DETAILED ACTION
Examiner acknowledges receipt of Applicant’s amendment filed 2/20/2026.
In the amendment, Applicant amended claims 1, 10, and 16.
Claims 1-4, 6, 8-12, 14-19, 21, 23, and 24 are currently pending.
Response to Arguments
Examiner has fully considered Applicant's arguments, see pages 9-15, filed 2/20/2026, with respect to the rejection of the claims under 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 but they are not persuasive.
On page 9, Applicant notes that the claims have been amended, points to portions of the drawings and specification providing support for the claim amendments, and summarizes the prior art used in the previous office action. On pages 10-11, Applicant summarizes the independent claims in detail. On page 11, Applicant asserts that the prior art of record does not disclose the limitations in the amended claims. On pages 11-12, Applicant summarizes portions of Wong and Priyanto. On pages 12-14, Applicant argues that Wong does not disclose the amended limitation that “wherein a type of service received by the apparatus is restricted to certain services based on the capability of the apparatus”. Applicant focuses on [0071] and [0078] of Wong, which describe a state when the capability of the UE is that the UE cannot receive signals transmitted from the network.
However, Wong discloses another state in Figures 11 and 12 and [0085]-[0086], in which the UE enters a “partial blackout”. This state is based on the capability of the UE is such that “the UE may be able to receive some signals but not others, for example the UE may have sufficient energy to receive SSB (for synchronisation) but may not have sufficient energy to monitor for a paging message…”. In this state, the type of service received by the UE is restricted to certain services (such as SSB for synchronization) based on the capability of the UE (that is can receive some signals but not others). Therefore, Wong anticipates the amended claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 10 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Wong et al (US 2025/0071682).
Regarding claim 10: Wong discloses an apparatus, comprising:
at least one processor (see controller 34 of Figure 3; see also [0245]-[0246], which indicates that the other network elements also comprise at least a processor and memory); and
at least one memory storing instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the apparatus at least to perform (see [0041], for example, which explains that the processor may “carry out instructions, which are stored on a computer readable medium…”; see also [0245]-[0246], which indicates that the other network elements also comprise at least a processor and memory)
receiving a message indicating a power state transition of a user equipment (disclosed throughout; see the blackout messages in Figure 7-16, for example; see [0072], for example, which discloses that “…when the UE detects that it is about to enter a blackout state, the UE transmits a blackout message to the infrastructure equipment…”; the first state is the state prior to the blackout state (normal RRC idle mode, for example), and the second state is the blackout state; the first and second states can also be reversed as the network may transmit a “blackout complete” message when leaving the blackout state as indicated in [0080], for example), wherein the power state transition defines a capability of the user equipment (disclosed throughout; as indicated in [0071], for example, the transition to the blackout state (power state transition) defines a capability of the UE; that is, the capability of the UE is that “the user equipment cannot receive signals transmitted from the infrastructure equipment for a blackout period” due to “energy storage” that is “insufficient for operating the transceiver circuitry”; further, different levels or types of blackouts (such as one or more types of “partial blackout”) are applied based on different capabilities of the apparatus (see [0085]-[0086] and Figures 11-12, for example); that is, the state transition to the blackout state or one of the partial blackout states defines the capability of the UE (as either the UE cannot operate the transceiver, or the UE can only receive some signals, but not others));
adjusting scheduling of the user equipment in accordance with the power state transition by (disclosed throughout; as one example, see [0078], for example, which indicates that “at t2 the UE informs the network that it will go into blackout at TStart after time t2 for a duration of TBlackout, i.e. the blackout period is between time t5 to t7. The network receives a message for the UE at time t6 and since it is aware that the UE is still in the blackout state, it delays the paging until time t8”; the delay of the paging message is adjusting the scheduling), by restricting a type of service received by the user equipment to certain services based on the capability of the user equipment (when the capability of the UE is such that “the UE may be able to receive some signals but not others, for example the UE may have sufficient energy to receive SSB (for synchronisation) but may not have sufficient energy to monitor for a paging message…” (see [0085] and Figures 11 and 12), the UE may enter a partial blackout state where the type of service is restricted to SSB, but not paging); and
sending an information message to the user equipment in accordance with the adjusted scheduling (disclosed throughout; see Figure 8, for example, which discloses that the network sends a paging message (see t8 and t9) in accordance with the power state (the paging message is delayed in accordance with the blackout state)), wherein a type of the information message is restricted based on the capability of the user equipment (disclosed throughout; see [0078], for example, which indicates that a type of information message (such as a paging type message) is restricted based on the capability of the UE (the paging type of message is not transmitted during the blackout period based on the UE’s capability being such that is cannot operate the transceiver circuitry)).
Regarding claim 15: Wong discloses the limitation that the power state transition comprises a transition from a first power state to a second power state (see [0072], for example, which discloses that “…when the UE detects that it is about to enter a blackout state, the UE transmits a blackout message to the infrastructure equipment…”; the first state is the state prior to the blackout state (normal RRC idle mode, for example), and the second state is the blackout state; the first and second states can also be reversed as the network may transmit a “blackout complete” message when leaving the blackout state as indicated in [0080], for example), the first power state and the second power state each comprising a different one of a power inactive state, a low power active state, and a full power active state (disclosed throughout; for example, consider [0088], which discloses that the first power state may be an active mode/state (either low power active state or full power active state) and the second power state may be the idle mode/state (for energy harvesting and thus the blackout state)).
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.
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.
Claims 1-4, 8, 9, 11, 14, 16-19, 23, and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wong et al (US 2025/0071682) in view of Priyanto et al (US 2024/0349194).
Regarding claim 1: Wong discloses an apparatus, comprising:
at least one processor (see controller 44 in Figure 3, for example); and
at least one memory storing instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the apparatus at least to perform (see [0041], for example, which explains that the processor may “carry out instructions, which are stored on a computer readable medium…”)
sending a message to a network indicating either a power state transition or non-transition, wherein the power state transition corresponds to the apparatus transitioning from a first power state to a second power state based on an available energy of the apparatus (disclosed throughout; see the blackout messages in Figure 7-16, for example; see [0072], for example, which discloses that “…when the UE detects that it is about to enter a blackout state, the UE transmits a blackout message to the infrastructure equipment…”; the first state is the state prior to the blackout state (normal RRC idle mode, for example), and the second state is the blackout state; the first and second states can also be reversed as the network may transmit a “blackout complete” message when leaving the blackout state as indicated in [0080], for example; the transition from the first state to the second state is based on an available energy of the apparatus as indicated throughout; for example, see [0071], for example, which indicates that the UE determines it will enter a blackout state when it determines “that an amount of energy which is available from the energy storage device will be insufficient for operating the transceiver circuitry to receive signals transmitted from an infrastructure equipment of the wireless communications network in an inactive mode”), wherein the power state transition defines a capability of the apparatus (disclosed throughout; as indicated in [0071], for example, the transition to the blackout state (power state transition) defines a capability of the UE; that is, the capability of the UE is that “the user equipment cannot receive signals transmitted from the infrastructure equipment for a blackout period” due to “energy storage” that is “insufficient for operating the transceiver circuitry”; further, different levels or types of blackouts (such as one or more types of “partial blackout”) are applied based on different capabilities of the apparatus (see [0085]-[0086] and Figures 11-12, for example); that is, the state transition to the blackout state or one of the partial blackout states defines the capability of the UE (as either the UE cannot operate the transceiver, or the UE can only receive some signals, but not others)), and wherein a type of service received by the apparatus is restricted to certain services based on the capability of the apparatus (when the capability of the UE is such that “the UE may be able to receive some signals but not others, for example the UE may have sufficient energy to receive SSB (for synchronisation) but may not have sufficient energy to monitor for a paging message…” (see [0085] and Figures 11 and 12), the UE may enter a partial blackout state where the type of service is restricted to SSB, but not paging); and
receiving an information message from the network in accordance with the power state transition (disclosed throughout; see Figure 8, for example, which discloses that the network sends a paging message (see t8 and t9) in accordance with the power state (the paging message is delayed in accordance with the blackout state)).
Wong does not explicitly disclose the limitations of receiving at least one threshold setting from the network, wherein the power state transition is based on the at least one threshold setting. However, Priyanto discloses a similar system including an energy harvesting UE that enters a “gap period” with “no communication” (see Figure 6, for example). This “gap period” (for performing an energy harvesting or charging operation) is similar to the blackout period of Wong. Further, Priyanto discloses in at least [0102] that the threshold used for determining when energy harvesting (and thus the “gap period” (blackout state)) occurs may be transmitted in configuration information from the network/gNB to the UE (“the gNB provides configuration information to support the UE's EH gap operation. This can be broadcasted to the UE, for example, to support energy harvesting. This may include, for example, the stored energy level threshold at which energy harvesting occurs.”). The rationale for doing so would have been to increase the network flexibility by enabling the network to provide control or input into how low the UE’s available storage falls before triggering energy harvesting/charging.
Regarding claim 16: Wong discloses a method, comprising:
sending, by a user equipment, a message to a network indicating either a power state transition or non-transition, wherein the power state transition corresponds to the user equipment transitioning from a first power state to a second power state based on an available energy of the user equipment (disclosed throughout; see the blackout messages in Figure 7-16, for example; see [0072], for example, which discloses that “…when the UE detects that it is about to enter a blackout state, the UE transmits a blackout message to the infrastructure equipment…”; the first state is the state prior to the blackout state (normal RRC idle mode, for example), and the second state is the blackout state; the first and second states can also be reversed as the network may transmit a “blackout complete” message when leaving the blackout state as indicated in [0080], for example; the transition from the first state to the second state is based on an available energy of the apparatus as indicated throughout; for example, see [0071], for example, which indicates that the UE determines it will enter a blackout state when it determines “that an amount of energy which is available from the energy storage device will be insufficient for operating the transceiver circuitry to receive signals transmitted from an infrastructure equipment of the wireless communications network in an inactive mode”), wherein the power state transition defines a capability of the user equipment (disclosed throughout; as indicated in [0071], for example, the transition to the blackout state (power state transition) defines a capability of the UE; that is, the capability of the UE is that “the user equipment cannot receive signals transmitted from the infrastructure equipment for a blackout period” due to “energy storage” that is “insufficient for operating the transceiver circuitry”; further, different levels or types of blackouts (such as one or more types of “partial blackout”) are applied based on different capabilities of the apparatus; that is, the state transition to the blackout state or one of the partial blackout states defines the capability of the UE (as either the UE cannot operate the transceiver, or the UE can only receive some signals, but not others)), and wherein a type of service received by the apparatus is restricted to certain services based on the capability of the apparatus (when the capability of the UE is such that “the UE may be able to receive some signals but not others, for example the UE may have sufficient energy to receive SSB (for synchronisation) but may not have sufficient energy to monitor for a paging message…” (see [0085] and Figures 11 and 12), the UE may enter a partial blackout state where the type of service is restricted to SSB, but not paging); and
receiving, by the user equipment, an information message from the network in accordance with the power state transition (disclosed throughout; see Figure 8, for example, which discloses that the network sends a paging message (see t8 and t9) in accordance with the power state (the paging message is delayed in accordance with the blackout state)).
Wong does not explicitly disclose the limitations of receiving at least one threshold setting from the network, wherein the power state transition is based on the at least one threshold setting. However, Priyanto discloses a similar system including an energy harvesting UE that enters a “gap period” with “no communication” (see Figure 6, for example). This “gap period” (for performing an energy harvesting or charging operation) is similar to the blackout period of Wong. Further, Priyanto discloses in at least [0102] that the threshold used for determining when energy harvesting (and thus the “gap period” (blackout state)) occurs may be transmitted in configuration information from the network/gNB to the UE (“the gNB provides configuration information to support the UE's EH gap operation. This can be broadcasted to the UE, for example, to support energy harvesting. This may include, for example, the stored energy level threshold at which energy harvesting occurs.”). The rationale for doing so would have been to increase the network flexibility by enabling the network to provide control or input into how low the UE’s available storage falls before triggering energy harvesting/charging.
Regarding claims 2 and 17: Wong discloses the limitations that the information message comprises paging, data transmission, or small data transmission (disclosed throughout; as indicated above, the message transmitted at time t8 is a paging message).
Regarding claims 3 and 18: Wong discloses the limitation of determining whether to transition the apparatus from the first power state to the second power state based on the available energy (disclosed throughout; see [0071], for example, which indicates that the UE determines it will enter a blackout state when it determines “that an amount of energy which is available from the energy storage device will be insufficient for operating the transceiver circuitry to receive signals transmitted from an infrastructure equipment of the wireless communications network in an inactive mode”).
Regarding claims 4 and 19: Wong discloses the limitation that the available energy comprises energy harvested during a predetermined period or stored energy (disclosed throughout; see [0059] and [0063], for example, which discloses that the devices (such as the UE) store harvested energy; thus, the available energy is both energy harvested during a previous predetermined blackout period for harvesting and is also stored energy).
Regarding claims 8, 14, and 23: Wong (or Wong, modified) discloses the limitations of parent claims 1, 10, and 16 as indicated above. Wong does not explicitly disclose the limitations of claims 8 and 23 of receiving an on-demand power state transition message from the network, wherein the power state transition is based on the on-demand power state transition message or the analogous limitations of claim 14 of sending an on-demand power state transition message to the user equipment, wherein the message indicating the power state transition is responsive to the on-demand power state transition message. However, Priyanto discloses a similar system including an energy harvesting UE that enters a “gap period” with “no communication” (see Figure 6, for example). This “gap period” (for performing an energy harvesting or charging operation) is similar to the blackout period of Wong. Further, Priyanto discloses in [0081] that the “charging operation (during the EH gap) may be initiated by the UE itself or by the network (e.g. by an instruction to the UE issued by the gNB)”. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Wong such that the blackout period for charging is initiated using a message (an on-demand power state transition message) from the network (such as the message from the gNB in Priyanto). The rationale for doing so would have been to increase the network flexibility by enabling the network to provide control or input into the timing of the charging (for situations where the network has advance knowledge of upcoming communications that will require the UEs to be more fully charged).
Regarding claims 9 and 24: Wong discloses the limitation that the first power state and the second power state each comprises a different one of a power inactive state, a low power active state, and a full power active state (disclosed throughout; for example, consider [0088], which discloses that the first power state may be an active mode/state (either low power active state or full power active state) and the second power state may be the idle mode/state (for energy harvesting and thus the blackout state)).
Regarding claim 11: Wong discloses the limitations of parent claim 10 as indicated above. Wong does not explicitly disclose the limitations of claim 11 of sending at least one threshold setting to the user equipment, wherein the at least one threshold setting corresponds to the power state transition. However, Priyanto discloses a similar system including an energy harvesting UE that enters a “gap period” with “no communication” (see Figure 6, for example). This “gap period” (for performing an energy harvesting or charging operation) is similar to the blackout period of Wong. Further, Priyanto discloses in at least [0102] that the threshold used for determining when energy harvesting (and thus the “gap period” (blackout state)) occurs may be transmitted in configuration information from the network/gNB to the UE (“the gNB provides configuration information to support the UE's EH gap operation. This can be broadcasted to the UE, for example, to support energy harvesting. This may include, for example, the stored energy level threshold at which energy harvesting occurs.”). The rationale for doing so would have been to increase the network flexibility by enabling the network to provide control or input into how low the UE’s available storage falls before triggering energy harvesting/charging.
Claims 6, 12, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wong et al (US 2025/0071682) in view of Priyanto et al (US 2024/0349194) in view of Yamamoto et al (US 2015/0004975).
Regarding claims 6, 12, and 21: Wong, modified, discloses the limitations of parent claims 5, 11, and 20 as indicated above. Wong does not explicitly disclose the limitations of claims 6 and 21 of receiving a plurality of offset settings from the network; applying one of the plurality of offset settings to a corresponding threshold of the at least one threshold setting when transitioning from the first power state to the second power state; and applying another of the plurality of offset settings to the corresponding threshold when transitioning from the second power state to the first power state or the analogous limitations of claim 12 of sending a plurality of offset settings to the user equipment, wherein one of the plurality of offset settings is applicable to transitioning from the first power state to the second power state and another of the plurality of offset settings is applicable to transitioning from the second power state to the first power state. However, the use of offsets (often called hysteresis values) to adjust thresholds and prevent “ping-ponging” is known in the art. Consider Yamamoto, for example, which discloses adjusting thresholds by a different hysteresis value in each “direction”. Consider Figure 11, for example, which discloses a threshold “Th” that is to be evaluated relative to the reception power (on the y-axis). In the “positive direction”, a first state or action is determined when the value of the reception power is above a threshold. Similarly, in the “negative direction”, a second state or action is determined when the value of the reception power is below a threshold. If a single threshold is used in each direction, a “ping-pong” effect may occur when the reception power repeatedly crosses the threshold. To prevent this, an offset or hysteresis value (HS) is used in each direction. The transition from the first state to the second state (at time T1 in Figure 11) is determined when the reception power exceeds Th+HS. The transition from the second state to the first state (at time T4 in Figure 11) is determined when the reception power drops below Th-HS. As indicated in [0224], for example, the value of the offset/hysteresis HS can be different in each direction (“a hysteresis HS is set in each of positive and negative directions with respect to a threshold Th”). Further, the value of hysteresis is configurable/adjustable as indicated in [0254], for example, which indicates that handover timing can be changed by “adjusting the hysteresis”. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Wong to include a plurality of offset values (hysteresis) to be applied to the threshold in each direction (from the first power state to the second power state and from the second to the first power state). It would have further been obvious to include these offset/hysteresis values in the configuration message that includes the threshold discussed above in the combination of Wong and Priyanto. The rationale for doing so would have been to prevent ping-ponging into and out of a charging/energy harvesting blackout state.
Conclusion
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 Robert C Scheibel whose telephone number is (571)272-3169. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 AM - 5:00 PM.
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, Hassan A Phillips can be reached at 571-272-3940. 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.
Robert C. Scheibel
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2467
/Robert C Scheibel/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2467 March 11, 2026
Prosecution Insights