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 .
Response to Amendment
The examiner has taken notice that claims 1, 10 and 17 have been amended and Claims 2, 4, 6-7, 9, 11, 13, 15-16, 18, 22 and 23 are cancelled. Claims 1, 3, 5, 8, 10, 12, 14, 17, 19-21 and 24 are now pending in the present application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see response, filed 05/15/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1, 10 and 17 under 35 USC § 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Lee.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 10 and 17 are objected to because of the following informalities: the claim recites the limitation “wherein an initial value of the SrxlevRef is a current measurement value of the reference signal received signal strength when the terminal device receives the evaluation parameter of the low-speed mobility criterion sent by the network device,” twice in substantively identical form, without any narrowing or distinguishing scope between the two recitations. The second recitation is followed by “comprising:”, which claims to introduce a narrowing sub-limitation, but the clause that follows again restates the identical conclusion (“the initial value of the SrxlevRef is the current measurement value of the reference signal received signal strength;”) rather than reciting a distinct condition. This redundant claim drafting renders the claim needlessly repetitive and obscures the actual scope of the limitation being claimed. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1, 10 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. “when rrm-MeasRelaxationReportingConfig is included in an RRCReconfiguration message,” the specification supports the general concept (RRC signaling triggers the SrxlevRef intialization) but not the particular implementation detail.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1, 10 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as failing to set forth the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant regards as the invention.
Claims 1, 10 and 17 recites the initial value of “SrxlevRef” as being set under two apparently different conditions: (1) generally, “when the terminal device receives the evaluation parameter of the low-speed mobility criterion sent by the network device,” (2) specifically, “when rrm-MeasRelaxationReportingConfig is included in an RRCReconfiguration message,” it’s unclear from the claim language whether limitation (2) is intended as:
The only way SrxlevRef’s initial value can be set which means limitation (1) adds nothing new and is unnecessary.
One of several alternative mechanisms, in which case the claim fails to clearly describe the boundary between the general and specific triggering conditions; or
Just a repeat limitation (1) that doesn’t add any new patentable content and including it this way makes the actual scope of the claim unclear.
Because the “comprising:” transition following the second recitation of the SrxlevRef limitation doesn’t introduce a limitation that narrows or is otherwise in a clear subset relationship with the immediately preceding recitation, the metes and bounds of the claim can’t be determined with reasonable certainty.
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, 3, 5, 8, 10, 12, 14, 17, 19-21 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaikkonen et al. (US 2022/0007293) in view of Kim et al. (US 2021/0105643) in further view of Lee (US 20210105647).
Regarding claim 1, Kaikkonen teaches a method for indicating cell measurement, comprising: receiving an evaluation parameter of a low-speed mobility criterion sent by a network device (Paragraph [0025]; [0101] Describes receiving mobility parameters from the network, where the network indicates the user equipment to be in “low mobility”. Paragraph [0099] Shows the network device sending specific threshold parameters for mobility evaluation),
wherein the evaluation parameter of the low-speed mobility criterion comprises: a first duration and a change threshold value of a reference signal received signal strength (Paragraphs [0102]; [0104] describes using a timer duration and threshold values applied to signal measurements),
wherein the first duration is an evaluation duration of the reference signal received signal strength change (Paragraphs [0128]; [0131] describes by showing continuous evaluation of mobility parameters during timer periods, which inherently involves monitoring signal strength changes over the evaluation duration);
evaluating a mobility state of a terminal device according to the evaluation parameter, a measurement result of a serving cell, and a condition of the low-speed mobility criterion (Paragraphs [0126]-[0127] describes mobility state determination (determined to be low or stationary) using evaluation parameters (timer and threshold conditions)),
Kaikkonen doesn’t teach comprising: in response to the measurement result continuously satisfying (SrxlevRef - Srxlev) < SsearchDetaP in the first duration, determining that the mobility state of the terminal device is in low-speed mobility, wherein SrxlevRef is a reference value of the reference signal received signal strength, Srxlev is a measurement value of the reference signal received signal strength of the serving cell, and SsearchDetaP is a change threshold value of the reference signal received signal strength,
However, in analogous art Kim teaches comprising: in response to the measurement result continuously satisfying (SrxlevRef - Srxlev) < SsearchDetaP in the first duration, determining that the mobility state of the terminal device is in low-speed mobility (Paragraphs [0125]; [0146]-[0151]; [0163]; [0271] describes use formula (SrxlevRef-Srxlev) < SsearchDeltaP) check if it is satisfied continuously over the period TSearchDeltap (first duration) when satisfied, determine the UE is in “ a low-speed state”),
wherein SrxlevRef is a reference value of the reference signal received signal strength, Srxlev is a measurement value of the reference signal received signal strength of the serving cell, and SsearchDetaP is a change threshold value of the reference signal received signal strength (Paragraphs [0132]-[0133]; [0254] describes that SrxlevRef stores a reference point based on Srxlev (signal strength) or reference value of the reference signal received signal strength. Paragraphs [0108]-[0109]; [0131]; [0253] describes that Srxlev is calculated from RSRP, which is a measurement value of the reference signal received signal strength. Paragraphs [0139]; [0143]; [0253] describes that SsearchDeltaP is the threshold for detecting changes in signal strength),
Kaikkonen and Kim don’t teach wherein an initial value of the SrxlevRef is a current measurement value of the reference signal received signal strength when the terminal device receives the evaluation parameter of the low-speed mobility criterion sent by the network device, wherein the initial value of the SrxlevRef is the current measurement value of the reference signal received signal strength when the terminal device receives the evaluation parameter of the low-speed mobility criterion sent by the network device, comprising: when rrm- MeasRelaxationReportingConfig is included in an RRCReconfiguration message, the initial value of the SrxlevRef is the current measurement value of the reference signal received signal strength;
However, in analogous art Lee teaches wherein an initial value of the SrxlevRef is a current measurement value of the reference signal received signal strength when the terminal device receives the evaluation parameter of the low-speed mobility criterion sent by the network device (Paragraphs [0304]-[0308]; [0320]; [0372]; [0374] describes that the reference value SrxlevRef is reinitialized to the current measured Srxlev value upon triggering events, including cell reselection (UE begins applying the relaxed (low mobility) measurement condition)),
wherein the initial value of the SrxlevRef is the current measurement value of the reference signal received signal strength when the terminal device receives the evaluation parameter of the low-speed mobility criterion sent by the network device, comprising: when rrm-MeasRelaxationReportingConfig is included in an RRCReconfiguration message, the initial value of the SrxlevRef is the current measurement value of the reference signal received signal strength (Paragraphs [0288]; [0294]; [0372]; [0374] describes if the network delvers the rrm- MeasRelaxationReportingConfig IE to the UE specifically inside an RRC Reconfiguration message, then the UE should set the starting/initial value of its reference signal strength (SrxlevRef) equal to whatever the UE’s currently measured RSRP value is at that moment );
Kaikkonen teaches reporting the mobility state of the terminal device to the network device for the network device to determine a cell measurement state (Paragraph [0136] describes reporting requirements how the user equipment sends mobility-related information to the network using various communication protocols).
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 Kaikkonen and Kim to incorporate the teachings of Lee to provide enhanced mobility state determination with defined continuous evaluation parameters for relaxed RRM measurement. Doing so would improve power saving efficiency while maintaining strong mobility performance (Lee, Paragraph [0003]).
Regarding claim 3, Kaikkonen in view of Kim and Lee, Kaikkonen teaches wherein the reference signal received signal strength is represented by at least one of the following signals: Reference Signal Received Power (RSRP) or Reference Signal received Quality (RSRQ) (Paragraph [0138] describes “RSRP” and “RSRQ” as signal quality metrics used in threshold-based evaluations for measurement decisions).
Regarding claim 5, Kaikkonen in view of Kim and Lee, Kaikkonen teaches wherein the condition of the low-speed mobility criterion comprises at least one of: an entry condition of the low-speed mobility criterion; or, a departure condition of the low-speed mobility criterion (Paragraph [0128] describes the entry condition by describing the specific criteria that must be satisfied for the device to enter the low mobility state).
Regarding claim 8, Kaikkonen in view of Kim and Lee, Kim teaches further comprising: updating the SrxlevRef to the current measurement value of the reference signal received signal strength when an entry condition of the low-speed mobility criterion is not satisfied; or, updating the SrxlevRef to the current measurement value of the reference signal received signal strength when a departure condition of the low-speed mobility criterion is satisfied (Paragraphs [0136]-[0137];[0163]-[0167]; [0196]-[0198] describes when criterion to enter/maintain low-speed mobility fails update SrxlevRef).
Regarding claim 20, Kaikkonen in view of Kim and Lee, Kaikkonen teaches a network device comprising: a processor, a memory, and a computer program stored on the memory and executable by the processor, wherein when the computer program is executed by the processor, a method for indicating cell measurement of claim 10 is implemented (Paragraph [0029] describes that the memory stores software modules (computer program) that are executed by the processor to implement the described functions).
Claims 10 and 17 are rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 1 respectively.
Claims 12 and 19 are rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 3 respectively.
Claims 14 and 21 are rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 5 respectively.
Claim 24 is rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 8 respectively.
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 MEHERET WOLDEGEBREAL KIDANE whose telephone number is (571)270-3642. The examiner can normally be reached M-F8:30-5.
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, Ricky Ngo can be reached at 571-272-3139. 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.
/M.W.K./Examiner, Art Unit 2464
/KAN YUEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2464
Prosecution Insights