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 - Drawings
Applicant’s arguments, filed11/18/2025, with respect to Fig. 3 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The Objection of Fig. 3 has been withdrawn.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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.
Claims 1-3, 8, 17-20, and 26-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xue et al. (WO 2020035053 A1), hereinafter Xue in view of Zhou et al. (CN 109462839 A), hereinafter Zhou and Bao et al. (CN 111800764 A), hereinafter Bao.
Re. Claims 1, 17 and 18, Xue teaches a non-transitory computer storage medium storing computer-executable instructions and a communication device (Pg. 8, Line 10 - a computer-readable storage medium is disclosed, including: the computer readable storage medium stores instructions), comprising: an antenna; a memory; a processor, respectively connected to the antenna and the memory, configured to control transmission and reception of the antenna (Fig. 3), and implement a method for configuring discontinuous reception DRX parameter, performed by a base station, comprising: configuring a DRX parameter of a terminal according to first DRX transmission feature data (Pg. 2, Line 33 - the configuration information including a first DRX parameter and a second DRX parameter; wherein the DRX parameter can be used to configure a discontinuous reception function); and wherein, the first DRX transmission feature data is DRX transmission feature data of DRX transmission (Pg. 3, Line 22 - the terminal device uses the first DRX parameter to communicate with the network device on the first BWP).
Yet, Xue does not expressly teach wherein the transmission is performed by the terminal at a historical moment.
However, Zhou explicitly teaches wherein the transmission is performed by the terminal at a historical moment (Pg. 6, Line 13 - this method adopts frame to analyze based on algorithm of RL data packet reaches the mode of each window start time data comprises historical data arrival time prior to an upcoming to predict window, thereby configuring the DRX period is the [decision window]).
Further still, the combination of Xue and Zhou does not expressly teach wherein the DRX transmission feature data comprises: DRX transmission feature data obtained from an operation maintenance management OAM network element.
However, Bao explicitly teaches wherein the DRX transmission feature data comprises: DRX transmission feature data obtained from an operation maintenance management OAM network element (Pg. 10, Line 11 - the DRX configuration set can be synchronized between the base stations 103 by means of an operation maintenance management (OAM) or an interface between the base stations 103).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Zhou to the teaching of Xue. The motivation for such would be as Zhou provides that the transmission is performed at a historical moment (Pg. 6, Line 13, Zhou). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements, as claimed by known methods, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Re. Claims 2, 19, and 26, Xue and Zhou teach Claims 1, 17, and 18.
Additionally, Xue further teaches wherein said configuring the DRX parameter of the terminal comprises: configuring the DRX parameter of the terminal as a first DRX parameter when the DRX parameter of the terminal is not configured at a current moment; wherein, the first DRX parameter is determined based on the first DRX transmission feature data; OR, configuring the DRX parameter of the terminal according to a matching result between the first DRX parameter and the a second DRX parameter when the DRX parameter of the terminal is configured as the second DRX parameter at the current moment (Pg. 2, Line 38 - A terminal device first receives configuration information sent by a network device, and the configuration information includes a first DRX parameter and a second DRX parameter; the first DRX parameter and the second DRX parameter Are different configuration parameters. Additionally, Examiner interprets that only one of the claimed features needs to be mapped because of the presence of “Or”).
Re. Claims 3, 20 and 27, Xue and Zhou teach claims 2, 19, and 26.
Additionally, Xue further teaches wherein said configuring the DRX parameter of the terminal according to the matching result between the first DRX parameter and the second DRX parameter comprises: reconfiguring the DRX parameter of the terminal as the first DRX parameter when the first DRX parameter does not match the second DRX parameter (Pg. 2, Line 38 - A terminal device first receives configuration information sent by a network device, and the configuration information includes a first DRX parameter and a second DRX parameter; the first DRX parameter and the second DRX parameter Are different configuration parameters. Additionally, Examiner interprets that only one of the claimed features needs to be mapped because of the presence of “Or”); OR, not reconfiguring the DRX parameter of the terminal when the first DRX parameter matches the second DRX parameter.
Re. Claims 8 and 25, Xue and Zhou teach claims 1 and 17.
Additionally, Xue further teaches wherein the DRX transmission feature data comprises AT LEAST ONE OF THE FOLLOWING: data of traffic performance, data of channel transmission performance, and data of energy consumption (Pg. 2, Line 19 - in order to reduce the power consumption of the UE, it is also possible to configure the discontinuous reception (DRX) function for the UE, so that the UE only monitors the physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) for a period of time in the DRX cycle. Additionally, Examiner interprets that only one of the claimed features needs to be mapped because of the presence of “at least one of the following”).
Claims 4, 21, and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xue in view of Zhou and Wang et al. (CN 110557761 B), hereinafter Wang.
Re. Claim 4, 21 and 26, Xue and Zhou teach claims 2, 19, and 26.
Additionally, Xue further teaches wherein, the second DRX transmission feature data is DRX transmission feature data of DRX transmission performed by the terminal at the current moment (Pg. 3 Line 25 - The terminal device communicates with the network device by using the second DRX
parameter on the second BWP); determining the first DRX parameter according to the predicted service type (Pg. 3, Line 45 - The terminal device obtains the first DRX parameter from the configuration information).
Yet, the combination of Xue and Zhou does not expressly teach determining a predicted service type by inputting second DRX transmission feature data into a trained neural network model; wherein, the trained neural network model is a neural network model for predicting service type and the neural network model is trained by using the first DRX transmission feature data.
However, Wang explicitly teaches determining a predicted service type by inputting second DRX transmission feature data into a trained neural network model (Pg. 10, Line 35 - After using the solution of the embodiment of the invention, it can use the modeling of the service data packet type (the neural network or the classifier, etc.) to reasonably configure the SPS and DRX as to whether the period of the turn on turn on); wherein, the trained neural network model is a neural network model for predicting service type and the neural network model is trained by using the first DRX transmission feature data (Pg. 9, Line 32 - selecting suitable machine algorithm according to need, such as commonly neural network, at this time, some sample data, based on the machine learning neural network of the machine for training, so as to establish a machine learning model, namely determining each parameter in the machine learning model).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Wang to the teaching of Xue and Zhou. The motivation for such would be as Wang provides predicting service type by inputting DRX feature data into a neural net (Pg. 10, Line 35, Wang). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements, as claimed by known methods, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Claims 5-6 and 22-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xue in view of Zhou, Wang, and Park et al. (EP 3046372 B1), hereinafter Park.
Re. Claim 5 and 22, Xue, Zhou and Wang teach Claims 4 and 21.
Additionally, Xue further teaches wherein said determining the first DRX parameter according to the predicted service type comprises: determining the first DRX parameter from a plurality of predetermined DRX parameters according to a power consumption threshold (Pg. 11, Line 35 - the terminal device may configure the DRX function according to the DRX parameter to save the power consumption of the terminal device monitoring the PDCCH on the BWP).
Yet, Xue does not expressly teach wherein the predetermined DRX parameters are DRX parameters of DRX transmissions performed at historical moments.
However, Zhou explicitly teaches the wherein predetermined DRX parameters are DRX parameters of DRX transmissions performed at historical moments (Pg. 6, Line 13 - this method adopts frame to analyze based on algorithm of RL data packet reaches the mode of each window start time data comprises historical data arrival time prior to an upcoming to predict window, thereby configuring the DRX period is the [decision window]).
Yet, the combination of Xue, Zhou and Wang does not expressly teach DRX parameters corresponding to the predicted service type wherein power consumption thresholds of different service types are different.
However, Park expressly teaches DRX parameters corresponding to the predicted service type wherein power consumption thresholds of different service types are different (¶0052- the terminal can select the power preference information based on the type of application that is included in the application usage information);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Park to the teaching of Xue, Zhou, and Wang. The motivation for such would be as Park provides power consumption thresholds corresponding to different service types (¶0052, Park). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements, as claimed by known methods, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Re. Claim 6 and 23, Xue, Zhou, Wang and Park teach Claim 5.
Yet, the combination of Xue, Zhou, and Wang does not expressly teach wherein said determining the first DRX parameter from the plurality of predetermined DRX parameters according to the power consumption threshold corresponding to the predicted service type comprises: determining the first DRX parameter from the plurality of predetermined DRX parameters according to the power consumption threshold and a correspondence between power consumption thresholds and the predetermined DRX parameters.
However, Park explicitly teaches wherein said determining the first DRX parameter from the plurality of predetermined DRX parameters according to the power consumption threshold corresponding to the predicted service type comprises: determining the first DRX parameter from the plurality of predetermined DRX parameters according to the power consumption threshold (Claim 1 - the power preference information is used to determine a discontinuous reception, DRX, parameter) and a correspondence between power consumption thresholds and the predetermined DRX parameters (Claim 1 - in case that the background network usage amount is equal to or less than the first predetermined threshold, power preference information based on the application usage amount without considering the background network usage amount, and transmit the power preference information to a base station, wherein the power preference information is used to determine a discontinuous reception, DRX, parameter).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Park to the teaching of Xue, Zhou, and Wang. The motivation for such would be as Park provides determining a DRX parameter according to power consumption (Claim 1, Park). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements, as claimed by known methods, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/18/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Examiner interprets that Applicant’s interpretation of the claims is narrower than the actual breadth of the claims. During examination, the claims are given its broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification as it would be interpreted by one of ordinary skill in the art. Applicant’s argument centers on the traditional OAM use versus the use they are trying to claim in the present application. Part of this argument centers on that the OAM provides “dynamic data” based on the historical transmission data, however both the claim language and the specification do not mention this dynamic feature. The language of Claim 1 claims “DRX transmission feature data of DRX transmission performed by the terminal at a historical moment, wherein the DRX transmission feature data comprises: DRX transmission feature data obtained from an operation maintenance management OAM network element.” Further, the Specification at ¶0078 states “the data transmitted by the discontinuous reception (DRX) includes data of at least one of the following related to the discontinuous reception (DRX) transmission process of the terminal: historical data of service traffic, historical data of transmission conditions, historical data of user buffer capacity and historical data of discontinuous reception (DRX) parameter” Examiner interprets a contradiction between the common understandings of “historical” and “dynamic” as used by Applicant. A person having ordinary skill would likely understand “historical” data as data that has happened or has previously been recorded, while “dynamic” data is data that is changing and is being actively gathered. Applicant argues that it would be difficult for a person having skill in the art to come to the conclusion that the OAM is being used for dynamic data allocation, however, given the claim language, Examiner would argue it would be equally difficult for a person having skill in the art to come to that conclusion as the claimed language in amended Claim 1 only states that the feature data is obtained from an OAM network element.
Further still, Applicant does not argue against the mapping for “feature data” provided by Xue and Zhou or that Bao teaches an OAM that provides information or data regarding the DRX, rather Applicant only argues that Bao does not teach “feature data”. Examiner respectfully disagrees with Applicant’s argument that both references are required to disclose a shared element in order for a 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection to be viable, only that a combination need be obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art. In Bao, the OAM is used to provide data regarding the DRX transmission, and in the present application, the OAM is used to provide data regarding DRX transmission. Said data is only defined as “feature data of DRX transmission performed by the terminal at a historical moment”, which Examiner previously quoted the provided Specification to define. As such, it would not be unreasonable, even given the state of the art, that a person having skill would ascertain that an OAM is used to obtain DRX transmission data in other forms.
As such, Examiner maintains the rejection on the same grounds as previously rejected for Claims 1, 17, and 18, as well as all depending claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Ko et al. (2023/0337318) - ¶0007-0009, ¶0220-0230
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 NOAH JAMES SUGDEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7406. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 9:00-6:00 ET, Fri 9:00-1:00 ET.
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, Khaled Kassim can be reached at (571) 270-3770. 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.
/N.J.S./Examiner, Art Unit 2472
/HASHIM S BHATTI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2475