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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 12, 23 & 27 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1 discloses an OR conditional however it is unclear what portions of the claim are included by the or conditional following after “a motion state of the UE”. Does the ‘or’ conditional apply to just the next paragraph or the next two paragraphs appearing before the ‘and’ conditional. Examination will treat the claims with the ‘or’ conditional applied to both the claim paragraph limitations appearing before the ‘and’ conditional. Meaning only “a motion state of the UE” could be required by the ‘or’ conditional. Appropriate correction or explanation is requested.
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, 12, 23 & 27 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.
The term “fewest” in claims 1, 12, 23 & 27 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “fewest” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
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, 7-8, 12, 18-19, 23 & 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (WO 2020/041421 A1) in view of Sahin et al (US 2021/0068079 A1).
Regarding claims 1, 12, 23 & 27; Lee discloses a user equipment (UE) for wireless communication, a method, non-transitory computer readable medium and apparatus comprising:
a memory one or more memories; and
one or more processors, coupled to the memory one or more memories, configured to:
identify that one or more thresholds are satisfied by at least one of:
a length of a discontinuous reception (DRX) ON duration of the UE (see DRX on duration time interval [0282]); estimate, based at least in part on the one or more thresholds being satisfied, for
each beam at one or more beam levels on one or more antenna panels, an application
layer throughput (see [0037], “quality of service (QoS) requirements, such as differing throughput requirements, latency requirements, error tolerance requirements, reliability requirements, data throughput requirements, mobility requirements,”) based at least in part on a reference signal received power (RSRP) measurement (see RSRP [0161], inter alia), wherein the one or more beam levels ((see [0243], “the number of beams to measure for L1 -RSRP is larger than a threshold”) are each associated with a number of antenna elements) (see minimum allowed number of antennas [0268]);
generate a set of candidate beams that includes, at each of the one or more beam
levels (see candidates [0154] and various metrics including power), one or more beams for which the respective estimated application layer throughput (see various application identified and throughput requirements [0037]) satisfies an application layer throughput requirement (see throughput level [0160]); and
select (see determine [0154]), from the set of candidate beams (see [0291], “channel estimation occurring while processing PDCCH candidates of a received CORESET”), a serving beam (see [0154] with determination regarding candidates for determining based on various factors) for which the estimated application layer throughput satisfies the application layer (see [0097], “Minimum reception requirements using the assumption of four Rx RF chains may be set for several NR operating bands. Specialized types of NR devices, such as those intended for V2X type of applications, may be expected to only use two Rx RF chains”) throughput requirement with a
fewest number of antenna elements (see [0096], “Minimum performance requirements for RF sensitivity assume that a WTRU is equipped with a minimum number of Rx antenna ports.”).
Lee does not specifically disclose however Sahin discloses identify that one or more thresholds are satisfied by at least one of: a motion state of the UE (see threshold and motion state [0028]), or (see the above)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to combine the teachings of Lee with that of Sahin. Doing so would conform to well-known techniques in the field of invention.
Regarding 7 & 18, Lee in view of Sahin discloses the UE of claim 1 and method of claim 12, wherein the application layer throughput requirement is a first application layer throughput requirement, wherein the one or more processors are configured to:
identify an adjusted application layer throughput requirement based at least in part on an observed application layer throughput associated with the selected serving beam (see [0173], “a WTRU may activate a default radio performance state if the RSRP of its serving cell is lower than a threshold. Such threshold may be signaled by MAC or RRC. Conversely, the WTRU may activate a non-default radio performance state if the RSRP of its serving cell is higher than a threshold. ”); and
switch the serving beam based at least in part on the adjusted application layer throughput requirement (see [0173], “a WTRU may activate a default radio performance state if the RSRP of its serving cell is lower than a threshold. Such threshold may be signaled by MAC or RRC. Conversely, the WTRU may activate a non-default radio performance state if the RSRP of its serving cell is higher than a threshold. ”).
Regarding 8 and 19, Lee in view of Sahin discloses the UE of claim 7 & 18, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to identify the first application layer throughput requirement based at least in part on an application layer of the UE (see throughput requirements of application, [0037] and see various application layer [0097]).
Conclusion
Claims 2-6, 9-11, 13-17, 20-22, 24-26, 28-30 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to K. WILFORD SHAHEED whose telephone number is (469) 295-9175. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9 am-6pm; CST; ALT Friday. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. The examiner’s Supervisor, Jinsong Hu, can be reached at (571)272-3965, where attempts to reach the examiner are unsuccessful.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/KHALID W SHAHEED/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2643
Prosecution Insights