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 .
The office acknowledges the amendment to claims 1-6, 15-21, and 28-30. Claims 1-7, 13-22, and 27-30 are presented for examination. Claims 8-12 and 23-26 remain withdrawn from consideration.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed July 15, 2026 have been fully considered but they are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection presented below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 1-7, 13-22, and 27-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim 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.
Regarding exemplary claim 1, the newly added limitation of “the subset of radio resource management signals including fewer radio resource management signals than the scheduled set of radio resource management signals; and communicating with the network entity, the subset of radio resource management signals” renders the claim indefinite since the communication step does not preclude communicating with the network entity the excluded signals (i.e. the set of radio resource management signals that are not selected as part of the subset). Therefore, the claim is found indefinite as it is not clear by the last limitation as to whether the intentions are for the claim to be restrictive in only sending the subset of signals (which is amended to be fewer signals than the entire set) or if the claim allows for the sending of the entire set which includes the subset.
The Office recommends clarifying the invention such that the signals that are not selected in the selecting step are not communicated with the network entity. Applicant is also reminded to include only limitations supported by the specification in accordance with 35 USC 112(a).
Claims 2-7, 13-22, and 27-30 are rejected for similar reasons as stated above, or do not cure the deficiency of claim 1 and therefore are rejected as being dependent therefrom.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1-4, 13, 15-19, 27-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Chen et al. (US PGPUB 2023/0217276) (hereinafter Chen2).
Regarding claim 1, Chen2 discloses A method for wireless communications at a user equipment (UE), comprising:
receiving, from a network entity, control signaling scheduling a set of radio resource management signals (para. 73: UE is configured in DC mode connected to both MCG and SCG….MN (master node) transmits a configuration message to the UE through RRC signaling, and therefore radio resource management signals are already established such as SCell measurement cycle);
identifying a first power condition at the UE, the first power condition indicating a low power mode of the UE that consumes less power than a higher power mode of the UE (para. 74: MN BS transmits a SCG suspended state message to the UE; this reads on the claimed identifying step since this condition of the SCG would reduce signaling to the SCG and therefore indicate a “mode” that would consume less power than a higher power mode (i.e. SCG connected) of the UE);
selecting, from the scheduled set of radio resource management signals, a subset of radio resource management signals, the selection being triggered by the identified first power condition at the UE, identification of a second power condition at the network entity, or a combination thereof, and the subset of radio resource management signals including fewer radio resource management signals than the scheduled set of radio resource management signals (paras 63 and 75:UE can consider SCG in a suspended state and various measurements the UE may perform on the PSCell can be reduced to subsets of measurements; or UE can consider SCell as deactivated and can skip relaxed measurements during the suspended state; also see Fig. 9, ref 906) (the office interprets skipping measurements to be functionally equivalent as a subset of RRM signals fewer than the scheduled set (i.e. the set of signals without the SCG measurement signals); and
communicating, with the network entity, the subset of the set of radio resource management signals (para 80: transmits a measurement report to the MN with the results of the relaxed RRM measurements, based on para 75 this would preclude using the signals on the deactivated SCell).
Regarding claim 2, Chen2 discloses cancelling (the Office interprets the claim term “canceling” as ‘not sending or transmitting’) at least one of the set of radio resource management signals (para 75: UE can consider SCell as deactivated and can skip relaxed measurements during the suspended state; also see Fig. 9, ref 906).
Regarding claim 3, Chen2 discloses selecting the subset of the set of radio resource management signals in accordance with a pattern (para 63 explains that the UE may perform relaxed measurements at a second periodicity longer than the first periodicity).
Regarding claim 4, Chen2 further discloses receiving control signaling indicating a configuration for selecting the subset of the set of RRM signals when the first power condition occurs (para 62: configuration message can include a DRX relaxation factor which can be used in conjunction with secondary DRX to increase the relaxed measurement period; para 64: UE can maintain secondary DRX configuration on the SCG to determine L3 relaxed measurement requirements for the SCG in the SCG suspended state and measurement resources).
Regarding claim 13, Chen2 discloses receiving an indication of a low power state or the second power condition at the network entity (i.e. Enter SCG Suspend state which is a low power state of the network entity) (para 63 and Fig.7 ref 704).
Claims 15-19, 27-30 are rejected for similar reasons as stated above. Furthermore, Chen2 discloses a UE and network entity includes processors and memory (see Figures 1-4 and para. 56), and identifying a second power condition at the network entity (see rejections above regarding SCG suspended or deactivation state).
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.
Claim(s) 5-7, and 20-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen2 in view of Shrivastava et al. (USPN 12170960) (hereinafter Shrivastava).
Regarding claim 5, Chen2 discloses the invention as described above. Although Chen2 discloses canceling RRM signals, Chen2 does not explicitly disclose canceling the RRM signals based at least in part on a first priority of the RRM signal being less than a second priority of a signal that overlaps with the RRM signal. IN analogous art, Shrivastava discloses prioritizing RRM signals over second signals (col. 21 lines 1-21: UL traffic managing module considers the serving cell WUS information while mapping priority or critical traffic in accordance to meet a desired criterion such as low latency, power saving and/or performance efficiency. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the teachings of Shrivastava’s mobility determination factors with the system of Chen2 in order to provide an efficient method for power savings at a UE when migrating between different base stations.
Regarding claims 6 and 7, Chen2 discloses the invention as described above. Although Chen2 discloses canceling RRM signals, Chen does not explicitly disclose increasing a priority of an RRM signal based on canceling a prior RRM signal of the second of RRM signals. In analogous art, Shrivastava discloses increasing a priority of an RRM signal based on canceling a prior RRM signal of the second of RRM signals (col. 18, lines 49-67: RRM signals are prioritized based on previous power saving conditions preventing transmission of signals). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the teachings of Shrivastava’s mobility determination factors with the system of Chen2 in order to provide an efficient method for power savings at a UE when migrating between different base stations.
Claims 20-22 are rejected for similar reasons as stated above.
Claim(s) 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen2 in view of Li et al. (US 20250081110) (hereinafter Li)
Regarding Claim 14, Chen-Ang discloses the invention as described above. Chen does not explicitly disclose that the first power condition comprises the UE being at a cell edge. IN analogous art Li discloses another RRM management system which discloses a UE determining to operate in power saving mode (PSM) at the edge of a cell of a base station. See para 0062. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the conditions for implementing enhanced power saving of Li with the events for power saving of Chen2 in order to provide efficient mechanisms for power saving in an implicit manner while remaining connected to the network (see Li, para 2).
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 Joseph E Avellino whose telephone number is (571)272-3905. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:00am-3:00pm.
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. 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.
JOSEPH E. AVELLINO
Supervisory Patent Examiner
Art Unit 2478
/JOSEPH E AVELLINO/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2478
Prosecution Insights