UE) (method for optimal terminal operation [2]-[7] and [43]), the method comprising: receiving a power state information of the UE (acquiring status information [12] and [43]), wherein the power state information comprises a battery level of the UE (status information includes terminal power amount information [78]); determining a current measurement reporting interval of the UE (implied/obvious to determine the current reporting period so that it gets extended or shortened based on the power status [110]-[114]); based at least in part on the power state information of the UE (based on status information [9], [43] and [0110]-[0112]), determining a modified measurement reporting interval for the UE (a new measurement reporting period is configured [0110]-[112]); and communicating the modified measurement reporting interval to the UE (sending configuration message to terminal [10] and [14]).
Ningyu does not explicitly teach wherein determining the modified measurement reporting interval comprises analyzing a historical pattern of battery usage associated with a defined time period and determining that current conditions match the historical pattern.
Shahi teaches wherein determining the modified measurement reporting interval comprises analyzing a historical pattern of battery usage associated with a defined time period and determining that current conditions match the historical pattern (predicting and configuring the UE context based on historical data including the battery level, where a neural network model is used for mapping the input context history to predicted/configured context [0006]-[0007], [0057]-[0058] and [0083]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Shahi to the teachings of Ningyu One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would optimize carrier aggregation (Shahi [0006]).
Regarding claim 20,
Ningyu teaches one or more non-transitory computer readable media having instructions stored thereon that, when executed by one or more computer processing components (computer readable storage medium having instructions executed by a processor [23] and [33]), cause the one or more computer processing components to perform a method for improving the power efficiency of a user equipment (UE), the method comprising: receiving one or more measurement report parameters associated with a UE (acquiring status information including terminal power amount information [12], [43], and [78]), the one or more measurement report parameters comprising one or more of a power level (status information includes terminal power amount information [78]), a density of UEs in an area comprising the UE, and a mobility of the UE; determining a modified measurement reporting interval based at least on a comparison of the received parameters to one or more predetermined thresholds (updating reporting period based on battery power falling below a first preset value [121]); and communicating an instruction to the UE to transmit measurement reports to a base station according to the modified measurement reporting interval (sending configuration message to terminal [10] and [14]).
Ningyu does not explicitly teach wherein determining the modified measurement reporting interval comprises analyzing a historical pattern of battery usage associated with a defined time period and determining that current conditions match the historical pattern.
Shahi teaches wherein determining the modified measurement reporting interval comprises analyzing a historical pattern of battery usage associated with a defined time period and determining that current conditions match the historical pattern (predicting and configuring the UE context based on historical data including the battery level, where a neural network model is used for mapping the input context history to predict/configure context [0006]-[0007], [0057]-[0058] and [0083]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Shahi to the teachings of Ningyu One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would optimize carrier aggregation (Shahi [0006]).
Regarding claim 21,
Ningyu does not explicitly teach receiving historical mobility information of the UE, wherein determining the modified measurement reporting interval further comprises proactively modifying the interval based on historical activity indicating the UE is likely to move at a present day/time.
Shahi teaches receiving historical mobility information of the UE, wherein determining the modified measurement reporting interval further comprises proactively modifying the interval based on historical activity indicating the UE is likely to move at a present day/time (predicting and configuring the UE based historical behavior patterns including the location, where a neural network model is used for mapping the input history to predict/configure context [0006]-[0007], [0057] and [0083]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Shahi to the teachings of Ningyu One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would optimize carrier aggregation (Shahi [0006]).
Regarding claim 24,
Ningyu and Shahi teach all the features of claim 1, as outlined above.
Ningyu further teaches wherein the power state information further comprises an indication of expected battery life remaining (terminal status information including remaining standby time [92]).
Regarding claim 25,
Ningyu and Shahi teach all the features of claim 1, as outlined above.
Ningyu does not explicitly teach wherein analyzing the historical pattern comprises determining a battery consumption rate during a specific time window and comparing current battery level against predicted consumption for a remaining portion of the time window.
Shahi wherein analyzing the historical pattern comprises determining a battery consumption rate during a specific time window (predicting and configuring the UE context based on historical data including the battery level, where a neural network model is used for mapping the input context history to predicted/configured context [0006]-[0007], [0057]-[0058] and [0083]) and comparing current battery level against predicted consumption for a remaining portion of the time window (predicting and configuring over a future duration the UE context based on historical data including the battery level, where a neural network model is used for mapping the input context history to predicted/configured context [0006]-[0007], [0057]-[0058] and [0083]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Shahi to the teachings of Ningyu One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would optimize carrier aggregation (Shahi [0006]).
Claims 2-4, and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ningyu and Shahi in view of Nuggehalli et al. (US 20230199560 A1) hereinafter Nuggehalli.
Regarding claim 2,
Ningyu and Shahi teach all the features of claim 1, as outlined above.
Ningyu and Shahi do not explicitly teach the power state information of the UE is reported in a measurement report.
Nuggehalli teaches the power state information of the UE is reported in a measurement report (measurement report including energy-related information [0135]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Nuggehalli to the teachings of Ningyu and Shahi. One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would reduce energy consumption (Nuggehalli [0005]).
Regarding claim 3,
Ningyu and shahia and Nuggehalli teach all the features of claim 2, as outlined above.
Ningyu further teaches the power state information of the UE comprises an indication that the UE is disconnected from an external power supply (terminal power amount information indicating power modes [92]-[93]).
Regarding claim 4,
Ningyu and shahi and Nuggehalli teach all the features of claim 3, as outlined above.
Ningyu further teaches the power state information of the UE comprises an indication that the battery level of the UE is below a predetermined threshold and wherein the modified measurement reporting interval is less frequent than the current measurement reporting interval (terminal power amount information indicates a low battery power which causes the reporting period to get extended [0112] and [0120]-[0121]).
Regarding claim 7,
Ningyu and shahi and Nuggehalli teach all the features of claim 2, as outlined above.
Ningyu further teaches the power state information of the UE comprises an indication that the UE is connected to an external power supply and wherein the modified measurement reporting interval is equal to or more frequent than the current measurement reporting interval (status information including terminal power amount information indicating plug-in power which increases the reporting frequency [113]).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ningyu and shahi in view of Modestine et al. (US 20170171516 A1) hereinafter Modestine.
Regarding claim 8,
Ningyu and shahi teach all the features of claim 1, as outlined above.
Ningyu further teaches the modified measurement reporting interval of the UE is a first value (reporting period when the battery power is above a first preset value [121]), and wherein the modified measurement reporting interval of the UE is a second value based at least in part on the battery level of the UE below a second predetermined threshold (extended reporting period when the battery power is below a first preset value [121]), the second value being less frequent than the first value (the extended period being larger than the original reporting period [121])
Ningyu and shahi do not explicitly teach a first value based at least in part on the battery level of the UE being below a first predetermined threshold, the second predetermined threshold being less than the first predetermined threshold.
Modestine teaches a first value based at least in part on the battery level of the UE being below a first predetermined threshold (length of preset interval set to an initial value ; Fig. 18), the second predetermined threshold being less than the first predetermined threshold (second threshold being lower than the first threshold [0132]-[0133]; Fig. 18).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Modestine to the teachings of Ningyu and shahi. One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would extend battery life (Modestine [0130]).
Claims 9 and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ningyu and shahi in view of Venkatraman et al. (US 20230359645 A1) hereinafter Venkatraman.
Regarding claim 9,
Ningyu and Shahi teach all the features of claim 1, as outlined above.
Ningyu and Shahi do not explicitly teach the power state information of the UE is received as a result of a query to a data repository comprising an indication of historical battery power levels for the UE.
Venkatraman teaches the power state information of the UE is received as a result of a query to a data repository comprising an indication of historical battery power levels for the UE (battery level retrieved from a historical context database [0038] and [0061]-[0065]; Figs. 1-4).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Venkatraman to the teachings of Ningyu and Shahi. One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would allow for context-aware task execution (Venkatraman [0004]-[0006]).
Regarding claim 29,
Ningyu and Shahi teach all the features of claim 20, as outlined above.
Ningyu and Shahi do not explicitly teach the one or more measurement report parameters are retrieved from a historical context database storing previous power states of the UE.
Venkatraman teaches the one or more measurement report parameters are retrieved from a historical context database storing previous power states of the UE (battery level retrieved from a historical context database [0038] and [0061]-[0065]; Figs. 1-4).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Venkatraman to the teachings of Ningyu and Shahi. One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would allow for context-aware task execution (Venkatraman [0004]-[0006]).
Claim 22, 28 and 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ningyu and shahi in view of Futaki et al. (US 20140348005 A1) hereinafter Futaki.
Regarding claim 22,
Ningyu and Shahi teach all the features of claim 1, as outlined above.
Ningyu and Shahi do not explicitly teach wherein the modified measurement reporting interval is determined based on the battery level falling within one of multiple power level bands, each band corresponding to a different measurement reporting frequency.
Fukata teaches do wherein the modified measurement reporting interval is determined based on the battery level falling within one of multiple power level bands (preventing reporting unless a battery charge at a terminal reaches a certain threshold, and then modifying the reporting frequency based on the remaining charge [0082]-[0092] and [0137]), each band corresponding to a different measurement reporting frequency (where above a threshold, the UE may start reporting. Above a second threshold, the UE maintains report interval. Above the second threshold and below a third threshold, the UE may increase report interval [0082]-[0092] and [0137]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Fukata to the teachings of Ningyu and Shahi One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would save power by preventing unnecessary reporting (Fukata [0037]).
Regarding claim 28,
Ningyu and Shahi teach all the features of claim 1, as outlined above.
Ningyu and Shahi do not explicitly teach the power state information is reported by the UE at a predetermined interval that is different from the measurement reporting interval (measurement and reporting intervals maybe the same or different [0137]).
Fukata teaches the power state information is reported by the UE at a predetermined interval that is different from the measurement reporting interval (measurement and reporting intervals maybe the same or different [0137]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Fukata to the teachings of Ningyu and Shahi. One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would save power by preventing unnecessary reporting (Fukata [0037]).
Regarding claim 32,
Ningyu and Shahi teach all the features of claim 1, as outlined above.
Ningyu and Shahi do not explicitly teach overriding the modified measurement reporting interval to increase reporting frequency when the UE battery level falls below a critical emergency threshold.
Fukata teaches overriding the modified measurement reporting interval to increase reporting frequency when the UE battery level falls below a critical emergency threshold (preventing reporting unless a battery charge at a terminal reaches a certain threshold, and then maintaining the reporting frequency at a value based on the remaining charge [0082]-[0092] and [0137]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Fukata to the teachings of Ningyu and Shahi One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would save power by preventing unnecessary reporting (Fukata [0037]).
Claim 23 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ningyu and shahi in view of Lee et al. (US 20110071757 A1) hereinafter Lee.
Regarding claim 23,
Ningyu and Shahi teach all the features of claim 1, as outlined above.
Ningyu further teaches receiving movement information (mobility information including terminal’s moving speed [80]), wherein determining the modified measurement reporting interval comprises detecting gross movement of the UE (determining whether the terminal is stationary [0127]).
Ningyu and Shahi do not explicitly teach movement detected by one or more sensors of the UE, and movement of the UE beyond a predetermined threshold distance of a first position.
Lee teaches movement detected by one or more sensors of the UE (using a sensor to detect terminal movement [0020]-[0021]), and movement of the UE beyond a predetermined threshold distance of a first position (movement beyond a threshold distance [0020]-[0021]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Lee to the teachings of Ningyu and Shahi. One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would provide accurate measurement (Lee [0005]-[0006]).
Regarding claim 26,
Ningyu and Shahi teach all the features of claim 1, as outlined above.
Ningyu further teaches wherein an absence of any movement is used as at least part of a basis for decreasing the measurement reporting frequency (extending the reporting period when it is determined that the terminal is stationary [0127]).
Ningyu and Shahi do not explicitly teach detecting fine movements of the UE using one or more sensors.
Lee teaches detecting fine movements of the UE using one or more sensors (using a sensor to detect terminal movement [0020]-[0021]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Lee to the teachings of Ningyu and Shahi. One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would provide accurate measurement (Lee [0005]-[0006]).
Claim 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ningyu and shahi in view of Soldati et al. (US 20250081101 A1) hereinafter Soldati in further view of NAKANISHI et al. (US 20110316964 A1) hereinafter NAKANISHI.
Regarding claim 27,
Ningyu and Shahi teach all the features of claim 1, as outlined above.
Ningyu and Shahi do not explicitly teach modifying content of measurement reports based on the power state information, wherein fewer measurement parameters are included when battery level is below a threshold.
Soldati teaches the measurement report having optional parameters (the number of reporting cells being variable [0043]-[0048]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Soldati to the teachings of Ningyu and Shahi. One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would enhance energy saving (Soldati [0008]).
Ningyu and Shahi and Soldati do not explicitly teach modifying content of data based on the power state information.
NAKANISHI teaches modifying content of data based on the power state information (reducing the size of the data when the remaining battery level is low [0065]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of NAKANISHI to the teachings of Ningyu and Shahi and Soldati. One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would allow for smooth communication (NAKANISHI [0065]).
Claim 30 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ningyu and shahi in view of Hu et al. (US 20160315832 A1) hereinafter Hu.
Regarding claim 30,
Ningyu and Shahi teach all the features of claim 20, as outlined above.
Ningyu and Shahi do not explicitly teach the one or more predetermined thresholds are dynamically adjusted based on historical battery usage patterns of the UE.
Hu teaches the one or more predetermined thresholds are dynamically adjusted based on historical battery usage patterns of the UE (adjusting the threshold based on a historical historical battery-usage [0028]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Hu to the teachings of Ningyu and Shahi. One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would allow for dynamically adjusting the threshold based on historical patterns (Hu [0028]).
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 ABDUL AZIZ SANTARISI whose telephone number is (703)756-4586. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 AM - 5:00 PM ET. 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, Ayman Abaza can be reached on (571)270-0422. 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.
/ABDUL AZIZ SANTARISI/Examiner, Art Unit 2465
/AYMAN A ABAZA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2465