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 .
Claims 1-15 are pending.
Amendments of 07/28/2026 is/are entered.
Response to Arguments
The claims of 07/28/2026 have been amended as per record. As such a new ground of rejection is established to address the new languages.
Regarding Applicant’s specific arguments pertaining reference Maleki (US 2023/0078444):
The argument claims Maleki merely describes that the UE receives SI and fails to teach SI that includes both the TRS configurations and validity duration. This is not correct, as Maleki expressively teaches receiving system information that contains the TRS configuration including a validity duration, see 0025, 0238, 0241 - configuration information of TRS can be received at the UE via SIB (system information block), see at least ¶0029-0035, 0286, 0284, the configuration information being indicative of time and frequency domain resource allocation for the TRS, and information indicative of the validity duration of the configuration
Applicant further emphasizes repeatedly that Maleki does not teach receiving SI with validity duration in the cell reselection cell. The independent claims do not require such limitations. Applicant focuses a selective set of paragraphs disclosing some general information however largely are silent on other relevant sections cited. See the updated rejection below for claim mapping.
The arguments for Maleki specifically are therefore not persuasive.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(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.
Claim(s) 1, 6, 11, 5, 10, and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being unpatentable over Maleki et al. (US 2023/0078444)
As to claims 1 and 11:
Maleki discloses:
A method and a terminal comprising:
A memory storing instructions; and one or more processors configured to execute the instructions (¶0318, UE with processor/memory and transceiver circuitry) to perform the method, comprising:
receive, from a base station, system information including configurations of tracking reference signal (TRS) occasions and information indicating validity duration,
(See at least Abstract, ¶0025, 0238, 0241, TRS information is transmitted to the UE via SIB transmission, See at least ¶0025-0029, 0196, 0286, 0284, configuration indicative for RB allocation for the TRS, and indicia for validity of the configuration. See also ¶0294)
wherein each configuration includes information indicating a first Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing (OFDM) symbol for TRS in a slot and an index corresponding to a bit included in TRS availability information; (See at least ¶0143, 0159, table 6, Fig. 3/5, OFDM system and structure, RB for resource signals are defined by the particular slot (shown visually in figures) with index indicator. See at least ¶0217-0218, this configuration is tightly associated with a bit value that is used to indicate or activate/deactivate this configuration. The bit value is included in TRS validity information conveyed via, for example, MIB)
and receive on a physical downlink control channel, from the base station, downlink control information including the TRS availability information; (¶0217-0219, the UE receives both the TRS configuration as well as the TRS availability bit)
in a case where the terminal is in an idle state or an inactive state, (¶0198, UE receives said information regarding TRS during non-connected state) determine an availability of the TRS during the validity duration based on a value for the bit included in the TRS availability information. (See ¶0195, 0218, “the SI may also include a validity duration for the presence bit in PBCH, allowing the UE to avoid very frequent PBCH/MIB reading. The UE may then read the PBCH, obtain TRS presence status info and validity duration, start or continue TRS utilization (if present”. See ¶0227, fig. 12, non-connected operation, UE receives and read TRS configuration/availability data and enact accordingly.)
As to claim 6:
A base station comprising: a memory storing instructions; and one or more processors (¶0314, base station with processor and transceiver) configured to execute the instructions to: transmit, to a terminal, system information includingSee at least Abstract, ¶0025, 0238, 0241, TRS information is transmitted to the UE via SIB transmission, See at least ¶0025-0029, 0196, 0286, 0284, configuration indicative for RB allocation for the TRS, and indicia for validity of the configuration. See also ¶0294)
wherein each configuration includes information indicating a first Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing (OFDM) symbol for TRS in a slot and an index corresponding to a bit included in TRS availability information; (See at least ¶0143, 0159, table 6, Fig. 3/5, OFDM system and structure, RB for resource signals are defined by the particular slot (shown visually in figures) with index indicator. See at least ¶0217-0218, this configuration is tightly associated with a bit value that is used to indicate or activate/deactivate this configuration. The bit value is included in TRS validity information conveyed via, for example, MIB)
and transmit on a physical downlink control channel, to the terminal, downlink control information including the TRS availability information;(¶0217-0219, the UE receives both the TRS configuration as well as the TRS availability bit)
and in a case where the terminalis in an idle state or an inactive state(¶0198, UE receives said information regarding TRS during non-connected state) control transmission of the TRS during the validity duration based on a value for the bits included in the TRS availability information. (See ¶0195, 0218, “the SI may also include a validity duration for the presence bit in PBCH, allowing the UE to avoid very frequent PBCH/MIB reading. The UE may then read the PBCH, obtain TRS presence status info and validity duration, start or continue TRS utilization (if present”. See ¶0227, fig. 12, non-connected operation, UE receives and read TRS configuration/availability data and enact accordingly.)
As to claims 5, 10, 15:
Maleki discloses all limitations of claim 1/6/11, wherein:
and the downlink control information includes a field used for paging early indication (PEI), or cyclic redundancy check (CRC) scrambled by P-RNTI (Paging Radio Network Temporary Identifier) is added to the downlink control information. (DCI in the physical downlink channel includes DCI format 1_0 with CRC scrambled by P-RNTI per ¶0221-0222 )
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.
Claim(s) 2-4, 7-9, 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maleki et al. (US 2023/0078444) in view of Shi et al. (WO 2022088187).
As to claims 2, 7, and 12:
Maleki discloses all limitations of claim 1/6/11, however is silent on the one or more processors are further configured to discard the validity duration based on performing of the reselection of a camp-on cell.
Shi, in a related field of managing TRS configuration/availability, discloses TRS configuration/availability of a serving cell is impacted and become unusable upon the UE undergoes cell reselection to another cell, which triggers an update process, i.e. causes the UE to obtain the changed cell information (See the discussion in page 8 (last 2 paragraphs) and page 10 of Shi) and discard the validity duration based on performing of reselection of a camp-on cell (Shi, page 8, if the terminal undergoes cell reselection, so that the cell information is changed, at this time, it is determined that the TRS status included in the first indication message is invalid)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing time of the invention that Maleki’s receiving and processing updated system information broadcast for the information indicative of availability of the TRS can occur in case of cell reselection disclosed in Shi. As Maleki calls for updated for TRS configuration/availability and discard as needed, while Shi calls for change of TRS information after a cell reselection occurring, this implementation is advantageous because it timely provides system information assisting the UE to adjust quickly to new timing and environment of the new cell/network, and also to avoid missing TRS transmissions while maintaining compact up-to-date data.
As to claims 3, 8, 13:
Maleki discloses all limitations of claim 1/6/11, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to:
in a case where the system information is specific to an area including a plurality of cells and reselection of a camp-on cell is performed between a plurality of cells in the same area, to not discard the validity duration; (Maleki, ¶0313, each base station can serve one or more cells in a geographical area, i.e. SIB from the same base station corresponds to the cells corresponding same geographical area. ¶0203-0206, the UE or the network can determine whether there’s changes for system information. If no changes in SI, for example the UE stays in the same base station coverages, no changes will occur for TRS configuration (i.e. no discarding old TRS config).
Maleki however is silent on: in a case where the system information is specific to an area including a plurality of cells and the reselection of a camp-on cell is performed between a plurality of cells in different areas, to discard the validity duration.
Shi, in a related field of endeavor, discloses TRS management during cell selection, wherein in a case where the system information is specific to an area including a plurality of cells and the reselection of a camp-on cell is performed between a plurality of cells in different areas, the control circuitry is configured to discard the validity duration. (Shi, page 8, if the terminal undergoes cell reselection, so that the cell information is changed, at this time, it is determined that the TRS status included in the first indication message is invalid, namely the system declare the old TRS configuration as being invalid and not to be used, i.e. discarded)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing time of the invention that Maleki’s receiving and processing updated system information broadcast wherein in a case where the system information is specific to an area including a plurality of cells and the reselection of a camp-on cell is performed between a plurality of cells in different areas, the control circuitry is configured to discard the validity duration disclosed in Shi. Shi’s managing of change of TRS information after a cell reselection occurring is advantageous because it timely provides system information assisting the UE to adjust quickly to new timing and environment of the new cell/network, and also to avoid missing TRS transmissions while maintaining compact up-to-date data.
As to claim 4, 14, 9:
Maleki discloses all limitations of claim 1/6/11, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: the system information is cell-specific (Maleki (¶197, 0238, 0217, SIB convey system information specific to a cell and is not relevant to their cell. Per ¶0191, each cell has its own SIB, i.e. SIB 1, SIB2) ;
Maleki however is silent on “in a case where the reselection of a camp-on cell is performed, stop the validity duration.”
Shi, in a related field of endeavor, discloses TRS management during cell selection, wherein in a case where the reselection of a camp-on cell is performed, the control circuitry is configured to stop the validity duration for the information indicative availability of the TRS. (Shi, page 8, if the terminal undergoes cell reselection, so that the cell information is changed, at this time, it is determined that the TRS status included in the first indication message is invalid, namely the system declare the old TRS configuration as being invalid and not to be used, i.e. discarded)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing time of the invention that Maleki’s receiving and processing updated system information broadcast in a case where the reselection of a camp-on cell is performed, the control circuitry is configured to stop the validity duration for the information indicative availability of the TRS. Shi’s managing of change of TRS information after a cell reselection occurring is advantageous because it provides system information assisting the UE to adjust quickly to new timing and environment of the new cell/network, and also to avoid missing TRS transmissions while maintaining compact up-to-date data.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2017/0055187- A method for supporting handover with multi-connectivity in a wireless communication system is provided. The method includes sending a measurement report message including information of at least one small base station (eNB) to a macro cell eNB, receiving information of a new small eNB in a target cell from the macro cell eNB based on the measurement report message, and performing a random access procedure with the new small eNB in the target cell based on handover.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. 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 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 QUAN M HUA whose telephone number is (571)270-7232. The examiner can normally be reached 10:30-6:30.
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, Anthony Addy can be reached at 571-272-7795. 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.
/QUAN M HUA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2645
Prosecution Insights