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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
2. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 6/30/2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Interpretation
3. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
4. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “Processing Circuitry” in claim 18.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
5. The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
The limitations of : “Processing Circuitry” in claim 18 is being treated in accordance with 112(f), because the associated functions are modified by a word that serves as a generic placeholder (i.e. the claims use the terms “circuitry” that is a substitute for “means”).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
7. Claims 1, 3-4, 9-11 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tang et al. (US. Pub. No. 2015/0245235 A1) in view of Meylan (US. Pub. No. 2010/0034158 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Tang discloses a method of operating a user equipment (UE) (See Abstract and Fig. 2; UE 210), the method comprising:
obtaining a measurement of a signal received by the UE from a serving cell (See Par. [20], [29], [32], [38] and Fig. 2 of Tang for a reference to the UE is configured with multiple measurement gap patterns from which the UE can select a pattern to perform inter-frequency channel measurements (RSRP or RSRQ) for signals received from the serving cell);
calculating a measurement gap usage ratio that is based on the measurement (See Par. [27]-[28], [37]-[38], [41], [47] and Fig. 2 of Tang for a reference to the UE is configured with multiple measurement gap patterns. The UE determines the measurement gap repetition period (MGRP) on which the inter-frequency channel measurements are performed based on the performed RSRP and RSRQ measurements);
and for individual measurement gaps of a plurality of measurement gaps, and based on the measurement gap usage ratio, determining whether to perform a measurement during the measurement gap (See Par. [27]-[28], [44], [46] of Tang for a reference to that for each measurement gap and based on the used subframes of each (MGRP), the UE determines whether to perform inter-frequency measurements on available resources [Subframes] during the measurement gap),
Tang does not explicitly disclose wherein the method further comprises, for at least one of the plurality of measurement gaps, and based on a result of the determining whether to perform a measurement during the measurement gap, performing at least one of: causing at least part of the UE to be in a low-power mode during at least part of the measurement gap; causing a radio-frequency (RF) receiver of the UE to be powered down during at least part of the measurement gap; or causing an RF transmitter of the UE to transmit a signal during at least part of the measurement gap.
However, Meylan discloses for at least one of the plurality of measurement gaps, and based on a result of the determining whether to perform a measurement during the measurement gap, causing an RF transmitter of the UE to transmit a signal during at least part of the measurement gap (See Par. [34], [47]-[50], [89] of Meylan for a reference to the UE determines whether to perform the measurements during the measurement gap. based on the determination, the UE skips (Ignores) measurements and transmits a signal on a physical random access channel (PRACH) during one or more measurement gap [Option 3 is cited]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Meylan to Tang. The motivation for combination would be to improve network’s performance, by providing higher throughput, greater reliability and improved efficiency when the UE does not perform measurements during measurement gaps. (Meylan; Par. [37])
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Tang and Meylan, specifically Tang discloses wherein the measurement is a serving cell quality measurement that indicates at least one of a reference signal received power (RSRP), reference signal received quality (RSRQ), or signal-to-interference-plus-noise ratio (SINR) of the signal received by the UE from the serving cell (See Par. [20], [22], [38], [50] of Tang for a reference to the inter-frequency measurements for the serving cell can be either a reference signal received power (RSRP), or reference signal received quality (RSRQ) measurements).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Tang and Meylan, specifically Tang discloses wherein the measurement gap usage ratio is inversely related to the serving cell quality measurement (See Par. [38], [44]-[48], [50] of Tang for a reference to reducing measurement frequency/skipping gap under strong serving conditions (quality), which implies an inverse relationship between serving quality and measurement activity).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Tang and Meylan, specifically Tang discloses wherein: the method comprises, based on the measurement gap usage ratio, selecting a pattern(See Par. [25], [28]-[30] and fig. 2 of Tang for a reference to the base station determines, for the UE, an effective measurement gap pattern [EMGP] based on the measurement gap pattern and the DRS measurement timing configuration);
and for the individual measurement gaps of the plurality of measurement gaps, the determining whether to perform a measurement during the measurement gap is based on the pattern (See Par. [25], [28]-[30], [41]-[45] and fig. 2 of Tang for a reference to the selected effective measurement gap pattern [EMGP] determines whether to perform measurements during the measurement gap or not based on measurement derived metrics).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Tang and Meylan, specifically Tang discloses wherein: the method comprises, for the individual measurement gaps of the plurality of measurement gaps:
generating a random number (See Par. [55] of Tang for a reference to defining [generating] a random number of subframes to monitor Frequency 1 (corresponding to the first [serving] cell)); and
the determining whether to perform a measurement during the measurement gap includes comparing the random number to a threshold that is based on the measurement gap usage ratio (See Par. [21]-[22], [55] of Tang for a reference to determining whether to perform measurements during the measurement gap based on comparing the defined number of subframes with a threshold of 40 or 80 subframes).
Regarding claim 11, Tang does not explicitly disclose wherein the method comprises, for at least one of the plurality of measurement gaps, and based on the result of the determining whether to perform a measurement during the measurement gap, causing the UE to transmit a signal on a physical random access channel (PRACH) during at least part of the measurement gap.
However, Meylan discloses wherein the method comprises, for at least one of the plurality of measurement gaps, and based on the result of the determining whether to perform a measurement during the measurement gap, causing the UE to transmit a signal on a physical random access channel (PRACH) during at least part of the measurement gap (See Par. [34], [47]-[50], [89] of Meylan for a reference to the UE determines whether to perform the measurements during the measurement gap. based on the determination, the UE skips (Ignores) measurements and transmits a signal on a physical random access channel (PRACH) during one or more measurement gap).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Meylan to Tang. The motivation for combination would be to improve network’s performance, by providing higher throughput, greater reliability and improved efficiency when the UE does not perform measurements during measurement gaps. (Meylan; Par. [37])
Regarding claim 18, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth
in claim 1, including a user equipment (UE) (See Tang; Fig. 9; UE 910) comprising: processing circuitry (See Tang; Fig. 9; Measurements Module 914).
Regarding claim 19, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth
in claim 9.
Regarding claim 20, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth
in claim 10.
8. Claims 2, 5-8 and 12-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tang et al. in view of Meylan and further in view of Cui et al. (US. Pub. No. 2019/0182900 A1).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Tang and Meylan does not explicitly disclose wherein the measurement gap usage ratio is based on a fluctuation of the measurement.
However, Cui discloses wherein the measurement gap usage ratio is based on a fluctuation of the measurement (See Par. [28]-[30] of Cui for a reference to adaptive allocation/sharing of measurements gaps depends on the variation of measurements [difference between measured qualities compared to a threshold [using fluctuation as input to usage metric]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Cui to combination of Tang and Meylan. The motivation for combination would be to improve network’s performance, by improving the efficiency of the handover decision based on comparing quality received of multiple cells. (Cui; Par. [4])
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Tang and Meylan does not explicitly disclose wherein: the measurement gap usage ratio is based on a neighbor cell quality measurement that is based on a plurality of neighbor cell measurements, and each of the neighbor cell measurements is a measurement of a signal received by the UE from a respective one of a plurality of neighbor cells.
However, Cui discloses the measurement gap usage ratio is based on a neighbor cell quality measurement that is based on a plurality of neighbor cell measurements (See Par. [26]-[27] of Cui for a reference to the UE performs inter-frequency measurements on signals received from neighboring cell [Target Cell]. A UE perform measurements on signals received from one or mor [A plurality] of neighboring cells), and each of the neighbor cell measurements is a measurement of a signal received by the UE from a respective one of a plurality of neighbor cells (See Par. [26]-[26] of Cui for a reference to each neighboring cell’s measurement is a measurement a signal received from that particular neighboring cell. Aggregated neighboring cells’ measurement are considered in making measurement decision).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Cui to combination of Tang and Meylan. The motivation for combination would be to improve network’s performance, by improving the efficiency of the handover decision based on comparing quality received of multiple cells. (Cui; Par. [4])
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Tang and Meylan, specifically Tang discloses wherein the measurement gap usage ratio is inversely related to a difference between the serving cell quality measurement and the neighbor cell quality measurement (See Par. [38], [44]-[48], [50] of Tang for a reference to the density of the measurements gap is adjusted based on the measured quality of the Macro [Serving] cell and the Micro/Pico [Another] cells. [More measurements when the quality of the neighbor cells is less than the quality of the macro cell).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Tang and Meylan does not explicitly disclose wherein the measurement gap usage ratio is inversely related to a difference between the neighbor cell quality measurement and a threshold value received by the UE from a base station.
However, Cui discloses wherein the measurement gap usage ratio is inversely related to a difference between the neighbor cell quality measurement and a threshold value received by the UE from a base station (See Par. [28]-[29] of Cui for a reference to the measurement gap pattern decision is based on the difference between the signal power of the signal received from a neighbor cell and signal power of the signal received from a serving cell is greater than a threshold).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Cui to combination of Tang and Meylan. The motivation for combination would be to improve network’s performance, by improving the efficiency of the handover decision based on comparing quality received of multiple cells. (Cui; Par. [4])
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Tang and Meylan does not explicitly disclose wherein the measurement gap usage ratio is based on a measurement of a signal received by the UE from a neighbor cell that is different than the serving cell.
However, Cui discloses wherein the measurement gap usage ratio is based on a measurement of a signal received by the UE from a neighbor cell that is different than the serving cell (See Par. [28]-[29] of Cui for a reference to the measurement gap pattern decision is based on the signal power of the signal received from a neighbor cell being greater than signal power of the signal received from a serving cell).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Cui to combination of Tang and Meylan. The motivation for combination would be to improve network’s performance, by improving the efficiency of the handover decision based on comparing quality received of multiple cells. (Cui; Par. [4])
Regarding claim 12, Tang discloses One or more non-transitory, computer-readable media having instructions that, when executed by one or more processors (See Par. [60] of Tang for a reference to one computer readable medium or one non-transitory machine readable storage medium), cause a user equipment (UE) to:
obtain a first measurement of a signal received by the UE from a serving cell (See Par. [20], [29], [32], [38] and Fig. 2 of Tang for a reference to the UE is configured with multiple measurement gap patterns from which the UE can select a pattern to perform inter-frequency channel measurements (RSRP or RSRQ) for signals received from the serving cell);
calculate a measurement gap usage ratio that is based on the first measurement and the second measurement (See Par. [27]-[28], [37]-[38], [41], [47] and Fig. 2 of Tang for a reference to the UE is configured with multiple measurement gap patterns. The UE determines the measurement gap repetition period (MGRP) on which the inter-frequency channel measurements are performed based on the performed RSRP and RSRQ measurements); and
for individual measurement gaps of a plurality of measurement gaps, and based on the measurement gap usage ratio, determine whether to perform a measurement during the measurement gap (See Par. [27]-[28], [44], [46] of Tang for a reference to that for each measurement gap and based on the used subframes of each (MGRP), the UE determines whether to perform inter-frequency measurements on available resources [Subframes] during the measurement gap).
Tang does not explicitly disclose obtain a second measurement that is based on a plurality of neighbor cell measurements, each of the neighbor cell measurements being a measurement of a signal received by the UE from a respective one of a plurality of neighbor cells; wherein the method further comprises, for at least one of the plurality of measurement gaps, and based on a result of the determining whether to perform a measurement during the measurement gap, performing at least one of: causing at least part of the UE to be in a low-power mode during at least part of the measurement gap; causing a radio-frequency (RF) receiver of the UE to be powered down during at least part of the measurement gap; or causing an RF transmitter of the UE to transmit a signal during at least part of the measurement gap.
However, Meylan discloses for at least one of the plurality of measurement gaps, and based on a result of the determining whether to perform a measurement during the measurement gap, causing an RF transmitter of the UE to transmit a signal during at least part of the measurement gap (See Par. [34], [47]-[50], [89] of Meylan for a reference to the UE determines whether to perform the measurements during the measurement gap. based on the determination, the UE skips (Ignores) measurements and transmits a signal on a physical random access channel (PRACH) during one or more measurement gap [Option 3 is cited]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Meylan to Tang. The motivation for combination would be to improve network’s performance, by providing higher throughput, greater reliability and improved efficiency when the UE does not perform measurements during measurement gaps. (Meylan; Par. [37])
The combination of Tang and Meylan does not explicitly disclose obtain a second measurement that is based on a plurality of neighbor cell measurements, each of the neighbor cell measurements being a measurement of a signal received by the UE from a respective one of a plurality of neighbor cells.
However, Cui discloses obtain a second measurement that is based on a plurality of neighbor cell measurements, each of the neighbor cell measurements being a measurement of a signal received by the UE from a respective one of a plurality of neighbor cells (See Par. [26]-[28] of Cui for a reference to the UE performs inter-frequency measurements on signals received from neighboring cell [Target Cell]. A UE perform measurements on signals received from one or mor [A plurality] of neighboring cells. Aggregated neighboring cells’ measurement are considered in making measurement decision).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Cui to combination of Tang and Meylan. The motivation for combination would be to improve network’s performance, by improving the efficiency of the handover decision based on comparing quality received of multiple cells. (Cui; Par. [4])
Regarding claim 13, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth
in claim 3.
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Tang and Meylan does not explicitly disclose wherein the measurement gap usage ratio is inversely related to a difference between the first measurement and the second measurement.
However, Cui discloses wherein the measurement gap usage ratio is inversely related to a difference between the first measurement and the second measurement (See Par. [28]-[29] of Cui for a reference to the measurement gap pattern decision is based on the difference between the signal power of the signal received from a neighbor cell and signal power of the signal received from a serving cell is greater than a threshold).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Cui to combination of Tang and Meylan. The motivation for combination would be to improve network’s performance, by improving the efficiency of the handover decision based on comparing quality received of multiple cells. (Cui; Par. [4])
Regarding claim 15, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth
in claim 9.
Regarding claim 16, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth
in claim 10.
Regarding claim 17, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth
in claim 11.
Conclusion
9. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Bao et al. (US 2023/0318781 Al) teaches wireless communication and to techniques and apparatuses for dynamically controlling a measurement gap.
Shih et al. (U.S. 2021/0029768 Al) teaches a method for handling Listen-Before-Talk (LBT) failure in cellular wireless communication networks.
Zhang et al. (US 2019/0268947 A1) discloses physical random access channel (PRACH) resources in a random access procedures.
10. Any inquiry concerning this communication from the examiner should be directed to RASHA FAYED whose telephone number is (571) 270-3804. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:00AM-4:30PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the supervisory Examiner, Un Cho can be reached on (571)272-7919. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
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.
/R.K.F/Examiner, Art Unit 2413
/UN C CHO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2413
Prosecution Insights