DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to claims filed on 11 January 2024 and Information Disclosure Statement filed on 5 July 2024.
Claims 1-20 are pending for examination.
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 .
Priority
Applicant cannot rely upon the certified copy of the foreign priority application to overcome this rejection because a translation of said application has not been made of record in accordance with 37 CFR 1.55. When an English language translation of a non-English language foreign application is required, the translation must be that of the certified copy (of the foreign application as filed) submitted together with a statement that the translation of the certified copy is accurate. See MPEP §§ 215 and 216.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 5 July 2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding Claim 9, line 2 — “that is dynamically” should read as “that [[is]]was dynamically”.
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding Claim 19, the first “wherein” clause is undefined.
“Wherein” clauses may raise a question as to the limiting effect of the language in the claim. The determination of whether each of these clauses is a limitation in a claim depends on the specific facts of the case. See, e.g., Griffin v. Bertina, 285 F.3d 1029, 1034, 62 USPQ2d 1431 (Fed. Cir. 2002) (finding that a "wherein" clause limited a process claim where the clause gave "meaning and purpose to the manipulative steps"). See MPEP § 2111.04(I).
Here, claim 19 is directed to a method of a base station, but includes a “wherein” clause that is undefined as to whether it has a limiting effect on the method of a base station, because while it requires that “a state…is determined based on at least one of the semi-static configuration information or the dynamic adjustment signaling,” the entity that performs the claimed determining is undefined. In independent claims 1 and 16, user equipment performs similarly-claimed “determining,” but that feature cannot be read into independent claim 19. Thus, claim 19 is rendered undefined by the by the “wherein” clause at issue.
If the “wherein” clause defined the claimed “determining” as performed by user equipment, then the wherein clause would have no limiting effect on the claimed method of a base station, but it would be definite. If the “wherein” clause were to be amended to define the claimed “determining” as performed by a base station, then the original disclosure must support such a claimed feature, but such support has not yet been determined. Alternatively, claim 19 could be amended to actively require the claimed “semi-static configuration information” and/or the “dynamic adjustment signaling” to indicate information from which a state of the cell DTX and/or cell DRX may be determined by user equipment.
Regarding Claim 20, though of a different scope, the limitations of claim 20 are substantially similar or identical to those of claim 19, and is rejected under the same reasoning.
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.
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-12, 15-17, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by CATT, “Remaining issues on Cell DTX/DRX,” 3GPP TSG-RAN WG2 Meeting #120, R2-2211443, Toulouse, France, 14th-18th Nov. 2022, Published 4 Nov. 2022, https://www.3gpp.org/ftp/ TSG_RAN/WG2_RL2/TSGR2_120/Docs, accessed on 12 March 2026 (hereinafter CATT).
Regarding Claim 1, CATT disclose a method performed by a user equipment (UE) in a communication system, the method comprising:
receiving at least one of:
semi-static configuration information related to at least one of a cell discontinuous transmission (DTX) or a cell discontinuous reception (DRX) (p. 2 § 2.2(2-2) discloses a UE receiving a radio resource configuration (RRC) configuration message from a gNB configuring a cell DTX/DRX to the UE), or
dynamic adjustment signaling related to at least one of the cell DTX or the cell DRX (MPEP § 2111.04 — the broadest reasonable interpretation of a method (or process) claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met — since the claimed method can be practices with only semi-static configuration information being received, then receiving dynamic adjustment signaling is not required); and
determining a state of at least one of the cell DTX or the cell DRX based on at least one of the semi-static configuration information or the dynamic adjustment signaling, wherein the state comprises an active time and an inactive time (p. 4 discloses 4 examples of a UE’s behavior based on the cell DTX/DRX configuration received from the gNB, wherein the UE may, during a non-active period, receive or transmit nothing, receive downlink (DL) reference signals (RS) or transmit uplink (UL) reference signals (RS) (such as a Sounding Reference Signal (SRS), stop dynamic grant (DG) data transmission only, or only perform measurement — for the UE to perform any of these options, the UE must have determined when the cell DTX/DRX is non-active based on the received RRC configuration indicating cell DTX/DRX configuration).
Regarding Claim 2, GATT discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the semi-static configuration information comprises at least one of:
a cycle of at least one of the cell DTX or the cell DRX (p. 2, § 2.2(2-2) discloses the RRC configuration as including L1/L2 signaling used to activate the configured cell DTX/DRX; and p. 3, Proposal 4 discloses L1/L2 signaling as including cell DTX/DRX activation/deactivation);
a starting position of the cycle of at least one of the cell DTX or the cell DRX (p. 2, § 2.2(2-2) discloses the RRC configuration as including L1/L2 signaling used to modify the start point of the cell DTX/DRX period; and p. 3, Proposal 4 discloses L1/L2 signaling as including a new start point);
a duration of the active time in the cycle of at least one of the cell DTX or the cell DRX (p. 2, § 2.2(2-2) discloses the RRC configuration as including L1/L2 signaling used to modify the periodicity and/or active duration of the cell DTX/DRX period; and p. 3, Proposal 4 discloses L1/L2 signaling as including a new active period); or
a duration of the inactive time in the cycle of at least one of the cell DTX or the cell DRX (p. 2, § 2.2(2-2) discloses the RRC configuration as including L1/L2 signaling used to deactivate the configured cell DTX/DRX; and p. 3, Proposal 4 discloses L1/L2 signaling as including a new periodicity, which would affect the inactive time in a cell DTX/DRX period).
Regarding Claim 3, GATT discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the dynamic adjustment signaling comprises at least one of:
a first signaling for at least one of:
indicating whether the active time is started at a starting position of a cycle of at least one of the cell DTX or cell DRX, or
adjusting a duration of the active time;
a second signaling for indicating that a cell switches to the inactive time from the active time or switches to the active time from the inactive time;
a third signaling for indicating that the duration of the active time is extended by a predetermined time length; or
a fourth signaling for indicating that the cell is in the active time (MPEP § 2111.04(II) — the BRI of a method (or process) claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met — since claim 3 can be practiced by the UE receiving semi-static configuration information instead of dynamic adjustment signaling, the prior art need not disclose the specific features of the claimed dynamic adjustment to disclose subject matter within the scope of the claim).
Regarding Claim 4, GATT discloses the method according to claim 3, further comprising at least one of:
monitoring the first signaling during a first-time window;
monitoring the third signaling during a second time window; or
monitoring the fourth signaling during a third time window;
wherein:
a starting position or an ending position of the first-time window is determined based on the starting position of the cycle of at least one of the cell DTX or the cell DRX;
a starting position or an ending position of the second time window is determined based on an expected ending position of the active time; or
the UE is configured with a DRX, a starting position, or an ending position of the third time window is determined based on the starting position of the cycle of the DRX (MPEP § 2111.04(II) — the BRI of a method (or process) claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met — since claim 3 can be practiced by the UE receiving semi-static configuration information instead of dynamic adjustment signaling, the prior art need not disclose the specific features of the claimed dynamic adjustment to disclose subject matter within the scope of the claim).
Regarding Claim 5, GATT discloses the method according to claim 4, wherein:
the first-time window ends at a position that satisfies a first gap before the starting position of the cycle of at least one of the cell DTX or the cell DRX;
the second time window ends at a position that satisfies a second gap before the expected ending position of the active time; or
the third time window ends at a position that satisfies a third gap before the starting position of the cycle of the DRX (MPEP § 2111.04(II) — the BRI of a method (or process) claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met — since claim 3 can be practiced by the UE receiving semi-static configuration information instead of dynamic adjustment signaling, the prior art need not disclose the specific features of the claimed dynamic adjustment to disclose subject matter within the scope of the claim).
Regarding Claim 6, GATT discloses the method according to claim 3, wherein:
in case that the first signaling is not detected, whether the active time is started at the starting position of the cycle of at least one of the corresponding cell DTX or cell DRX is predefined or preconfigured; or
in case that the first signaling is detected, whether the active time is started at the starting position of the cycle of at least one of the corresponding cell DTX or cell DRX is predefined or determined according to an indication of the first signaling (MPEP § 2111.04(II) — the BRI of a method (or process) claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met — since claim 3 can be practiced by the UE receiving semi-static configuration information instead of dynamic adjustment signaling, the prior art need not disclose the specific features of the claimed dynamic adjustment to disclose subject matter within the scope of the claim).
Regarding Claim 7, GATT discloses the method according to claim 4, wherein monitoring the first signaling during a first-time window comprises:
monitoring the first signaling during the first-time window in case that at least one of the cell DTX or the cell DRX is in the inactive time (MPEP § 2111.04(II) — the BRI of a method (or process) claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met — since claim 3 can be practiced by the UE receiving semi-static configuration information instead of dynamic adjustment signaling, the prior art need not disclose the specific features of the claimed dynamic adjustment to disclose subject matter within the scope of the claim).
Regarding Claim 8, GATT discloses the method according to claim 3, wherein, at a position of a fourth gap after receiving the second signaling, the cell is considered to switch to the inactive time from the active time or switch to the active time from the inactive time (MPEP § 2111.04(II) — the BRI of a method (or process) claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met — since claim 3 can be practiced by the UE receiving semi-static configuration information instead of dynamic adjustment signaling, the prior art need not disclose the specific features of the claimed dynamic adjustment to disclose subject matter within the scope of the claim).
Regarding Claim 9, GATT discloses the method according to claim 3, wherein the third signaling is used to extend a semi- statically configured active duration or an active duration that is dynamically extended by third signaling previously (MPEP § 2111.04(II) — the BRI of a method (or process) claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met — since claim 3 can be practiced by the UE receiving semi-static configuration information instead of dynamic adjustment signaling, the prior art need not disclose the specific features of the claimed dynamic adjustment to disclose subject matter within the scope of the claim).
Regarding Claim 10, GATT discloses the method according to claim 3, wherein the UE is configured with a DRX, and further comprising:
monitoring the dynamic adjustment signaling regardless of whether the DRX is in the active time or the inactive time (MPEP § 2111.04(II) — the BRI of a method (or process) claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met — since claim 3 can be practiced by the UE receiving semi-static configuration information instead of dynamic adjustment signaling, the prior art need not disclose the specific features of the claimed dynamic adjustment to disclose subject matter within the scope of the claim).
Regarding Claim 11, GATT discloses the method according to claim 3, wherein the dynamic adjustment signaling is carried by at least one:
cell common downlink control information (DCI);
UE group DCI;
a physical signal sequence; or
medium access control control element (MAC CE) (MPEP § 2111.04(II) — the BRI of a method (or process) claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met — since claim 3 can be practiced by the UE receiving semi-static configuration information instead of dynamic adjustment signaling, the prior art need not disclose the specific features of the claimed dynamic adjustment to disclose subject matter within the scope of the claim).
Regarding Claim 12, GATT discloses the method according to claim 2, wherein receiving the semi-static configuration information comprises at least one of:
receiving the semi-static configuration information via a UE-specific radio resource control (RRC) signaling (p. 2 § 2.2(2-2) discloses a UE receiving a radio resource configuration (RRC) configuration message from a gNB configuring a cell DTX/DRX to the UE); or
receiving the semi-static configuration information via a system information block (SIB).
Regarding Claim 15, GATT discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the UE is configured with a DRX (p. 5 Proposal #2-4H discloses and enhancement of UE C-DRX where DRX cycles or offsets configured for UEs in connected mode or idle/inactive mode can be aligned), and further comprising at least one of.
performing an operation of the UE in the active time of the DRX in case that the DRX is in the active time and at least one of the cell DTX or the cell DRX is in the active time;
performing the operation of the UE in the inactive time of at least one of the cell DTX or the cell DRX in case that the DRX is in the active time and at least one of the cell DTX or the cell DRX is in the inactive time;
performing the operation of the UE in the inactive time of the DRX, if the DRX is in the inactive time and at least one of the cell DTX or the cell DRX is in the active time; or
performing the operation of the UE in the inactive time of at least one of the cell DTX or the cell DRX, in case that the DRX is in the inactive time and at least one of the cell DTX or the cell DRX is in the inactive time (p. 5 Proposal #2-4H discloses a UE monitoring certain channels from a BS outside DRX active time (i.e., DRX in inactive time); p. 4 discloses the UE receiving DL RS and transmitting UL RS during a cell DTX-DRX non-active period (i.e., cell DTX/DRX inactive time), the UE, similar to C-DRX, only stopping dynamic grant (DG) data transmission during a cell DTX/DRX non-active period, or the UE performs measurement only during a cell DTX/DRX non-active period — thus, a UE, outside DRX active time, is disclosed as alternatively performing a number of acts while also outside a cell DTX-DRX non-active period).
Regarding Claim 16, GATT discloses a user equipment (UE) in a communication system (p. 1 § 1 discloses a UE in communication with a gNB via Layer 1 and/or Layer 2 (L1/L2) signaling — a UE is defined in the art to be a computer usable by a user; thus, a UE, as disclosed must have at least a processor, since it is a type of computer, and a transceiver, which is required for L1/L2 signaling), the UE comprising:
a transceiver (Id.); and
a processor coupled with the transceiver (Id.) and configured to:
receive at least one of:
semi-static configuration information related to at least one of a cell discontinuous transmission (DTX) or a cell discontinuous reception (DRX) (p. 2 § 2.2(2-2) discloses a UE receiving a radio resource configuration (RRC) configuration message from a gNB configuring a cell DTX/DRX to the UE), or
dynamic adjustment signaling related to at least one of the cell DTX or the cell DRX (p. 1 § 1 discloses that although periodic DTX is assumed to be the baseline, the gNB provides indication to the UE about network (NW) DTX mode/configuration via dedicated dynamic L1/L2 signaling, and that dynamic L1/L2 group signaling from NW to provide BW DTX mode/configuration is also considered in RAN2; and p. 8 § 6.1.1.x, including CATT proposals 1 and 3, discloses that the cell DTX mode/configuration can also be activated/deactivated/modified to the UE via dynamic L1/L2 signaling, which at least supports UE dedicated indication, and that UE dedicated L1/L2 signaling should at least include information of Cell DTX/DRX activation/deactivation); and
determine a state of at least one of the cell DTX or the cell DRX based on at least one of the semi-static configuration information or the dynamic adjustment signaling, wherein the state comprises an active time and an inactive time (p. 4 discloses 4 examples of a UE’s behavior based on the cell DTX/DRX configuration received from the gNB, wherein the UE may, during a non-active period, receive or transmit nothing, receive downlink (DL) reference signals (RS) or transmit uplink (UL) reference signals (RS) (such as a Sounding Reference Signal (SRS), stop dynamic grant (DG) data transmission only, or only perform measurement — for the UE to perform any of these options, the UE must have determined when the cell DTX/DRX is non-active based on the received RRC configuration indicating cell DTX/DRX configuration).
Regarding Claim 17, GATT discloses the UE according to claim 16, wherein the semi-static configuration information comprises at least one of:
a cycle of at least one of the cell DTX or the cell DRX (p. 2, § 2.2(2-2) discloses the RRC configuration as including L1/L2 signaling used to activate the configured cell DTX/DRX; and p. 3, Proposal 4 discloses L1/L2 signaling as including cell DTX/DRX activation/deactivation);
a starting position of the cycle of at least one of the cell DTX or the cell DRX (p. 2, § 2.2(2-2) discloses the RRC configuration as including L1/L2 signaling used to modify the start point of the cell DTX/DRX period; and p. 3, Proposal 4 discloses L1/L2 signaling as including a new start point);
a duration of the active time in the cycle of at least one of the cell DTX or the cell DRX (p. 2, § 2.2(2-2) discloses the RRC configuration as including L1/L2 signaling used to modify the periodicity and/or active duration of the cell DTX/DRX period; and p. 3, Proposal 4 discloses L1/L2 signaling as including a new active period); or
a duration of the inactive time in the cycle of at least one of the cell DTX or the cell DRX (p. 2, § 2.2(2-2) discloses the RRC configuration as including L1/L2 signaling used to deactivate the configured cell DTX/DRX; and p. 3, Proposal 4 discloses L1/L2 signaling as including a new periodicity, which would affect the inactive time in a cell DTX/DRX period), and
wherein the dynamic adjustment signaling comprises at least one of:
a first signaling for at least one of:
indicating whether the active time is started at the starting position of a cycle of at least one of the cell DTX or cell DRX (p. 8 § 6.1.1.x discloses in 1st Editor’s Note that L1/L2 signaling indicates a new start point, active period and periodicity), or
adjusting a duration of the active time ;
a second signaling for indicating that a cell switches to the inactive time from the active time, or switches to the active time from the inactive time (Id.);
a third signaling for indicating that the duration of the active time is extended by a predetermined time length (Id.); or
a fourth signaling for indicating that the cell is in the active time (Id.).
Regarding Claims 19-20, though of varying scope, the limitations of claims 19-20 are substantially similar or identical to those of claims 1 and 16, and are rejected under the same reasoning.
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 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 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GATT as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Myung et al. (US 2026/0040395, hereinafter Myung).
Regarding Claim 13, GATT discloses the method according to claim 2.
GATT may not explicitly disclose wherein the semi-static configuration information comprises at least one of:
a cycle of the cell DRX that is equal to a cycle of the cell DTX;
a cycle of the cell DRX that is an integer multiple of a cycle of the cell DTX;
a cycle of the cell DTX that is an integer multiple of a cycle of the cell DRX;
a duration of the active time in the cycle of the cell DTX is greater than or equal to a duration of the active time in the cycle of the cell DRX; or
the duration of the active time in the cycle of the cell DRX fully or partially overlaps with the duration of the active time in the cycle of the cell DTX.
However, in analogous art, Myung discloses wherein the semi-static configuration information comprises at least one of:
a cycle of the cell DRX that is equal to a cycle of the cell DTX;
a cycle of the cell DRX that is an integer multiple of a cycle of the cell DTX;
a cycle of the cell DTX that is an integer multiple of a cycle of the cell DRX;
a duration of the active time in the cycle of the cell DTX is greater than or equal to a duration of the active time in the cycle of the cell DRX; or
the duration of the active time in the cycle of the cell DRX fully or partially overlaps with the duration of the active time in the cycle of the cell DTX (¶ 260 discloses cell-specific DTX/DRX durations overlapping each other).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Myung to modify GATT in order to have a UE modify its behavior based on whether DTX/DRX cycles’ active times. One would have been motivated to do this, because such a configuration by a base station and behavior by a UE appear to help achieve network energy saving (NES) (Myung ¶ 260).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GATT as applied to claim 17 above, and further in view of Cheng et al. (US 2026/0040213, hereinafter Cheng).
Regarding Claim 18, GATT discloses the UE according to claim 17, wherein the processor is further configured to perform at least one of:
monitoring the first signaling during a first-time window (p. 3 § 2.3(3-2) discloses that the UE monitoring; and p. 5 Proposal #2-4H discloses that since a UE monitoring certain channels/signals from BS when outside DRX active time a corresponding restriction to BS activity time is provided — since a window does not necessarily have a start or end, disclosure of monitoring is disclosure of monitoring during a window);
monitoring the third signaling during a second time window (p. 3 § 2.3(3-2) discloses that the UE monitoring; and p. 5 Proposal #2-4H discloses that since a UE monitoring certain channels/signals from BS when outside DRX active time a corresponding restriction to BS activity time is provided — since a window does not necessarily have a start or end, disclosure of monitoring is disclosure of monitoring during a window — a second window may also be a first window); or
monitoring the fourth signaling during a third time window (p. 3 § 2.3(3-2) discloses that the UE monitoring; and p. 5 Proposal #2-4H discloses that since a UE monitoring certain channels/signals from BS when outside DRX active time a corresponding restriction to BS activity time is provided — since a window does not necessarily have a start or end, disclosure of monitoring is disclosure of monitoring during a window — a third window may also be a first window).
GATT may not explicitly disclose wherein:
a starting position or an ending position of the first-time window is determined based on the starting position of the cycle of at least one of the cell DTX or the cell DRX;
a starting position or an ending position of the second time window is determined based on an expected ending position of the active time; or
the UE is configured with a DRX, a starting position, or an ending position of the third time window is determined based on the starting position of the cycle of the DRX.
However, in analogous art, Cheng discloses wherein:
a starting position or an ending position of the first-time window is determined based on the starting position of the cycle of at least one of the cell DTX or the cell DRX (Fig. 3 and ¶ 51 disclose a UE receiving a cell DTX/DRX configuration including an ON-OFF pattern; ¶ 53 disclose the UE monitoring PDCCH only at the intersection of the cell’s ON duration and the UE ON duration — thus, the disclosed UE is capable of determining a first time window based on a starting position of a cycle of the cell DTX/DRX);
a starting position or an ending position of the second time window is determined based on an expected ending position of the active time (Id. — thus, the disclosed UE is capable of determining a starting or ending position of a second time window based on an expected end of the active time); or
the UE is configured with a DRX, a starting position, or an ending position of the third time window is determined based on the starting position of the cycle of the DRX (Id. — thus, the disclosed UE is capable of being configured with DRX and determining a third window based on the starting position of the DRX cycle).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Cheng to modify GATT in order to determine windows for monitoring for one or more signals for adapting its behavior for cell-specific and or UE-specific DTX/DRX configurations. One would have been motivated to do this, because the disclosure of Cheng helps to define the signaling involved in implementing the cell DRX/DTX cycle and the UE/gNB behavior when cell DRX/DTX is configured (Cheng ¶ 3).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 14 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The prior art of record does not appear to teach or suggest a partial overlap being greater than or equal to a particular threshold or particularly describe or render obvious for an overlap to comprise a starting position of an active period of a cell DRX cycle. The closest prior art is that which is cited above, wherein CATT, as cited above, discloses a base station configuring a UE with cell-specific DRX/DTX configurations via RRC configuration signaling, and Myung, as cited above, discloses a cell-specific DTX cycle overlapping with a cell-specific DRX cycle. However, Myung does not appear to further detail the overlap itself, since its disclosure is more focused on the behavior of a UE in the event of such an overlap. Further search and consideration has not revealed other prior art that appear to disclose the subject matter at issue.
Therefore, if claim 14 were written in independent form along with actively requiring a UE to receive semi-static configuration information, then such a claim would be in condition for allowance.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Wang et al. (US 2025/0318011), at Figs. 2-5 and associated description, discloses a terminal receiving configuration information for a cell DTX and/or cell DRX;
Islam et al. (US 2020/0037396), at Fig. 6 and associated description, discloses a UE performing CSI monitoring when a UE turns on and/or at configured locations/occasions;
Ly et al. (US 2023/0020254), at Fig. 4 and associated description, discloses a UE receiving various control signaling form a base station operating according to DRX and having selected a C-DRX configuration, causing the UE to switch to the C-DRX configuration, determine a timeline, and activate network power saving features; and
Liu (US 2024/0365232), at Figs. 1-10 and associated description, discloses a base station sending, and a UE receiving energy-saving configuration information about a designated carrier frequency band.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS R CAIRNS whose telephone number is (571)270-0487. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-5PM ET 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, MARCUS SMITH can be reached at (571) 270-1096. 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.
/Thomas R Cairns/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2468