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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of group I, claims 1-9 in the reply filed on 11-13-2025 is acknowledged.
Newly submitted claims 21-22 and 27-31 are directed to an invention that is independent or distinct from the invention originally claimed for the following reasons: intermodulation distortion and generating configuration information was already restricted on the office action mailed 9-16-2025.
Since applicant has received an action on the merits for the originally presented invention, this invention has been constructively elected by original presentation for prosecution on the merits. Accordingly, claims 21-22 and 27-31 are withdrawn from consideration as being directed to a non-elected invention. See 37 CFR 1.142(b) and MPEP § 821.03.
To preserve a right to petition, the reply to this action must distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement. Otherwise, the election shall be treated as a final election without traverse. Traversal must be timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are subsequently added, applicant must indicate which of the subsequently added claims are readable upon the elected invention.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-9 and 23-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Priyanto 20200163017 in view of Shi 20220377666.
As to claim 1, Priyanto discloses a method comprising:
accessing configuration information to determine a wake-up sequence that is designated for a device or a group of devices; the wake-up sequence to include a plurality of frequency resources in a bandwidth [the control message 4001 may be indicative of a plurality of reoccurring resources allocated to the wake-up signal 4003] [3001-3002; 4001] (see par. 0110-0113);
detecting, via a wake-up receiver, a wake-up signal in all of the plurality of frequency resources of the wake-up sequence; and providing, based on detecting the wake-up signal in all of the plurality of frequency resources, a trigger to activate a primary receiver of the device [In response to receiving the wake-up signal 4003, the main receiver 1351 of the UE 103 is transitioned to the active state] (see par.0115-0118). Depending on interpretation, Priyanto may or may not disclose frequency resources that are non-uniformly spaced. In an analogous art, Shi discloses the wake-up sequence to include a plurality of frequency resources that are non-uniformly spaced in a bandwidth [WUS resource, per gap type (e.g., DRX gap, or eDRX gap; or DRX gap, eDRX short gap, or eDRX long gap), or per WUS source and per gap type] (see fig. 1A-2B; par. 0074, 0079). Thereby, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to use non-uniformly spaced frequency resources for the simple purpose of adjusting the frequency resources according the needs of the communication systems; thereby, maximizing wireless spectrum.
As to claim 2, Priyanto discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the plurality of frequency resources is [are] distributed within a corresponding plurality of frequency resource groups of a bandwidth (see par. 0115-0016).
As to claim 3, Priyanto discloses the method of claim4 2, wherein, the plurality of frequency resources is [are] selected from a set of frequency resources, and method further comprises: identifying an offset associated with a network device that transmits the wake-up signal; and determining the set of frequency resources based on the offset (see par. 0115-0016).
As to claim 4, Priyanto discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the configuration information further indicates a code [identity code, UE identity, group identity, etc.] and the method further comprises: generating a modulated wake-up sequence based on the code and the wake-up sequence (see par. 0088, 0100, 0176); and detecting the wake-up signal based on the modulated wake-up sequence (see par. 0115-0118).
As to claim 5, Priyanto discloses the method of claim 4, wherein generating the modulated wake-up sequence includes: modulating the wake-up sequence based on the code (see par. 0048, 0071, 0102). Priyanto does not specifically disclose modulating an amplitude; however, discloses OOK which is the simplest form of amplitude-shift keying (ASK) modulation that represents digital data as the presence or absence of a carrier wave. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention that OOK include modulating the amplitude; thereby, allowing to transmit information with spectral efficiency.
As to claim 6, Priyanto discloses the method of claim 4, wherein the code is a binary code assigned to the device (see par. 0094) or group of devices or is a cell-specific signature (see par. 0121).
As to claim 7, Priyanto discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving, from a base station via the primary receiver, the configuration information [3001; 4001] (see par. 0110-0113).
As to claim 8, Priyanto discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising: transitioning the primary receiver to a reduced-power mode; and activating the wake-up receiver based on transitioning the primary receiver to the reduced-power mode [3003] (see par. 0114).
As to claim 9, Priyanto discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the configuration information defines wake-up parameters for the device or group of devices throughout a tracking area (see par. 0121).
Regarding claims 23-26, they are the corresponding apparatus claims of method claims 1-2, 4 and 9. Therefore, claims 23-26 are rejected for the same reasons as shown above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARCOS L TORRES whose telephone number is (571)272-7926. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00 AM - 6:00 PM M-F.
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, Alison Slater can be reached at (571)270-0375. 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.
MARCOS L. TORRES
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2647
/MARCOS L TORRES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2647
Prosecution Insights