DETAILED ACTION
This office action is a response to an application filed on 04/24/2023.
Claims 1-16, 19-22 are pending for examination.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) was filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The Examiner contends that the drawings submitted on 12/07/2023 are acceptable for examination proceedings.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, with respect to the rejection(s) of claims have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made and claims are rejected under new ground of rejection(s).
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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 non-obviousness.
Claims 1-16 and 19-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yerramalli et al. (US 20190037427 A1), hereinafter “Yerramalli”; and in further view of Tang et al. (US 20150245235 A1), hereinafter “Tang”.
Regarding claim 1, Yerramalli teaches measurement gap determination method, performed by a base station and comprising [Abstract; Fig. 14; Par. 143- 145 teaches base station 105 may configure a measurement gap for measuring DRS, data channel, or combination thereof. In some examples, the measurement gap may be associated with a neighbor cell or a group of neighbor cells]:
determining a measurement gap for a terminal device base on a transmission between a serving cell and a neighboring cell [Fig. 14-15; Par. 145- 151 teaches base station configure measurement gap and set of hop frequencies measurement; UE receive configuration for cell measurement 1510 and generate/determine a measurement report].
However, Yerramalli does not teaches determining a measurement gap for a terminal device base on a transmission delay difference.
Nevertheless, Tang, in the similar filed of endeavor, teaches determining a measurement gap for a terminal device base on a transmission delay difference [Tang: Fig. 8, 9; Par. 22, 60- 68 teaches base station generate measurement gap patterns using MGL and indicates it to UE to perform inter-frequency measurements].
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time the invention was made to utilize the teachings of Tang for configuring measurement gap patterns for UE. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to utilize the teachings of Tang in the Yerramalli system in order to perform inter-frequency measurements for selected cell [Tang: Par. 22].
Regarding claim 2, The combined Yerramalli in view of Tang further teaches wherein the measurement gap comprises a measurement gap length (MGL), and the MGL comprises the transmission delay difference [Tang: Par. 22, 6- 68].
Regarding claim 3, The combined Yerramalli in view of Tang further teaches wherein the MGL further comprises a measurement window duration and a radio frequency adjustment duration [Tang: Par. 57].
Regarding claim 4, The combined Yerramalli in view of Tang further teaches wherein the measurement gap comprises a measurement gap offset, and the measurement gap offset is configured based on the transmission delay difference [Yerramalli: Par. 84].
Regarding claim 5, The combined Yerramalli in view of Tang further teaches grouping the plurality of neighboring cells based on transmission delay differences corresponding to the neighboring cells, and configuring the measurement gap for at least one group of the plurality of neighboring cells [Yerramalli: Par. 84].
Regarding claim 6, The combined Yerramalli in view of Tang further teaches dividing neighboring cells with transmission delay difference less than or equal to a transmission delay difference threshold value into one group according to the transmission delay differences corresponding to the neighboring cells [Yerramalli: Par. 71].
Regarding claim 7, The combined Yerramalli in view of Tang further teaches wherein the measurement gap comprises an MGL, and the MGL corresponding to one group of neighboring cells comprises a maximum transmission delay difference in the transmission delay differences corresponding to the at least one group of the plurality of neighboring cells [Yerramalli: Par. 84].
Regarding claim 8, The combined Yerramalli in view of Tang further teaches wherein the measurement gap comprises a measurement gap offset, and the measurement gap offset corresponding to one group of neighboring cells is configured based on a minimum transmission delay difference in the transmission delay differences corresponding to the at least one group of the plurality of neighboring cells [Yerramalli: Par. 84].
Regarding claim 9, The combined Yerramalli in view of Tang further teaches obtaining transmission delay of the neighboring cell through an Xn interface [Yerramalli: Par. 94 teaches X interface]; and
determining the transmission delay difference between the serving cell and the neighboring cell based on the transmission delay of the neighboring cell [Yerramalli: Par. 84].
Regarding claim 10, Yerramalli teaches A measurement method, performed by a terminal device, and comprising [Abstract]:
receiving a measurement configuration information, wherein the measurement configuration information comprises a measurement gap and a neighboring cell identifier corresponding to the measurement gap, and the measurement gap is determined based on a transmission delay difference between a serving cell and a neighboring cell [Fig. 14; Par. 143- 145 teaches base station 105 may configure a measurement gap for measuring DRS, data channel, or combination thereof. In some examples, the measurement gap may be associated with a neighbor cell or a group of neighbor cells]
measuring, based on the measurement gap, a reference signal for the neighboring cell corresponding to the neighboring cell identifier [Fig. 14-15; Par. 145- 151 teaches base station configure measurement gap and set of hop frequencies measurement; UE receive configuration for cell measurement 1510 and generate/determine a measurement report].
However, Yerramalli does not teaches determining a measurement gap for a terminal device base on a transmission delay difference.
Nevertheless, Tang, in the similar filed of endeavor, teaches determining a measurement gap for a terminal device base on a transmission delay difference [Tang: Fig. 8, 9; Par. 22, 60- 68 teaches base station generate measurement gap patterns using MGL and indicates it to UE to perform inter-frequency measurements].
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time the invention was made to utilize the teachings of Tang for configuring measurement gap patterns for UE. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to utilize the teachings of Tang in the Yerramalli system in order to perform inter-frequency measurements for selected cell [Tang: Par. 22].
Regarding claim 11, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth for claim 2.
Regarding claim 12, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth for claim 3.
Regarding claim 13, The combined Yerramalli in view of Tang further teaches determining a start moment of the measurement gap based on the measurement gap offset, and measuring, based on the start moment, the reference signal for the neighboring cell corresponding to the neighboring cell identifier [Yerramalli: Par. 95 teaches start of hopping frame to received data from base station and start of measurement gap].
Regarding claim 14, The combined Yerramalli in view of Tang further teaches for one measurement gap, measuring, based on the measurement gap and the neighboring cell identifier corresponding to the measurement gap, the reference signal for one group of neighboring cells corresponding to the measurement gap [Yerramalli: Par. 84; 95].
Regarding claim 15, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth for claim 7.
Regarding claim 16, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth for claim 8.
Regarding claim 19, The combined Yerramalli in view of Tang further teaches the memory being configured to store a computer program; and the processor being configured to execute computer program to perform the measurement gap determination method of claim 1 [Yerramalli: Par. 113].
Regarding claim 20, The combined Yerramalli in view of Tang further teaches A computer readable storage medium, wherein the computer readable storage medium stores a computer program, and the computer program is executed by a processor to implement the measurement gap determination method according to claim 1 [Yerramalli: Par. 113].
Regarding claim 21, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth for claim 10.
Regarding claim 22, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth for claim 2.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record (see attached PTO-892) and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
A shortened statutory period for reply to this action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of the action. An extension of time may be obtained under 37 CFR 1.136(a). However, in no event, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KYAW Z SOE whose telephone number is (571)270-0304. The examiner can normally be reached on 9am-5pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Charles C Jiang can be reached on 5712707191. 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.
/KYAW Z SOE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2412
Prosecution Insights