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 amendment filed 11/04/2025 has been entered. Claims 1 and 10 have been amended.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1 and 10 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Regarding the changed claim limitations, prior art of record Alfarhan et al. (US 2023/0088597), hereinafter Alfarhan, teaches a shortened DRX cycle as part of a response to detection of a beam failure: “SSB/CSI-RS periodicity may be aligned with the DRX period, e.g., including switching between long and short DRX. Measurement opportunities for SSB/CSI-RS (or their periodicity) may vary, for example, as a function of the DRX state. In examples, more scheduling activity for a given WTRU on the PDCCH may lead to shorter BFD evaluation periods (e.g., more beam management and oversight), while less scheduling may lead to longer BFD periods. Longer BFD periods may be bounded, for example, by a (e.g., configurable) value. A WTRU may (e.g., dynamically) adapt measurement opportunities (e.g., in time and/or in frequency) for BFD, SSB/CSI-RS measurements in synchronization with DRX, e.g., under gNB control” (Alfarhan ¶ 0130).
New prior art of record Tseng et al. (US 2022/0346180), hereinafter Tseng teaches the claim limitations of claim 10.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 09/18/2025 was filed after the mailing date of the application on 08/23/2023. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 10 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Tseng et al. (US 2022/0346180), hereinafter Tseng.
Regarding Claim 10, Tseng teaches: A method for wireless communication, comprising: detecting, with a user equipment, a radio link failure tendency for a serving cell of one discontinuous reception (DRX) group: “the UE may release the stored SL-DRX configuration (e.g., the SL-DRX configuration received from the serving cell) while the UE declares radio link failure due to the reaching of maximum number of retransmissions from the MCG RLC entity” (Tseng ¶ 0200); and suspending, with the user equipment, a DRX operation for the DRX group that the serving cell belongs to after the detection of the radio link failure tendency: “In some implementations, the UE may stop the running SL-DRX operation (and so the running SL-DRX timer(s), e.g., the running SL-DRX OndurationTimer) while the UE declares radio link failure due to the reaching of maximum number of retransmissions from the MCG RLC” (Tseng ¶ 0201).
Regarding Claim 12, Tseng teaches: The method of claim 10, wherein a radio link failure tendency for the serving cell of one DRX group is detected based on at least one of: a set number (n) consecutive indication are received from a lower layer; or a value of a counter being equal to or larger than a set value: “the UE declares radio link failure due to the reaching of maximum number of retransmissions from the MCG RLC entity” (Tseng ¶ 0200).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-2, 4-6, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being anticipated by Tsai (US 2021/0105827), hereinafter Tsai, in further view of Alfarhan et al. (US 2023/0088597), hereinafter Alfarhan.
Regarding Claim 1, Tsai teaches: A method for wireless communication, comprising: detecting, with a user equipment: “Example 16: A UE comprising: . . . wherein the processor is configured to execute a program code stored in the memory to perform the method steps as defined in any one of the preceding Examples 1 to 15” (Tsai ¶ 0203 and 0207), a beam failure tendency for a serving cell of one discontinuous reception (DRX) group: “A beam failure event may be detected if the number of (consecutive) detected beam failure instance indications exceeds a configured maximum number (e.g., a parameter denoted as beamfailurelnstanceMaxCount). One beamfailurelnstanceMaxCount may be configured for each BWP/cell/sub set of cell group/cell group” (Tsai ¶ 0062) where the cell group is a DRX group: “If the UE is configured with the DRX operation (for a cell group) (e.g., via an RRC configuration DRX-Config), the UE may discontinuously monitor a PDCCH (for the cell group). For example, the UE may only monitor the PDCCH while the UE is in the DRX active time and/or during the time that the events specified in the 3GPP TS 38.321 V15.6.0 that may indicate to the UE to monitor the PDCCH happen” (Tsai ¶ 0092) or a radio link failure tendency for the serving cell of one DRX group;
Tsai does not teach: shortening, with the user equipment, a duration of a subsequent DRX cycle for the DRX group that the serving cell belong to after the detection of the beam failure tendency or the radio link failure tendency.
Regarding Claim 1, Alfarhan teaches: shortening, with the user equipment, a duration of a subsequent DRX cycle for the DRX group that the serving cell belong to after the detection of the beam failure tendency or the radio link failure tendency: “SSB/CSI-RS periodicity may be aligned with the DRX period, e.g., including switching between long and short DRX. Measurement opportunities for SSB/CSI-RS (or their periodicity) may vary, for example, as a function of the DRX state. In examples, more scheduling activity for a given WTRU on the PDCCH may lead to shorter BFD evaluation periods (e.g., more beam management and oversight), while less scheduling may lead to longer BFD periods. Longer BFD periods may be bounded, for example, by a (e.g., configurable) value. A WTRU may (e.g., dynamically) adapt measurement opportunities (e.g., in time and/or in frequency) for BFD, SSB/CSI-RS measurements in synchronization with DRX, e.g., under gNB control” (Alfarhan ¶ 0130).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the disclosure of Tsai with Alfarhan for the purpose of reducing self-interference via hardware or signal processing. According to Alfarhan: “The full duplex radio may include an interference management unit to reduce and or substantially eliminate self-interference via either hardware (e.g., a choke) or signal processing via a processor (e.g., a separate processor (not shown) or via processor 118)” (Alfarhan ¶ 0040).
Regarding Claim 2, Tsai teaches: The method of claim 1, wherein a beam failure tendency for the serving cell in one DRX group is detected based on at least one of: a value of a counter being equal to or larger than a set value: “A beam failure event may be detected if the number of (consecutive) detected beam failure instance indications exceeds a configured maximum number (e.g., a parameter denoted as beamfailurelnstanceMaxCount). One beamfailurelnstanceMaxCount may be configured for each BWP/cell/sub set of cell group/cell group” (Tsai ¶ 0062); or a set number (n) of consecutive indication are received from a lower layer.
Regarding Claim 4, Tsai teaches: The method of claim 1.
Tsai does not teach: adjusting a duration of a subsequent discontinuous reception cycle comprises: applying, with the processor, a short DRX cycle for the DRX group.
Regarding Claim 4, Alfarhan teaches: adjusting a duration of a subsequent discontinuous reception cycle comprises: applying, with the processor, a short DRX cycle for the DRX group: “SSB/CSI-RS periodicity may be aligned with the DRX period, e.g., including switching between long and short DRX. Measurement opportunities for SSB/CSI-RS (or their periodicity) may vary, for example, as a function of the DRX state. In examples, more scheduling activity for a given WTRU on the PDCCH may lead to shorter BFD evaluation periods (e.g., more beam management and oversight), while less scheduling may lead to longer BFD periods. Longer BFD periods may be bounded, for example, by a (e.g., configurable) value. A WTRU may (e.g., dynamically) adapt measurement opportunities (e.g., in time and/or in frequency) for BFD, SSB/CSI-RS measurements in synchronization with DRX, e.g., under gNB control” (Alfarhan ¶ 0130).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the disclosure of Tsai with Alfarhan for the purpose of reducing self-interference via hardware or signal processing. According to Alfarhan: “The full duplex radio may include an interference management unit to reduce and or substantially eliminate self-interference via either hardware (e.g., a choke) or signal processing via a processor (e.g., a separate processor (not shown) or via processor 118)” (Alfarhan ¶ 0040).
Regarding Claim 5, Tsai teaches: The method of claim 4, further comprising: detecting, with the processor of user equipment, at least one of a beam failure resumption tendency for all serving cells of the DRX group: “In one implementation, the UE may start or restart a timer at the first time (e.g., at which the UE transmits the BFR MAC CE) and stay in the DRX active time while the timer is running. In addition, the UE may stop the timer when the UE receives the BFRR. An example of the corresponding process is disclosed with reference to FIG. 8” (Tsai ¶ 0240; Fig 8 below), beam failure recovery procedures for all serving cells of the DRX group are successfully terminated: “In one implementation, in a case that the UE does not receive the BFRR while the timer is running, the end of the period of time is determined by a third time at which the timer expires. An example of the corresponding process is disclosed with reference to FIG. 9” (Tsai ¶ 024; Fig. 9 below) and “A BFD timer (e.g., a parameter denoted as beamFailureDetectionTimer) may reset the BFI counter upon expiration” (Tsai ¶ 0062), a radio link failure resumption tendency for the serving cell of the DRX group, or that a radio link failure is resumed for the serving cell of the DRX group.
PNG
media_image1.png
212
399
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Tsai Fig. 8
PNG
media_image2.png
208
368
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Tsai Fig. 9
Tsai does not teach: applying, with the processor, a long DRX cycle to the DRX group.
Regarding Claim 5, Alfarhan teaches: applying, with the processor, a long DRX cycle to the DRX group: “SSB/CSI-RS periodicity may be aligned with the DRX period, e.g., including switching between long and short DRX. Measurement opportunities for SSB/CSI-RS (or their periodicity) may vary, for example, as a function of the DRX state. In examples, more scheduling activity for a given WTRU on the PDCCH may lead to shorter BFD evaluation periods (e.g., more beam management and oversight), while less scheduling may lead to longer BFD periods. Longer BFD periods may be bounded, for example, by a (e.g., configurable) value. A WTRU may (e.g., dynamically) adapt measurement opportunities (e.g., in time and/or in frequency) for BFD, SSB/CSI-RS measurements in synchronization with DRX, e.g., under gNB control” (Alfarhan ¶ 0130).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the disclosure of Tsai with Alfarhan for the purpose of reducing self-interference via hardware or signal processing. According to Alfarhan: “The full duplex radio may include an interference management unit to reduce and or substantially eliminate self-interference via either hardware (e.g., a choke) or signal processing via a processor (e.g., a separate processor (not shown) or via processor 118)” (Alfarhan ¶ 0040).
Regarding Claim 6, Tsai and Alfarhan teach: The method of claim 5, wherein a beam failure resumption tendency for all serving cells of a DRX group is detected based on at least one of: no counters of the serving cells in one DRX group is equal to or larger than a set number (n); a counter of one specific serving cell in one DRX group is set to zero: “A BFD timer (e.g., a parameter denoted as beamFailureDetectionTimer) may reset the BFI counter upon expiration” (Tsai ¶ 0062); or a timer is expired or stopped: “In one implementation, the UE may start or restart a timer at the first time (e.g., at which the UE transmits the BFR MAC CE) and stay in the DRX active time while the timer is running. In addition, the UE may stop the timer when the UE receives the BFRR. An example of the corresponding process is disclosed with reference to FIG. 8” (Tsai ¶ 0240).
Regarding Claim 8, Tsai teaches: A wireless communication apparatus, comprising: a memory operable to store computer-readable instructions; and a processor circuitry operable to read the computer-readable instructions, the processor circuitry when executing the computer-readable instructions: “Example 16: A UE comprising: . . . wherein the processor is configured to execute a program code stored in the memory to perform the method steps as defined in any one of the preceding Examples 1 to 15” (Tsai ¶ 0203 and 0207) is configured to: detect a beam failure tendency for a serving cell of one discontinuous reception (DRX) group: “A beam failure event may be detected if the number of (consecutive) detected beam failure instance indications exceeds a configured maximum number (e.g., a parameter denoted as beamfailurelnstanceMaxCount). One beamfailurelnstanceMaxCount may be configured for each BWP/cell/sub set of cell group/cell group” (Tsai ¶ 0062) where the cell group is a DRX group: “If the UE is configured with the DRX operation (for a cell group) (e.g., via an RRC configuration DRX-Config), the UE may discontinuously monitor a PDCCH (for the cell group). For example, the UE may only monitor the PDCCH while the UE is in the DRX active time and/or during the time that the events specified in the 3GPP TS 38.321 V15.6.0 that may indicate to the UE to monitor the PDCCH happen” (Tsai ¶ 0092).
Tsai does not teach: shorten a duration of a subsequent DRX cycle for the DRX group that the serving cell belong to after the detection of the beam failure tendency
Regarding Claim 8, Alfarhan teaches: shorten a duration of a subsequent DRX cycle for the DRX group that the serving cell belong to after the detection of the beam failure tendency or the radio link failure tendency: “SSB/CSI-RS periodicity may be aligned with the DRX period, e.g., including switching between long and short DRX. Measurement opportunities for SSB/CSI-RS (or their periodicity) may vary, for example, as a function of the DRX state. In examples, more scheduling activity for a given WTRU on the PDCCH may lead to shorter BFD evaluation periods (e.g., more beam management and oversight), while less scheduling may lead to longer BFD periods. Longer BFD periods may be bounded, for example, by a (e.g., configurable) value. A WTRU may (e.g., dynamically) adapt measurement opportunities (e.g., in time and/or in frequency) for BFD, SSB/CSI-RS measurements in synchronization with DRX, e.g., under gNB control” (Alfarhan ¶ 0130).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the disclosure of Tsai with Alfarhan for the purpose of reducing self-interference via hardware or signal processing. According to Alfarhan: “The full duplex radio may include an interference management unit to reduce and or substantially eliminate self-interference via either hardware (e.g., a choke) or signal processing via a processor (e.g., a separate processor (not shown) or via processor 118)” (Alfarhan ¶ 0040).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsai and Alfarhan as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Basu Mallick et al. (US 11,968,733), hereinafter Basu Mallick.
Regarding Claim 3, Tsai and Alfarhan teach: The method of claim 1.
Tsai and Alfarhan do not teach: a radio link failure tendency for the serving cell of one DRX group is detected based on at least one of: a set number (n) consecutive indication are received from a lower layer; or a value of a counter being equal to or larger than a set value.
Regarding Claim 3, Basu Mallick teaches: a radio link failure tendency for the serving cell of one DRX group is detected based on at least one of: a set number (n) consecutive indication are received from a lower layer; or a value of a counter being equal to or larger than a set value: “In certain embodiment, PHY signals OOS and optionally IS to an upper layer. In such embodiments, the upper layer may start a timer (e.g., upper layer timer) if an OOS is received and may increment a local counter. If the value of the local counter reaches a threshold value, RLF may be declared” (Basu Mallick Col 12 Lines 16-21).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the disclosure of Tsai and Alfarhan with Basu Mallick for the purpose of freeing memory space and clearing unneeded context. According to Basu Mallick: “In certain embodiments, in PC5 it may be meaningful to perform radio link monitoring to determine if the radio link between two UEs is sufficiently good and, if not, the UEs may not unnecessarily attempt another transmission to other UEs. In various embodiments, after having declared RLF, a UE may immediately or shortly later clear the context for another UE and free memory space” (Basu Mallick Col 10 Lines 53-60).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsai and Alfarhan as applied to claim 5 above, and further in view of Kenehan et al. (US 2011/0183663), hereinafter Kenehan.
Regarding Claim 7, Tsai and Alfarhan teach: The method of claim 5.
Tsai and Alfarhan do not teach: a radio link resumption tendency for the serving cell of a DRX group is detected based on at least one of: receipt of at least a set number (n) of radio link resumption tendency indications from a lower layer; a timer is expired or stopped; a radio link failure is recovered; or a value of a counter being set to zero.
Regarding Claim 7, Kenehan teaches: a radio link resumption tendency for the serving cell of a DRX group is detected based on at least one of: receipt of at least a set number (n) of radio link resumption tendency indications from a lower layer: “the parameter to be adapted as a function of the current DRX cycle the UE is using could be a counter that is used to count the number of consecutively reported out-of-sync and in-sync indications from lower layer in order to detect radio link failure” (Kenehan ¶ 0019); a timer is expired or stopped; a radio link failure is recovered; or a value of a counter being set to zero.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the disclosure of Tsai and Alfarhan with Kenehan for the purpose of achieving reliable radio problem detection while a UE is in DRX mode. According to Kenehan: “An advantage with embodiments of the present invention is to achieve reliable radio problem detection even when a UE is operating in DRX mode and in scenario with limited measurements opportunities” (Kenehan ¶ 0025).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tseng as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Basu Mallick.
Regarding Claim 12, Tseng teaches: The method of claim 10.
Tseng does not teach: a radio link failure tendency for the serving cell of one DRX group is detected based on at least one of: a set number (n) consecutive indication are received from a lower layer; or a value of a counter being equal to or larger than a set value.
Regarding Claim 12, Basu Mallick teaches: a radio link failure tendency for the serving cell of one DRX group is detected based on at least one of: a set number (n) consecutive indication are received from a lower layer; or a value of a counter being equal to or larger than a set value: “In certain embodiment, PHY signals OOS and optionally IS to an upper layer. In such embodiments, the upper layer may start a timer (e.g., upper layer timer) if an OOS is received and may increment a local counter. If the value of the local counter reaches a threshold value, RLF may be declared” (Basu Mallick Col 12 Lines 16-21).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the disclosure of Tseng with Basu Mallick for the purpose of freeing memory space and clearing unneeded context. According to Basu Mallick: “In certain embodiments, in PC5 it may be meaningful to perform radio link monitoring to determine if the radio link between two UEs is sufficiently good and, if not, the UEs may not unnecessarily attempt another transmission to other UEs. In various embodiments, after having declared RLF, a UE may immediately or shortly later clear the context for another UE and free memory space” (Basu Mallick Col 10 Lines 53-60).
Claims 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tseng as applied to 10 above, and further in view of Tsai and Alfarhan.
Regarding Claim 13, Tseng teaches: The method of claim 10.
Tseng does not teach: further comprising: detecting, with the processor of user equipment at least one of a beam failure resumption tendency for all serving cells of the DRX group: “In one implementation, the UE may start or restart a timer at the first time (e.g., at which the UE transmits the BFR MAC CE) and stay in the DRX active time while the timer is running. In addition, the UE may stop the timer when the UE receives the BFRR. An example of the corresponding process is disclosed with reference to FIG. 8” (Tsai ¶ 0240; Fig 8 above), beam failure recovery procedures for all serving cells of the DRX group are successfully terminated: “In one implementation, in a case that the UE does not receive the BFRR while the timer is running, the end of the period of time is determined by a third time at which the timer expires. An example of the corresponding process is disclosed with reference to FIG. 9” (Tsai ¶ 024; Fig. 9 above) and “A BFD timer (e.g., a parameter denoted as beamFailureDetectionTimer) may reset the BFI counter upon expiration” (Tsai ¶ 0062).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the disclosure of Tseng with Tsai for the purpose of providing a beam failure recovery mechanism at the UE. According to Tsai: “the misalignment on a beam may result in a loss of an ongoing link of a control channel (which may refer to a beam failure event). A gNB may not be able to use the same beam management procedure to switch to a new beam. Thus, the BFR mechanism may be utilized. A UE may recognize a beam failure event by measuring certain DL RS(s), the control channel(s), and/or data channel(s)” (Tsai ¶ 0042).
Tsai does not teach: resuming, with the processor of user equipment, the suspended DRX operation for the DRX group.
Regarding Claim 13, Alfarhan teaches: resuming, with the processor of user equipment, the suspended DRX operation for the DRX group: “A link may be configured between BFD and DRX. DRX may impact beam management. A WTRU may change the status of a subset of beam states, (de)-activate associated CSI-RS or SSBs, and/or pause/resume associated BFD measurements and procedures, for example, as a function of the DRX state and/or the active DRX configuration” (Alfarhan ¶ 0139).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the disclosure of Tseng and Tsai with Alfarhan for the purpose of reducing self-interference via hardware or signal processing. According to Alfarhan: “The full duplex radio may include an interference management unit to reduce and or substantially eliminate self-interference via either hardware (e.g., a choke) or signal processing via a processor (e.g., a separate processor (not shown) or via processor 118)” (Alfarhan ¶ 0040).
Regarding Claim 14, Tseng and Alfarhan teach: The method of claim 13.
Tseng and Alfarhan do not teach: a beam failure resumption tendency for all serving cells of a DRX group is detected based on at least one of: no counters of the serving cell in one DRX group is equal to or larger than a set number (n); a counter of one specific serving cell in one DRX group is set to zero; a radio link failure is recovered; or a value of a counter being set to zero..
Regarding Claim 14, Tsai teaches: a beam failure resumption tendency for all serving cells of a DRX group is detected based on at least one of: no counters of the serving cell in one DRX group is equal to or larger than a set number (n); a counter of one specific serving cell in one DRX group is set to zero: “A BFD timer (e.g., a parameter denoted as beamFailureDetectionTimer) may reset the BFI counter upon expiration” (Tsai ¶ 0062); or a timer is expired or stopped: “In one implementation, the UE may start or restart a timer at the first time (e.g., at which the UE transmits the BFR MAC CE) and stay in the DRX active time while the timer is running. In addition, the UE may stop the timer when the UE receives the BFRR. An example of the corresponding process is disclosed with reference to FIG. 8” (Tsai ¶ 0240).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the disclosure of Tseng and Alfarhan with Tsai for the purpose of providing a beam failure recovery mechanism at the UE. According to Tsai: “the misalignment on a beam may result in a loss of an ongoing link of a control channel (which may refer to a beam failure event). A gNB may not be able to use the same beam management procedure to switch to a new beam. Thus, the BFR mechanism may be utilized. A UE may recognize a beam failure event by measuring certain DL RS(s), the control channel(s), and/or data channel(s)” (Tsai ¶ 0042).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tseng, Tsai, and Alfarhan as applied to 13 above, and further in view of Kenehan.
Regarding Claim 15, Tseng, Tsai, and Alfarhan teach: The method of claim 13.
Tseng, Tsai, and Alfarhan do not teach: a radio link resumption tendency for the serving cell of a DRX group is detected based on at least one of: receipt of at least a set number (n) of radio link resumption tendency indications from a lower layer; a timer is expired or stopped; a radio link failure is recovered; or a value of a counter being set to zero.
Regarding Claim 15, Kenehan teaches: a radio link resumption tendency for the serving cell of a DRX group is detected based on at least one of: receipt of at least a set number (n) of radio link resumption tendency indications from a lower layer: “the parameter to be adapted as a function of the current DRX cycle the UE is using could be a counter that is used to count the number of consecutively reported out-of-sync and in-sync indications from lower layer in order to detect radio link failure” (Kenehan ¶ 0019); a timer is expired or stopped; a radio link failure is recovered; or a value of a counter being set to zero.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the disclosure of Tseng, Tsai, and Alfarhan with Kenehan for the purpose of achieving reliable radio problem detection while a UE is in DRX mode. According to Kenehan: “An advantage with embodiments of the present invention is to achieve reliable radio problem detection even when a UE is operating in DRX mode and in scenario with limited measurements opportunities” (Kenehan ¶ 0025).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 BRADLEY DAVIS LYTLE whose telephone number is (703)756-4593. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 AM - 4:00 PM EST.
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, Kwang bin Yao can be reached at 571-272-3182. 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.
/B.D.L./Examiner, Art Unit 2473
/BRADLEY D LYTLE JR./Examiner, Art Unit 2473
/KWANG B YAO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2473