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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 Arguments
Applicant’s Amendments and Arguments filed 05/07/2026 have been considered for examination.
With regard to the objections to Claims, Applicant’s arguments filed 05/07/2026 in view of the amendments have been fully considered and are persuasive. Thus, the objections to Claims have been withdrawn.
With regard to the 103 rejections, Applicant’s arguments filed 05/07/2026 in view of the amendments have been fully considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to any of the references being used in the current rejection.
Claim Objections
Claims 6, 15-16, 18-20 and 23 are objected to because of the following informality:
Claim 6 recites, “PDCCH monitoring” (lines 3 and 5). It is suggested to replace them with “the PDCCH monitoring” for more clarity. Claim 15 (lines 2 and 3) is objected to at least based on a similar rationale applied to claim 6.
Claim 6 recites, “-- a start moment of a DRX on-duration timer is a start moment of a corresponding DRX cycle --” (lines 8-9). It is suggested to replace it with “-- a start moment of the DRX on-duration timer is a start moment of a corresponding DRX cycle --” for more clarity.
Claim 20 recites, “A network device, comprising a processor, a memory, and a program --” (lines 1-2). It is suggested to replace it with “A network device, comprising: a processor; a memory; and a program --” for more clarity.
Claim 18 recites, “reporting CSI” (line 8). It is suggested to replace it with “reporting channel state information (CSI)” for more clarity. Claim 20 (line 8) is objected to at least based on a similar rationale applied to claim 18.
Claims 16, 19 and 23 are also objected to since they are directly or indirectly dependent upon the objected claims, as set forth above.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 1-3, 5-7, 11, 15-17 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites, “the predetermined behavior comprises: monitoring a PDCCH, measuring a channel state information-reference signal (CSI-RS); or the predetermined behavior comprises: monitoring the PDCCH and measuring the CSI-RS;” (lines 5-6). It is unclear whether it means: “monitoring a PDCCH and measuring a channel state information-reference signal (CSI-RS)”; or “monitoring a PDCCH or measuring a channel state information-reference signal (CSI-RS)”. For the sake of examination purpose only, it is interpreted as best understood.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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, 11, 15, 18-21 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maleki et al (US Publication No. 2022/0394616) in view of Guan et al (US Publication No. 2021/0274438).
Regarding claim 1, Maleki discloses, a transmission processing method [FIG. 4; its related descriptions; ¶0105, a transmission method performed by a WD for communicating with a network node], comprising:
in a non-physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) monitoring period1 [FIG. 4; its related descriptions; ¶0107, in a wakeup signal/power saving signal (WUS/PSS) monitoring occasion (MO); further see FIG. 2, “PSS 8a” is outside the DRX on-duration window 3 (see, foot note 2 below)], monitoring, by a terminal, a first indication on at least one target channel or signal monitoring occasion [FIG. 4; its related descriptions; ¶0107, the WD/UE monitors PSS with wake-up indication (i.e., first indication) in the configured MOs 402 on a target channel (e.g., 1a of FIG. 2) including the WUS/PSS MO 8a and the next ON duration of the DRX cycle 3 (e.g., see FIG. 2)]; and
performing, by the terminal, a predetermined behavior based on the first indication [FIG. 4; its related descriptions; ¶0107-0108 and 0115-0116, the WD/UE performs monitoring a PDCCH (i.e., predetermined behavior) in the next ON duration based on detection of the wake-up indication in the WUS/PSS MO 8a],
wherein the predetermined behavior comprises monitoring a PDCCH [FIG. 4; its related descriptions; ¶0107-0108 and 0115-0116, monitoring the PDCCH] . . . ; wherein
the target channel or signal monitoring occasion comprises a wake-up signal monitoring occasion (WUS MO) [FIG. 4; its related descriptions; ¶0107 and FIG. 2; ¶0061, a target channel (e.g., 1a of FIG. 2) including the WUS/PSS MO 8a and the next ON duration of the DRX cycle 3 (e.g., see FIG. 2) includes a WUS MO 8a].
Although Maleki discloses, “performing, by the terminal, a predetermined behavior based on the first indication, wherein the predetermined behavior comprises monitoring a PDCCH” as set forth above, Maleki does not explicitly disclose (see, italicized and bold limitations), the predetermined behavior comprises monitoring a PDCCH and measuring the CSI-RS.
However, Guan discloses, the predetermined behavior comprises monitoring a PDCCH and measuring the CSI-RS [¶0124, the base station sends configuration information to the UE; further see ¶0129, the UE performs normal communication with the base station when the UE is in a DRX ON mode and ¶0130, the normal communication includes, for example, listening to a PDCCH (i.e., monitoring PDCCH), measuring and reporting a CSI-RS, sending an SRS, sending an uplink PUCCH, and transmitting a PDSCH or a PUCCH].
It is noted that the above-mentioned feature is a known technique in the field Applicant's endeavor, e.g., telecommunication art.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the system of Maleki with "the above-mentioned known feature(s)" taught by Guan to reach the claimed invention as set forth above. Since one having ordinary skill in the art could have recognized that applying the known technique taught by Guan into the system of Maleki would have yield predictable results and/or resulted in the improved system, such as e.g., enabling to adapt dynamic variation of channel state and thus reducing power consumption of a terminal device, such a modification (or application) would have involved the mere application of a known technique to a piece of prior art ready for improvement," the claim is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a). Ex Parte Smith, 83 USPQ.2d 1509, 1518-19 (BPAI, 2007) (citing KSR v. Teleflex, 127 S.Ct. 1727, 1740, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007)).
Regarding claim 2, Maleki in view of Guan discloses, the method according to claim 1 as set forth above.
Maleki discloses, wherein before the monitoring a first indication on at least one target channel or signal monitoring occasion [FIG. 4; its related descriptions; ¶0106, before the monitoring the channel/signal at the PSS MO (step 403)], the method further comprises:
obtaining, by the terminal, configuration information [FIG. 4; its related descriptions; ¶0105-0106, the WD is configured with DRX configuration (step 401) and PSS configuration (step 402)], wherein the configuration information is used to configure [FIG. 4; its related descriptions; ¶0106, the DRX configuration (step 401)] at least one of the following:
a first monitoring time window [FIG. 4; its related descriptions; ¶0105, the ON-duration of the DRX cycle; further see reference number 3 of FIG. 2], wherein configuration of the first monitoring time window is related to at least one of a discontinuous reception (DRX) cycle, a DRX start moment, or DRX on-duration [FIG. 4; its related descriptions; ¶0105, the DRX configuration has an ON-duration configuration and a long/short DRX cycle configuration, and a timing and a length of an ON-duration];
the at least one target channel or signal monitoring occasion, wherein the at least one target channel or signal monitoring occasion is configured within the first monitoring time window [FIG. 4; its related descriptions; ¶0105, the DRX configuration has an ON-duration configuration and a long/short DRX cycle configuration, and a timing and a length of an ON-duration; note that the target channel 1a including the ON-duration corresponds to the claimed at least one target channel or signal monitoring occasion].
Regarding claim 3, Maleki in view of Guan discloses, the method according to claim 1 as set forth above.
Maleki discloses, wherein the first indication is used to indicate at least one of the following [FIG. 4; its related descriptions; ¶0107 and 0115, the PSS is used to indicate]:
a target channel or signal monitoring occasion that the terminal needs to monitor [¶0116-0117, the first indication indicated in the PSS may comprise monitoring a Physical Downlink Control Channel (PDCCH) at one or more PDCCH monitoring occasions (MOs) in a subsequent/following ON-duration of the DRX cycle (step 405)];
whether the terminal is to be woken up for PDCCH monitoring [¶0116-0117 and 0122, the first action indicated in the PSS may comprise monitoring a Physical Downlink Control Channel (PDCCH) at one or more PDCCH monitoring occasions (MOs) in a subsequent/following ON-duration of the DRX cycle (step 405)];
duration of monitoring a PDCCH by the terminal [¶0116-0117, the first action indicated in the PSS may comprise monitoring a Physical Downlink Control Channel (PDCCH) at one or more PDCCH monitoring occasions (MOs) in a subsequent/following ON-duration of the DRX cycle (step 405)].
Regarding claim 11, Maleki in view of Guan discloses, the method according to claim 3 as set forth above.
Maleki discloses, wherein in a case that the first indication is used to indicate at least one of the start moment of monitoring the PDCCH, the end moment of monitoring the PDCCH, or the duration of monitoring the PDCCH [FIG. 4; its related descriptions; ¶0107 and 0115-0117, in case that the PSS is used to indicate the subsequent ON-duration of the DRX cycle to monitor the PDCCH], monitoring, by the terminal, the PDCCH based on the first indication comprises: monitoring the PDCCH within target monitoring duration [FIG. 4; its related descriptions; ¶0107 and 0115-0117, monitoring the PDCCH within the one or more PDCCH monitoring occasions (MOs) in the subsequent/following ON-duration based on the indication of PSS that the WD needs to monitor], wherein the target monitoring duration is determined based on at least one of the start moment of monitoring the PDCCH, the end moment of monitoring the PDCCH, or the duration of monitoring the PDCCH [FIG. 4; its related descriptions; ¶0107 and 0115-0117, note that the one or more PDCCH monitoring occasions (MOs) are determined based the subsequent/following ON-duration].
Regarding claim 15, Maleki in view of Guan discloses, the method according to claim 1 and particularly, “wherein the starting or resuming, by the terminal, PDCCH monitoring after the first indication is received” as set forth above.
Maleki discloses, starting or resuming, by the terminal, PDCCH monitoring by starting a discontinuous reception (DRX) on-duration timer [FIG. 4; its related descriptions; ¶0107 and 0115-0117 and 0122, monitoring the PDCCH at one or more PDCCH monitoring occasions in the subsequent/following ON-duration; further see ¶0061 and ¶000116, trigger the MAC entity to start the DRX ON duration timer], wherein a start moment of the DRX on-duration timer is at least one of: an end moment of a first time unit to which an end moment of a first duration belongs [FIG. 4; its related descriptions; ¶0061 and 0161, note that the starting of the DRX ON duration timer is after any time unit].
Regarding claim 18, Maleki discloses, a terminal [FIG. 4; its related descriptions; wireless device (WD); further see FIG. 5, wireless device 550], comprising
a processor [FIG. 5; its related descriptions; ¶0136, processing circuitry 551; note that every wireless communication device has at least one processor],
a memory [FIG. 5; its related descriptions; ¶0136, memory 555; note that every wireless communication device has at least one memory], and
a program or instructions stored in the memory and executable on the processor, wherein the program or instructions, when executed by the processor, cause the terminal to perform action(s) [FIG. 5; its related descriptions; ¶0136, program instructions stored in the memory and executable on the processing circuitry to perform action(s); note that every wireless communication device has at least one memory storing program instructions].
Since claim 18 recites similar features to claim 1 without further additional features, claim 18 is rejected at least based on a similar rationale applied to claim 1.
Regarding claim 19, claim 19 is rejected at least based on a similar rationale applied to claim 2.
Regarding claim 20, Maleki discloses, a network device [FIG. 4; its related descriptions; network node; further see FIG. 7, network node 550], comprising
a processor [FIG. 7; its related descriptions; ¶0156, processing circuitry 751; note that every network node has at least one processor],
a memory [FIG. 7; its related descriptions; ¶0156, memory 755; note that every network node has at least one memory], and
a program or instructions stored in the memory and executable on the processor, wherein the program or instructions, when executed by the processor, cause the network device to perform action(s) [FIG. 7; its related descriptions; ¶0156, program instructions stored in the memory and executable on the processing circuitry to perform action(s); note that every wireless communication device has at least one memory storing program instructions].
Since claim 20 is merely different from claim 1 in that it recites claimed features from the perspective of a network node, but recites similar features to claim 1 without further additional features, claim 20 is rejected at least based on a similar rationale applied to claim 1.
Regarding claim 21, Maleki in view of Guan discloses, the method according to claim 1 as set forth above.
Maleki discloses, wherein a duration within which no PDCCH is monitored comprises a duration outside the discontinuous reception (DRX) active time [FIG. 4; its related descriptions; ¶0107, the WUS/PSS monitoring occasion (MO) 8a within which no PDCCH is monitored is outside the DRX on-duration window 3) within which the PDCCH is monitored].
Regarding claim 23, claim 23 is rejected at least based on a similar rationale applied to claim 21.
Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maleki et al (US Publication No. 2022/0394616) in view of Guan et al (US Publication No. 2021/0274438) and further in view of Lin et al (US Publication No. 2020/0396684)2.
Regarding claim 5, Maleki in view of Guan discloses, the method according to claim 3 as set forth above.
Maleki in view of Guan does not explicitly disclose (see, italicized limitations), but Lin discloses, wherein in a case that the first indication is used to indicate the first duration [FIG. 12; its related descriptions; ¶187, in case that an indication is used to indicate the next one or more DRX ON durations(s)/first duration], monitoring, by the terminal, a PDCCH based on the first indication comprises at least one of the following:
skipping monitoring, by the terminal, a PDCCH that fully overlaps the first duration [FIG. 12; its related descriptions; ¶187, skipping the PDCCH monitoring for the next one or more DRX ON duration(s) (note that the DRX ON duration is the first duration on which the PDCCH monitoring is skipped); further see ¶0184, indicating to the UE to skip PDCCH monitoring in one or more DRX ON duration(s) or to skip any transmission and reception in one or more DRX ON duration(s). Alternatively, the indication can be implicit such that a default UE behavior can be to skip PDCCH monitoring unless the UE receives an indication to monitor PDCCH for next one or more DRX ON duration(s)];
skipping monitoring, by the terminal, a PDCCH that partially overlaps the first duration [FIG. 12; its related descriptions; ¶187, skipping the PDCCH monitoring for the next one or more DRX ON duration(s) (note that the DRX ON duration is the first duration on which the PDCCH monitoring is skipped)]; or
starting or resuming, by the terminal, PDCCH monitoring after the first duration ends [FIG. 12; its related descriptions; ¶187, skipping the PDCCH monitoring for the next one or more DRX ON duration(s) (note that the DRX ON duration is the first duration on which the PDCCH monitoring is skipped); further see ¶0184, the indication can be implicit such that a default UE behavior can be to skip PDCCH monitoring unless the UE receives an indication to monitor PDCCH for next one or more DRX ON duration(s); note that the next one or more DRX ON durations (after receiving the indication to monitor PDCCH) are durations on which the UE resumes monitoring of the PDCCH].
It is noted that the above-mentioned feature is a known technique in the field Applicant's endeavor, e.g., telecommunication art.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the system of Maleki in view of Guan with "the above-mentioned known feature(s)" taught by Lin to reach the claimed invention as set forth above. Since one having ordinary skill in the art could have recognized that applying the known technique taught by Lin into the system of Maleki in view of Guan would have yield predictable results and/or resulted in the improved system, such as e.g., ensuring to avoid unnecessary wakeup to reduce power consumption, such a modification (or application) would have involved the mere application of a known technique to a piece of prior art ready for improvement," the claim is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a). Ex Parte Smith, 83 USPQ.2d 1509, 1518-19 (BPAI, 2007) (citing KSR v. Teleflex, 127 S.Ct. 1727, 1740, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007)).
Regarding claim 6, Maleki in view of Guan and Lin discloses, the method according to claim 5 and particularly “the starting or resuming, by the terminal, PDCCH monitoring after the first duration ends” as set forth above.
Maleki discloses, in a case that the first indication is used to indicate the first duration, the terminal monitoring the PDCCH based on the first indication [FIG. 4; its related descriptions; ¶0107 and 0115-0117 in a case that the PSS/first indication is used to indicate the DRX ON duration, the UE monitoring the PDCCH based on the PSS], starting or resuming, by the terminal, PDCCH monitoring by starting a discontinuous reception (DRX) on-duration timer [FIG. 4; its related descriptions; ¶0107 and 0115-0117 and 0122, monitoring the PDCCH at one or more PDCCH monitoring occasions in the subsequent/following ON-duration; further see ¶0061 and ¶000116, trigger the MAC entity to start the DRX ON duration timer], wherein
a start moment of the DRX on-duration timer is an end moment of a first time unit to which an end moment of the first duration belongs [FIG. 4; its related descriptions; ¶0061 and 0161, note that the starting of the DRX ON duration timer is after any time unit].
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maleki et al (US Publication No. 2022/0394616) in view of Guan et al (US Publication No. 2021/0274438) and further in view of Lin et al (US Publication No. 2020/0396684) and further in view of Tooher et al (US Publication No. 2021/0176710).
Regarding claim 7, Maleki in view of Guan and Lin discloses, the method according to claim 6, as set forth above.
Maleki in view of Guan and Lin does not explicitly disclose (see, italicized limitations), but Tooher discloses, wherein in a case that the DRX on-duration timer is started, the method further comprises: within a first time range, canceling starting a DRX on-duration timer other than the DRX on-duration timer [¶0117, in case of the new DRX cycle timer is started, the WTRU may pause the short or long DRX cycle timer while in the new DRX cycle (where the new DRX cycle timer is running); note that the new DRX cycle timer has a shorter duration than a short DRX cycle timer].
It is noted that the above-mentioned feature is a known technique in the field Applicant's endeavor, e.g., telecommunication art.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the system of Maleki in view of Guan and Lin with "the above-mentioned known feature(s)" taught by Tooher to reach the claimed invention as set forth above. Since one having ordinary skill in the art could have recognized that applying the known technique taught by Tooher into the system of Maleki in view of Guan and Lin would have yield predictable results and/or resulted in the improved system, such as e.g., ensuring to avoid redundant DRX timers, optimizing UE power efficiency in a wireless network, such a modification (or application) would have involved the mere application of a known technique to a piece of prior art ready for improvement," the claim is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a). Ex Parte Smith, 83 USPQ.2d 1509, 1518-19 (BPAI, 2007) (citing KSR v. Teleflex, 127 S.Ct. 1727, 1740, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007)).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maleki et al (US Publication No. 2022/0394616) in view of Guan et al (US Publication No. 2021/0274438) and further in view of Tooher et al (US Publication No. 2021/0176710).
Regarding claim 16, Maleki in view of Guan discloses, the method according to claim 15 as set forth above.
Maleki in view of Guan does not explicitly disclose (see, italicized limitations), but Tooher discloses, wherein in a case that the DRX on-duration timer is started, the method further comprises: within a second time range, canceling starting a DRX on-duration timer other than the DRX on-duration timer [¶0117, in case of the new DRX cycle timer is started, the WTRU may pause the short or long DRX cycle timer while in the new DRX cycle (where the new DRX cycle timer is running); note that the new DRX cycle timer has a shorter duration than a short DRX cycle timer].
It is noted that the above-mentioned feature is a known technique in the field Applicant's endeavor, e.g., telecommunication art.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the system of Maleki in view of Guan with "the above-mentioned known feature(s)" taught by Tooher to reach the claimed invention as set forth above. Since one having ordinary skill in the art could have recognized that applying the known technique taught by Tooher into the system of Maleki in view of Guan would have yield predictable results and/or resulted in the improved system, such as e.g., ensuring to avoid redundant DRX timers, optimizing UE power efficiency in a wireless network, such a modification (or application) would have involved the mere application of a known technique to a piece of prior art ready for improvement," the claim is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a). Ex Parte Smith, 83 USPQ.2d 1509, 1518-19 (BPAI, 2007) (citing KSR v. Teleflex, 127 S.Ct. 1727, 1740, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007)).
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maleki et al (US Publication No. 2022/0394616) in view of Guan et al (US Publication No. 2021/0274438) and further in view of Bao et al (US Publication No. 2023/0239794)3.
Regarding claim 17, Maleki in view of Guan discloses, the method according to claim 1 as set forth above.
Maleki in view of Guan does not explicitly disclose (see, italicized limitations), but Bao discloses,
wherein before the performing, by the terminal, the predetermined behavior based on the first indication, the method further comprises at last one of: in a case that the terminal detects a wake-up indication, ignoring the first indication [FIG. 5; its related descriptions; ¶0077, in case of the UE detects an WUS indication delivered to the group, the UE may ignore cross group indication].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the above-mentioned feature(s) as taught by Bao in the system of Maleki in view of Guan in order to cause the system to be able to improve WUS diversity by allowing simultaneously including two WUS with two independent WUS indicators [e.g., ¶0068 of Bao].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon are considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Xu et al (US Publication No. 2022/0053542) [¶0117].
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SUN JONG KIM whose telephone number is (571)270-3216. The examiner can normally be reached on 7:30am-5:30pm (M-T).
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.f attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ian Moore can be reached on (571) 272-3085. 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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.
/SUN JONG KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2469
1 In light of the specification, ¶0033, the term “non-physical downlink control channel monitoring period” is defined as “duration within which no PDCCH is monitored. For example, in a case that a network configures discontinuous reception (DRX), the duration within which no PDCCH is monitored is duration outside DRX active time, and/or network-defined duration within which no PDCCH is monitored.
2 Lin was cited in an IDS by the applicant.
3 Since Bao is relying on PCT publication (WO 2022/010567) (see attached) to claim a priority date 04/27/2021, Bao is qualified as a prior art under 102(a)(2) for the instant application with the effective filing date 06/30/2021.
Prosecution Insights