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 .
Response to Arguments
The 112 rejections have been withdrawn in view of the amendment.
Applicant's arguments filed 6-14-2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant submits: “The Office Action appears to identify the claimed "feature" with power-saving, sleep, or similar operation, see page 5, line 6 of the Office Action. Applicant respectfully submits that this interpretation is inconsistent with the language of claim 1. Claim 1 does not merely recite entering a sleep state or performing power-saving operation. Rather, claim 1 separately requires a feature in the wireless communication network and further requires that the feature be aligned with the skipping interval in time.”; the examiner’s position is that the power-saving, sleep, not receiving or similar operation is during the skipping interval in time; thereby, aligned with the skipping interval in time.
Regarding the argument: “Zhou's sleep or power-saving operation does not correspond to this claimed feature. For example, paragraph [0273] of Zhou describes that, in DRX operation, a UE discontinuously monitors the PDCCH or EPDCCI-. Zhou, in paragraph [0274], further explains that a time during which the UE does not listen to or monitor the PDCCH in DRX mode may be referred to as a DRX sleep state. Thus, Zhou's sleep state is a state in which PDCCH monitoring is not performed. Such a sleep state is not the claimed feature whose interaction with PDCCH skipping is aligned by a configured time offset.”; the examiner respectfully disagrees. Zhou's discloses a PDCCH monitoring offset (see par. 0271-0274) whose interaction with PDCCH skipping is aligned. Additionally, pretty much all communication systems that communicate/multiplex in the time domain require alignment in the time domain.
In view of “Zhou fails to disclose the time-offset-based alignment required by claim 1. Claim 1 requires that a time offset be configured to align an interaction between PDCCH skipping and the feature. Zhou does not disclose such a time offset, nor does Zhou disclose configuring a time offset for aligning an interaction between PDCCH skipping and a feature as recited in claim 1”; as disclosed in the previous response Zhou disclose configuring a time offset for aligning an interaction between PDCCH skipping.
As to the argument: “By contrast, the claimed PDCCH skipping is not limited to Zhou's DRX on-duration control. Claim 1 recites a skipping interval and requires alignment between that skipping interval and the claimed feature, including through a configured time offset that aligns an interaction between PDCCH skipping and the feature. In other words, the claimed skipping interval is not limited to a single DRX on-duration, and the claimed time offset is not merely a wake-up or go-to-sleep indication for the next DRX on-duration.”; the examiner’s position is that applicant is arguing limitations which are not claimed such as Zhou's possibilities. And, Zhou's discloses a skipping interval, alignment between that skipping interval and an offset for the interval, occasion, etc.
The rest of the arguments they fall for the same reasons as shown above. The rejection of record stands.
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)(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) 1-9 and 11-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Zhou 20250048257.
As to claim 1, Zhou discloses a user device [UE, 106, 156, 210, 1502], comprising: a transceiver [1520] configured for communicating in a wireless communication network [104] being operated by at least one base station [160, 220, 1504] (see figs. 1A, 1B, 2 and 15) wherein the transceiver is configured for transceiving wireless signals in the wireless communications network [the data to be sent to base station 1504 may be provided to a transmission processing system 1520] (see par. 0217), wherein the transceiver is configured to monitor a Physical Downlink Control Channel (PDCCH) to acquire downlink information (see par. 0257, 0261), and to provide a feature [power saving, sleep, etc.] in the wireless communication network, wherein the transceiver is configured to skip monitoring the PDCCH by performing no monitoring for a duration of a skipping interval, for aligning the feature with the skipping interval in time [The wireless device skips monitoring PDCCH in the next DRX on duration in response to the power saving indication indicating the wireless device shall go to sleep for next DRX on duration] (see par. 0273, 0288), and wherein the skipping interval includes a time where the transceiver enters or leaves PDCCH monitoring, or enables PDCCH skipping, and a time offset is configured to align an interaction between the PDCCH skipping and the feature (see par. 0271, 0273, 0286-0288).
As to claim 2, Zhou discloses the user device of claim 1, wherein the transceiver is configured to acquire aligning information indicating a relationship between the skipping of the monitoring PDCCH and the feature, and to align the feature with the skipping interval based on the aligning information (see par. 0271, 0273, 0286-0288).
As to claim 3, Zhou discloses the user device of claim 1, wherein the transceiver is configured to monitor the PDCCH with a first pattern in time and to perform a plurality of features comprising the feature with a different second pattern in time [since no pattern difference is explained in the claims, they can refer to the same pattern; or long and short drx, etc.] (see par. 0271, 0273, 0278, 0280, 0286-0288).
As to claim 4, Zhou discloses the user device of claim 1, wherein the transceiver is configured to operate in a power saving mode, including a sleep mode or a deep sleep mode, during the skipping interval. (see par. 0288).
As to claim 5, Zhou discloses the user device of claim 1, wherein the transceiver is configured to perform the feature on at least a part of the PDCCH. (see par. 0287).
As to claim 6, Zhou discloses the user device of claim 1, wherein the transceiver is configured to apply a time offset to extend an already configured timer for the feature (see par. 0285) based on reference symbol monitoring including configured Channel State Information-Reference Signal (CSI-RS), synchronization blocks, Synchronization Signal Block (SSB) or SSB based Measurement Timing Configuration (SMTC) to align the feature with the skipping interval in time (see par. 0187).
As to claim 7, Zhou discloses the user device of claim 6, wherein the feature comprises at least one of: Measurements for Radio Link Monitoring (RLM)/Radio Link Failure (RLF) feature; or Radio Resource Management (RRM) feature (see par. 0296).
As to claim 8, Zhou discloses the user device of claim 5, wherein the time offset is configured considering at least one of the following parameters: a reference symbol periodicity, including Channel State Information-Reference Signal (CSI-RS) periodicity (see par. 0173); a synchronization block or Synchronization Signal Block (SSB) periodicity (see par. 0185); an SSB based Measurement Timing Configuration (SMTC) window periodicity; a measurement gap configuration; a relative or absolute velocity of users including the transceiver; a Quality of Service (QoS) profile including packet delay budget; a traffic load of the transceiver including queue length or a number of data flows; a Validity timer set for PDCCH; a Discontinuous Reception (DRX), configuration (see par. 0284, 0286); a transceiver category; a PDCCH skipping time interval (see par. 0286-0287); and a beam configuration.
As to claim 9, Zhou discloses the user device of claim 5, wherein the transceiver is configured to derive the time offset from a Radio Resource Control (RRC), message including a PDCCH-Config field description, or from a Downlink Control Information (DCI), of the wireless communication network (see par. 0288).
As to claim 11, Zhou discloses the user device of claim 1, wherein the transceiver is configured to receive, from the wireless communication network, an indication that the transceiver is allowed to interrupt all or some particular activity during a part or during a complete duration of the skipping interval, and to operate accordingly (see par. 0286-0287).
As to claim 12, Zhou discloses the user device of claim 1, wherein the transceiver is configured to skip the monitoring of the PDCCH based on a Downlink Control Information (DCI), and for evaluating an Downlink (DL), DCI or an Uplink (UL), DCI, for a an information element that signals a PDCCH candidate providing a next opportunity for monitoring the PDCCH (see par. 0286-0287).
As to claim 13, Zhou discloses the user device of claim 12, wherein the PDCCH candidate is a subsequent PDCCH for the transceiver including after having skipped at least one PDCCH; and wherein the information element represents a distance to a next PDCCH, and the transceiver is allowed to enter a sleep period that ends prior to the next PDCCH (see par. 0286-0287).
Regarding claims 14-15, they are the corresponding method and non-transitory digital storage medium of device claim 1. Therefore, claims 14-15 are rejected for the same reasons as shown above.
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(s) 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou.
As to claim 10, Zhou discloses the user device of claim 5, configured to evaluate a Radio Resource Control (RRC) message or a Downlink Control Information (DCI), of the wireless communication network for a time offset bit indicating information that toggles a flag that mandates the transceiver to consider or neglect the time offset, based on configured time duration for PDCCH skipping (see par. 0288). Zhou does not explicitly disclose which part is making the evaluation. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to let transceiver do the evaluation, since it has been held that the provision of adjustability, where needed, involves only routine skill in the art. In re Stevens, 101 USPQ 284 (CCPA 1954). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to let transceiver do the evaluation for the simple purpose of a faster evaluation, thereby, improving communication quality.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Babae1 20210307108 discloses an enhanced power saving process by skipping monitoring the control channel or switching a monitoring periodicity or a monitoring periodicity and offset.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 MARCOS L TORRES whose telephone number is (571)272-7926. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00 AM - 6:00 PM M-F.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Alison Slater can be reached at (571)270-0375. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
MARCOS L. TORRES
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2647
/MARCOS L TORRES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2647
Prosecution Insights