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
2. Claims 1 and 11 are amended. Claims 2-3 and 12-13 are cancelled. Claims 1, 4-11 and 14-20 are pending.
Response to Arguments
With regards to applicant’s arguments, filed on 11/22/2025, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The applicant asserts, with respect to claims 1, 11, that Da silva does not teach or suggest: “decreasing, by the processor, a frequency of receiving the RSs in the adjusted RS reception scheduling, in response to the new detection result being better than the detection result; and increasing, by the processor, the frequency of receiving the RSs in the adjusted RS reception scheduling, in response to the new detection result being worse than the detection result”. Examiner respectfully disagrees.
In the arguments section, the applicant asserts that adjusting the “frequency of receiving” means "adjusting the times of receiving RSs" or "adjusting the period of receiving RSs". However, the claim language, as recited, is not indicative of the asserted meaning.
Da silva teaches obtaining the CH parameter comprises determining a first CH parameter for a first frequency and/or carrier and/or band and a second CH parameter for a second frequency and/or carrier and/or band; and changing the measurement parameter based on the obtained CH parameter comprises changing the measurement parameter on the first frequency and/or carrier and/or band based on the determined first CH parameter and not changing the measurement parameter on the second frequency and/or carrier and/or band based on the determined second CH parameter. Changing a measurement parameter based on the obtained CH parameter comprises reducing a measurement bandwidth because the CH parameter is less than a threshold. In some embodiments, changing a measurement parameter based on the obtained CH parameter comprises increasing a measurement bandwidth because the CH parameter exceeds a threshold. (See Da silva; Par. [68]-[70])
If the UE has already detected the presence or absence of CH, and the current CH parameter has not changed compared to the previous parameter, then the UE may keep the length of coherent averaging the same. At least one property that is adjusted is the measurement bandwidth (BW) the UE sample measurements. The UE may change the measurement BW upon the detection of channel hardening or its absence. Generally speaking, reducing the measurement BW will reduce the number of measurements required, while increasing it will increase the number of measurements required. If the UE detects CH occurrence, then the measurement BW is decreased. On the other hand, if the UE detects the absence of CH, then the measurement BW is increased [Therefore, Decreasing and increasing measurements, implies decreasing and increasing the received RSs].
When CH is detected, that is an indication that there is no need to perform too much averaging on the time domain to achieve the required accuracy. Hence, the UE only uses SSBs (transmitted less often) [Reduced], and not the CSI-RSs. That is, the type of CH condition that is present (e.g. on one or more of time, frequency, spatial domains) may indicate which reference signals can be used, and which can be omitted without sacrificing accuracy, according to some embodiments. If the UE detects CH occurrence, then the set of reference signals used for measurements is decreased. On the other hand, if the UE detects the absence of CH, then the set of reference signals used for measurements is increased [Therefore, if the current CH condition is better than the previously estimated CH condition, then the measurement BW [Frequency], as well as measurements number are decreased, while if the current CH condition is worse than the previously estimated CH condition, then the measurement BW [Frequency], as well as measurements number are increased] (See Da silva; Par. [112]-[113], [120], [144]).
Therefore, and for the reasons set above, Da silva teaches the claimed invention. The rejection of claims 1, 4-11 and 14-20is sustained.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
3. 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.
4. Claims 1, 6-8, 10-11, 16-18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Da Silva et al. (US. Pub. No. 2021/0392526 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Da silva discloses a dynamic adjustment method for reference signal (RS) reception (See Abstract and Par. [1]-[2] of Da Silva for a reference to a method, performed by the UE, for measuring channel quality based on received reference signal (RS)), comprising: detecting, by a processor of an apparatus, at least one channel condition to generate a detection result (See Par. [116]-[120], [152]-[154] of Da Silva for a reference to the UE performs periodic channel quality measurements to determine a channel hardening (CH) parameter [detecting the occurrence or absence of CH condition, or the level of CH]);
determining, by the processor, an RS reception scheduling based on the detection result (See Par. [104]-[105], [112]-[113] of Da Silva for a reference to that based on the detection of the presence or absence of the CH condition, the measurement parameters, including the reference signal used in the measurements, as well as the time and the bandwidth [Frequency] of receiving the RS, is determined); and performing, by the processor, an RS reception based on the RS reception scheduling to receive RSs from a network node(See Par. [131], [146]-[149] and Fig. 9 of Da Silva for a reference to that based on the detected CH condition, the CH parameters (time and frequency [schedule]) is adjusted, and the UE performs the RS reception from the network node using the adjusted parameters), wherein the method further comprises:
determining, by the processor, whether to adjust the RS reception scheduling based on a new detection result (See Par. [68], [106], [112]-[113], [120] of Da Silva for a reference to the UE determines to adjust the CH parameters, including time and BW of RS reception based on comparing the CH parameters with a new CH parameters estimate); performing, by the processor, the RS reception based on an adjusted RS reception scheduling (See Par. [112]-[113], [131], [146]-[149] and Fig. 9 of Da Silva for a reference to that based on the detected CH condition, the CH parameters (time and frequency [schedule]) is adjusted, and the UE performs the RS reception from the network node using the adjusted parameters); decreasing, by the processor, a frequency of receiving the RSs in the adjusted RS reception scheduling, in response to the new detection result being better than the detection result (See Par. [68], [70], [112]-[113], [144] of Da Silva for a reference to that if the current CH condition is better than the previously estimated CH condition, then the measurement BW [Frequency], as well as measurements number are decreased); and increasing, by the processor, the frequency of receiving the RSs in the adjusted RS reception scheduling, in response to the new detection result being worse than the detection result (See Par. [68], [70], [112], [144] of Da Silva for a reference to that if the current CH condition is worse than the previously estimated CH condition, then the measurement BW [Frequency], as well as measurements number are increased).
Regarding claim 6, Da silva discloses wherein the at least one channel condition comprises a channel quality, a channel stability, a channel scenario and a channel performance requirement (See Par. [99], [103], [120] of Da Silva for a reference to the UE performs periodic measurements to derive the channel quality, which can be in terms of RSRP, RSRQ, SINR or any other quality metrics).
Regarding claim 7, Da silva discloses wherein the channel quality comprises at least one of a signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), a reference signal received power (RSRP) and a received signal strength indication (RSSI), the channel stability comprises at least one of a temperature and a mobility, the channel scenario comprises at least one of a traffic and a throughput, and the channel performance requirement comprises at least one of a block error (BLER), a cyclic redundancy check (CRC) result, a synchronization, a radio link monitoring (RLM) and a beam management (BM) (See Par. [99], [103], [120] of Da Silva for a reference to the UE performs periodic measurements to derive the channel quality, which can be in terms of RSRP, RSRQ, SINR or any other quality metrics).
Regarding claim 8, Da silva discloses wherein the determining the RS reception scheduling further comprises: determining, by the processor, the RS reception scheduling based on the detection result and beam types(See Par. [76], [151], [222] of Da Silva for a reference to the adjusted parameters for RS reception is determined based on the detection of a CH condition, as well as on beam/group of beams granularity).
Regarding claim 10, Da silva discloses wherein the RS reception scheduling is associated with different types of RSs (See Par. [113] of Da Silva for a reference to the detected CH condition is associated with the RS type used for measurements. RS types, includes SSBs, CSI-RSs, DMRSs, TRSs, etc.).
Regarding claim 11, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 1, including an apparatus for dynamically adjusting reference signal (RS) reception (See Da Silva; Fig. 11; UE 1102), comprising: a transceiver (See Da Silva; Fig. 11; Signalling Unit 1108 & Receiving Unit 1110); and a processor, coupled to the transceiver (See Da Silva; Fig. 11; Determining Unit 1104).
Regarding claim 16, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 6.
Regarding claim 17, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 7.
Regarding claim 18, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 8.
Regarding claim 20, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 10.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. 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.
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.
6. Claims 4-5 and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Da Silva et al. in view of Park et al. (US. Pub. No. 2021/0345293 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Da silva does not explicitly disclose wherein the RS reception scheduling is associated with a sleep state or an active state.
However, Park discloses wherein the RS reception scheduling is associated with a sleep state or an active state (See Par. [237]-[238] of Park for a reference to the DRX cycles [RS Reception] parameters are configured according to the UE operation modes; Wake up mode and Sleep mode).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Park to Da Silva. The motivation for combination would be to improve network’s performance, by increasing throughput per user, reducing end-to-end latency, and increasing energy efficiency. (Park; Par. [3])
Regarding claim 5, Da silva does not explicitly disclose wherein the performing the RS reception further comprises: performing, by the processor, the RS reception in the sleep state and the active state or in the active state based on the RS reception scheduling.
However, Park discloses wherein the performing the RS reception further comprises: performing, by the processor, the RS reception in the sleep state and the active state or in the active state based on the RS reception scheduling (See Par. [237]-[238], [240] of Park for a reference to reference signal is monitored/received during both the UE’s sleep mode and wakeup mode, as well as in the PTW period, in which the UE switches from the sleep mode to the wakeup mode).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Park to Da Silva. The motivation for combination would be to improve network’s performance, by increasing throughput per user, reducing end-to-end latency, and increasing energy efficiency. (Park; Par. [3])
Regarding claim 14, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 4.
Regarding claim 15, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 5.
7. Claims 9 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Da Silva et al. in view of Li et al. (US. Pub. No. 2019/0150133 A1).
Regarding claim 9, Da silva does not explicitly disclose wherein the number of times of receiving the RS associated with a primary beam is more than the number of times of receiving the RS associated with a secondary beam in the RS reception scheduling.
However, Park discloses wherein the number of times of receiving the RS associated with a primary beam is more than the number of times of receiving the RS associated with a secondary beam in the RS reception scheduling (See Par. [113], [126] of Li for a reference to the number of repetition of RS reception from the frequent active beam is more than the number of repetition of RS reception from the less frequent sweep [Secondary] of the total K beams).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Li to Da Silva. The motivation for combination would be to improve network’s performance, by improving beam through detecting the degradation in channel using comparison between primary and alternative beams. (Li; Par. [114])
Regarding claim 19, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 9.
Conclusion
8. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Xiang et al. (US. Pub. No. 2024/0048605 A1) discloses a method for acquiring status information related to a data transmission link during a process of video data transmission between a UE and a server via a wireless network.
Su et al. (US. Pub. No. 2021/0195518 A1) discloses a reference signal sending method, a reference signal receiving method, a device, and a system.
Fehrenbach et al. (US. Pub. No. 2020/0092685 A1) discloses a method for communication between one or more UE within a radio cell served by a base station of a wireless communication network.
9. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
10. Any inquiry concerning this communication from the examiner should be directed to RASHA FAYED whose telephone number is (571) 270-3804. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:00AM-4:30PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the supervisory Examiner, Un Cho can be reached on (571)272-7919. 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.
/R.K.F/Examiner, Art Unit 2413
/UN C CHO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2413