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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 05/07/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 05/07/2026 has been entered. Claims 1, 8, and 10 have been amended.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 8, 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.
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 4, and 8 have been rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) based upon a public use or sale or other public availability of the invention, the public availability being the publication of prior art of record Wang et al. (US 2010/0113008), hereinafter Wang.
Regarding Claim 1, Wang teaches: A method for wireless communication, comprising: receiving, with a Medium Access Control (MAC) layer of a user equipment, one or more indications regarding a beam failure tendency for a serving cell of one discontinuous reception (DRX) group from a physical layer of the user equipment or a radio link failure tendency for the serving cell of one DRX group: “at each on-duration period of each DRX cycle (708,710,712) higher layer entities in the WTRU may receive the measured RLF values from the (PHY) entity. The PHY entity may evaluate and determine, on a per DRX cycle basis, if the WTRU is in-synch or out-of-synch with the network. The PHY entity may then send a message to the higher layers, such as the MAC layer entity, radio resource control (RRC) layer entity, or radio link control (RLC) layer entity, that specifies "in-synch" or "out-of-sync", without passing the measurement data. The PHY entity will transmit the in-synch or out-of-synch condition by determining if, over the measurement period, there are a majority of in-synch measurements or out-of-synch measurements” (Wang ¶ 0034), wherein, in response to receiving the one or more indications, shortening, with the MAC layer of the user equipment, a duration of a subsequent DRX cycle for the DRX group that the serving cell belong to: “N.sub.RLF-durations may also be a function of the length of a timer, such at timer T310, the length of the signaled on-duration time as computed by the WTRU, such as N.sub.RLF-durations=(T310/on-duration period), or a function of the DRX cycle length, for example, the medium access control (MAC) DRX cycle, the long DRX-cycle and the short DRX-cycle, optionally including the length of the on-duration timer” (Wang ¶ 0032) and “The WTRU may make another adjustment during DRX mode in its determination of RLF conditions. During DRX mode, the PHY entity may be configured to reduce its filtering time from the non-DRX mode time to the length of the on-duration time, or shorter, if the on-duration time is shorter than the non-DRX filtering timer. For example, if the non-DRX filtering time is 200 ms, in DRX mode the WTRU may use a time shorter than 200 ms. The adjustment may be made by the WTRU based on an offset, by a fraction or value that is signaled from the network or predefined. The shorter filtering time in DRX mode should be sufficient for the WTRU to take measurements and check the downlink radio link quality of the serving cell” (Wang ¶ 0038).
Regarding Claim 4, Wang teaches: The method of claim 1, wherein adjusting a duration of a subsequent discontinuous reception cycle comprises: applying, with the processor, a short DRX cycle for the DRX group: “N.sub.RLF-durations may also be a function of the length of a timer, such at timer T310, the length of the signaled on-duration time as computed by the WTRU, such as N.sub.RLF-durations=(T310/on-duration period), or a function of the DRX cycle length, for example, the medium access control (MAC) DRX cycle, the long DRX-cycle and the short DRX-cycle, optionally including the length of the on-duration timer” (Wang ¶ 0032).
Regarding Claim 8, Wang 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 methods or flow charts provided herein may be implemented in a computer program, software, or firmware incorporated in a computer-readable storage medium for execution by a general purpose computer or a processor” (Wang ¶ 0052), the processor circuitry when executing the computer-readable instructions is configured to: receive, with a Medium Access Control (MAC) layer of a user equipment, one or more indications regarding a beam failure tendency for a serving cell of one discontinuous reception (DRX) group from a physical layer of the user equipment or a radio link failure tendency for the serving cell of one DRX group: “at each on-duration period of each DRX cycle (708,710,712) higher layer entities in the WTRU may receive the measured RLF values from the (PHY) entity. The PHY entity may evaluate and determine, on a per DRX cycle basis, if the WTRU is in-synch or out-of-synch with the network. The PHY entity may then send a message to the higher layers, such as the MAC layer entity, radio resource control (RRC) layer entity, or radio link control (RLC) layer entity, that specifies "in-synch" or "out-of-sync", without passing the measurement data. The PHY entity will transmit the in-synch or out-of-synch condition by determining if, over the measurement period, there are a majority of in-synch measurements or out-of-synch measurements” (Wang ¶ 0034), wherein, in response to receiving the one or more indications, shortening, with the MAC layer of the user equipment, a duration of a subsequent DRX cycle for the DRX group that the serving cell belong to: “N.sub.RLF-durations may also be a function of the length of a timer, such at timer T310, the length of the signaled on-duration time as computed by the WTRU, such as N.sub.RLF-durations=(T310/on-duration period), or a function of the DRX cycle length, for example, the medium access control (MAC) DRX cycle, the long DRX-cycle and the short DRX-cycle, optionally including the length of the on-duration timer” (Wang ¶ 0032) and “The WTRU may make another adjustment during DRX mode in its determination of RLF conditions. During DRX mode, the PHY entity may be configured to reduce its filtering time from the non-DRX mode time to the length of the on-duration time, or shorter, if the on-duration time is shorter than the non-DRX filtering timer. For example, if the non-DRX filtering time is 200 ms, in DRX mode the WTRU may use a time shorter than 200 ms. The adjustment may be made by the WTRU based on an offset, by a fraction or value that is signaled from the network or predefined. The shorter filtering time in DRX mode should be sufficient for the WTRU to take measurements and check the downlink radio link quality of the serving cell” (Wang ¶ 0038).
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 factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 35 U.S.C. 103 as being anticipated by Wang in further view of Tsai (US 2021/0105827), hereinafter Tsai.
Regarding Claim 2, Wang teaches: The method of claim 1.
Wang does not teach: 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; or a set number (n) of consecutive indication are received from a lower layer.
Regarding Claim 2, Tsai teaches: 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).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the disclosure of Wang with Tsai for the purpose of enabling a beam failure recovery mechanism. According to Tsai: “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). One example of the beam failure recognition is that the UE detects a very low RSRP of the current serving beam based on the measurement of DL RS(s) used for beam management. If a beam failure event is recognized (or detected), the UE may notify the gNB of the beam failure event through UL transmission(s). The gNB may then perform operations with the UE to recovery the failed beam” (Tsai ¶ 0042).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang 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, Wang teaches: The method of claim 1.
Wang 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 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 Wang 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 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang and further in view of Alfarhan et al. (US 2023/0088597), hereinafter Alfarhan.
Regarding Claim 4, Wang teaches: The method of claim 1.
Wang 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 Wang 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).
Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang and further in view of Tsai and Alfarhan.
Regarding Claim 5, Wang and Alfarhan teach: The method of claim 4.
Wang does not teach: detecting, with the processor of user equipment, at least one of a beam failure resumption tendency for all serving cells of the DRX group, beam failure recovery procedures for all serving cells of the DRX group are successfully terminated.
Regarding Claim 5, Tsai teaches: 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).
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
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the disclosure of Wang with Tsai for the purpose of enabling a beam failure recovery mechanism. According to Tsai: “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). One example of the beam failure recognition is that the UE detects a very low RSRP of the current serving beam based on the measurement of DL RS(s) used for beam management. If a beam failure event is recognized (or detected), the UE may notify the gNB of the beam failure event through UL transmission(s). The gNB may then perform operations with the UE to recovery the failed beam” (Tsai ¶ 0042).
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 Wang 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 6, Wang and Alfarhan teach: The method of claim 5.
Wang 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 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; or a timer is expired or stopped
Regarding Claim 6, 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 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).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the disclosure of Wang and Alfarhan with Tsai for the purpose of enabling a beam failure recovery mechanism. According to Tsai: “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). One example of the beam failure recognition is that the UE detects a very low RSRP of the current serving beam based on the measurement of DL RS(s) used for beam management. If a beam failure event is recognized (or detected), the UE may notify the gNB of the beam failure event through UL transmission(s). The gNB may then perform operations with the UE to recovery the failed beam” (Tsai ¶ 0042).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang, 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, Wang, Tsai, and Alfarhan teach: The method of claim 5.
Wang, 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 Wang, 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 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang and further in view of Kuo et al. (US 2008/0130488), hereinafter Kuo.
Regarding Claim 10, Wang teaches: A method for wireless communication, comprising: receiving, with a Medium Access Control (MAC) layer of a user equipment, one or more indications regarding a beam failure tendency for a serving cell of one discontinuous reception (DRX) group from a physical layer of the user equipment or a radio link failure tendency for the serving cell of one DRX group: “at each on-duration period of each DRX cycle (708,710,712) higher layer entities in the WTRU may receive the measured RLF values from the (PHY) entity. The PHY entity may evaluate and determine, on a per DRX cycle basis, if the WTRU is in-synch or out-of-synch with the network. The PHY entity may then send a message to the higher layers, such as the MAC layer entity, radio resource control (RRC) layer entity, or radio link control (RLC) layer entity, that specifies "in-synch" or "out-of-sync", without passing the measurement data. The PHY entity will transmit the in-synch or out-of-synch condition by determining if, over the measurement period, there are a majority of in-synch measurements or out-of-synch measurements” (Wang ¶ 0034).
Wang does not teach: in response to receiving the one or more indications, suspending, with the MAC layer of the user equipment, a DRX operation for the DRX group that the serving cell belong to.
Regarding Claim 10, Kuo teaches: in response to receiving the one or more indications, suspending, with the MAC layer of the user equipment, a DRX operation for the DRX group that the serving cell belong to: “when a radio link failure or an RLC unrecoverable error occurs or when transmission of a UE CAPABILITY INFORMATION message fails, the UE can timely stop DTX/DRX operation of the physical and MAC layers to avoid system malfunction” (Kuo ¶ 0046).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the disclosure of Wang with Kuo for the purpose preventing a system malfunction to due a radio link failure. According to Kuo: “The present invention provides a method and related communications device for managing a discontinuous packet operation of CPC for a user equipment in a wireless communications system to avoid system malfunction” (Kuo ¶ 0026).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang and Kuo as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Basu Mallick.
Regarding Claim 12, Wang and Kuo teach: The method of claim 10.
Wang and Kuo 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 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 Wang and Kuo as applied to 10 above, and further in view of Tsai and Alfarhan.
Regarding Claim 13, Wang and Kuo teach: The method of claim 10.
Wang and Kuo do 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 Wang and Kuo 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 Wang, Kuo, 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, Wong, Kuo, and Alfarhan teach: The method of claim 13.
Wong, Kuo, 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 Wong, Kuo, 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 Wong, Kuo, Tsai, and Alfarhan as applied to 13 above, and further in view of Kenehan.
Regarding Claim 15, Wong, Kuo, Tsai, and Alfarhan teach: The method of claim 13.
Wong, Kuo, 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 Wong, Kuo, 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
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
Prosecution Insights