DETAILED ACTION
Examiner acknowledges receipt of Applicant’s amendment filed 3/5/2026.
In the amendment, Applicant amended claims 1-5, 7-15, and 17-20, cancelled claims 6 and 16, and added new claim 21.
Claims 1-5, 7-15, and 17-21 are currently pending.
Response to Arguments
Examiner has fully considered Applicant’s arguments, see section II on page 8, filed 3/5/2026, with respect to the rejection of claim 5 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) and they are persuasive. Examiner has withdrawn the rejection of claim 5 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
Examiner has fully considered Applicant's arguments, see sections III and IV on pages 8-12, filed 3/5/2026, with respect to the rejections of claims under 35 U.S.C. 102 and 35 U.S.C. 103 but they are moot because the new ground of rejection relies on the Li ’582 reference for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
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 1-3, 20, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wei et al (US 2025/0310881) in view of Li ’582 et al (US 2025/0220582).
Regarding claim 1: Wei discloses a method performed by a user equipment (UE) in a communication system, the method comprising:
monitoring a wake-up signal (WUS) by a low power wake up receiver (disclosed throughout; see step 1405 of Figure 14, for example, which discloses monitoring for a wake-up signal; see also [0108], which discloses that the first receiver may be a low power wake up radio/receiver (LP-WUR)); and
in case that the WUS is detected, monitoring an associated paging occasion (PO) is performed (disclosed throughout; as indicated in [0122]-[0135], the UE determines, based on the monitoring of the wake-up signal, whether a paging message is scheduled in a paging occasion (PO) and monitoring the PO to which the UE belongs).
Wei does not explicitly disclose the limitations that the monitoring of the WUS is based on a periodicity of a discontinuous reception (DRX) cycle. However, Li ’582 discloses a similar system including a wake up signal (LP-WUS) and further discloses in at least [0145] that “the duty cycle of the LP-WUS and the periodicity for the DRX operation are related”. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Wei to monitor the WUS based on a periodicity of a DRX cycle as suggested by Li ’582. The rationale for doing so would have been to reduce power consumption by coordinating the timing of the wake up signal with the timing on the main radio including the DRX to prevent unnecessary additional radio wake ups.
Regarding claim 20: Wei discloses a method performed by a base station, the method comprising:
transmitting, to a user equipment (UE), a wake-up signal (WUS) (disclosed throughout; see step 1505 of Figure 15, for example, which discloses transmitting a wake-up signal); and
wherein the WUS indicates to the UE to monitor an associated paging occasion (PO) (disclosed throughout; as indicated in [0122]-[0135], the UE determines, based on the monitoring of the wake-up signal, whether a paging message is scheduled in a paging occasion (PO) and monitoring the PO to which the UE belongs).
Wei does not explicitly disclose the limitations that the transmitting of the WUS is based on a periodicity of a discontinuous reception (DRX) cycle. However, Li ’582 discloses a similar system including a wake up signal (LP-WUS) and further discloses in at least [0145] that “the duty cycle of the LP-WUS and the periodicity for the DRX operation are related”. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Wei to monitor the WUS based on a periodicity of a DRX cycle as suggested by Li ’582. The rationale for doing so would have been to reduce power consumption by coordinating the timing of the wake up signal with the timing on the main radio including the DRX to prevent unnecessary additional radio wake ups.
Regarding claim 2: Wei, modified, discloses the limitations that in case that the WUS is not detected, the monitoring of the associated PO is not performed (disclosed throughout; see [0094], for example, which discloses that in some instances, “If an LP-WUS is not detected, the main radio stays in deep sleep mode for power saving”).
Regarding claims 3 and 21: Wei, modified, discloses the limitations that the WUS indicates a subgroup of the UE (disclosed throughout; see [0124], for example, which discloses that the monitoring of a PO is performed “…if a WUS is detected with a payload that indicates a paging message is scheduled in a PO for a paging subgroup to which the UE belongs” ).
Claims 4, 5, and 7-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wei et al (US 2025/0310881) in view of Li ’582 et al (US 2025/0220582) in view of Cheng et al (US 2024/0015655).
Regarding claim 4: Wei, modified, discloses the limitations of parent claim 1 as indicated above. Wei does not explicitly disclose the limitation of claim 4 that in case that a reference signal received power (RSRP) value of the -WUS is lower than a threshold, the UE wakes up. However, Cheng discloses a similar system and further discloses in [0063] that “When the RSRP of LP-WUS is lower than a configured threshold provided by network node via RRC or system information block (SIB), the LP-WUR may wake up the main transceiver (or main radio)”. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Wei, modified, to wake up when an RSRP of the WUS is lower than a threshold as suggested by Cheng. The rationale for doing so would have been to consider a potential cell id change as suggested by Cheng in [0063], for example.
Regarding claim 5: Wei, modified, discloses the limitations of monitoring paging early indication (PEI) (disclosed throughout; see [0096]-[0099] and [0123], for example, which discloses that a PEI may be used in addition to a LP-WUS; as indicated in these sections, the paging message is received if the PEI indicates that a paging message for the subgroup is in the PO to reduce unnecessary UE paging reception) and receiving a paging message (disclosed throughout; see [0096]-[0099] and [0123], for example; when a PEI indicates that a paging message is in a PO for a subgroup to which the UE belongs, the UE receives the paging message).
Regarding claim 7: Wei discloses the limitations of parent claim 1 as indicated above. Wei further discloses the limitations: wherein the WUS includes a [preamble] and a data part (see the LP-WUS on the right side of Figure 6, which includes a preamble and a payload (data part)). Wei is silent regarding the limitation that the preamble is a synchronization part, and the corresponding limitations
wherein the UE determines a signal sequence of the synchronization part by at least one of the following:
system information,
at least one of identification information of a cell where the UE is located, identification information of the UE, and an index of a radio frame or time slot or symbol where the synchronization part is located,
blind detection of the UE, and the signal sequence configured during the latest time the UE was in radio resource control (RRC) connected state.
However, Cheng discloses a similar system which uses a low power wake-up signal (LP-WUS) to aid in power savings and waking up a UE, as well as a PEI, PO, and paging message. Further, Cheng discloses the use of a low power synchronization signal (LP-SS) (see [0057], for example). In addition, Cheng discloses that “the LP-SS may comprise a LP-WUS preamble” (see [0057], for example). Further, as indicated in [0087]-[0089], for example, Cheng discloses at least that the LP-WUS sequence may be configured by the network through RRC or SIB system information.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Wei to use the preamble as a synchronization signal/part of the WUS as suggested by Cheng. The rationale for doing so would have been to improve the reliability of detection of the LP-WUS in at least situations where there is no DL synchronization as suggested in at least [0057] of Cheng, for example.
Regarding claim 8: Wei, modified, discloses the limitations of parent claim 7 as indicated above. Wei, modified, further discloses the limitations of claim 8 that the data part includes part or all of indication information and/or a paging message to wake up the UE (disclosed throughout; see Figure 10 and [0110]-[0111], for example, which disclose that the data part (payload) of the LP-WUS comprises at least part of the indication information to wake up the UE (including the paging occasion indications and the subgroup indications)).
Regarding claim 9: Wei, modified, discloses the limitations of parent claim 7 as indicated above. Wei, modified, further discloses the limitations of claim 9 that an indication field of the data part includes at least one of the following: a list of a paged UEs pagingRecordList comprising a UE identification ue-Identity and/or an access type accessType, a late non-critical extension lateNonCriticalExtension, a non-critical extension nonCriticalExtension, system information modification, an earthquake and tsunami warning system etwsAndCmaslndication and/or commercial mobile alarm service indication commercial mobile alert service, and a stop paging monitoring stopPagingMonitoring indication. For example, see Figure 11B and [0117], for example, which disclose at least an indication to stop (or continue) monitoring the paging information in the WUSs (“a 1-bit early termination LP-WUS indication can be included in an LP-WUS to indicate whether to continue monitoring a subsequent LP-WUS when one LP-WUS is detected in the set of WUR monitoring occasions associated with the PO”).
Regarding claim 10: Wei, modified, discloses the limitations of parent claim 7 as indicated above. Wei, modified, further discloses the limitations of claim 10 that the data part includes a UE-specific information block or a UE group information block group (disclosed throughout; see Figure 10, for example, which discloses that the data part (payload) of the LP-WUS includes at least UE group information block group (the subgroup indication)). Wei does not explicitly disclose the limitations that the UE group is at least one of the following: a subgroup specified by a core network; and a subgroup based on UE identification (ID). However, Cheng discloses a similar use of grouping information in an LP-WUS. Further, Cheng discloses at least that the UE group/sub-group information may be configured by a core network (the MME-level grouping described in [0126]-[0127] and Figure 20, for example). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Wei to configure the UE with a subgroup specified by a core network (such as the MME-level grouping) as suggested by Cheng. The rationale for doing so would have been to enable the network to page the UE in multiple tracking areas (TACs) to more efficiently notify the UE when its location has changed as suggested by Cheng.
Regarding claim 11: Wei, modified, discloses the limitations of parent claim 10 as indicated above. Wei, modified, further discloses the limitations of claim 11 that the information block group is at least one of the following: length and/or format of each information block in the information block group being the same, and each information block corresponding to one or more UEs in the UE group, length or format of each information block in the information block group being different, and the information block group comprising a first information block and at least one second information block, wherein the first information block includes UE group-common information, and wherein each of the second information blocks includes information of one or more UEs in the UE group (disclosed throughout; see Figure 10, for example, which discloses at least that each information block in the information block group (bits 1-N for each PO, for example) has a same length and/or format).
Regarding claim 12: Wei, modified, discloses the limitations of parent claim 11 as indicated above. Wei does not explicitly disclose the limitations of claim 12 that the UE group-common information comprising at least one of the following: system information modification indication information; earthquake and tsunami warning system and/or commercial mobile alarm service indication information; and stop paging monitoring indication information. However, Li ’582 discloses including UE group-common information including “systemInfoModification” and “etwsAndCmasIndication” in at least [0102] and table 2, for example. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Wei, modified, to indicate to the UE which channel is to be received (such as the system information or a notification such as ETWS or CMAS) in the wake-up signal as suggested by Li ’582. The rationale for doing so would have been to more efficiently wake up a UE by directly indicating certain types of information to be received as suggested by Li ’582.
Regarding claim 13: Wei, modified, discloses the limitations of parent claim 10 as indicated above. Wei, modified, further discloses the limitations of claim 13 that each information block in the information block group includes: information for indicating whether there is a next information block in the information block group after the information block, or information for indicating whether the information block is the last information block in the information block group (disclosed throughout; see at least see Figure 11B and [0117], for example, which disclose at least the “more LP-WUS indicator”, which indicates whether or not there are more WUS elements in the WUR occasion, or if this is the last WUS element in this WUR occasion).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wei et al (US 2025/0310881) in view of Li ’582 et al (US 2025/0220582) in view of Cheng et al (US 2024/0015655) in view of Wu ’752 et al (US 2025/0159752).
Regarding claim 14: Wei, modified, discloses the limitations of parent claim 7 as indicated above. Wei, modified, does not explicitly disclose the limitations of claim 14 that the UE determines a format of the data part by at least one of the following: system information indication; the signal sequence used by the synchronization part, a format of a data part is determined according to a serial number of the data part if there are multiple data parts after the synchronization part of the WUS, a format of each of the data parts is indicated by its previous data part as one of predefined formats, and blind detection of the UE. However, Wu ’752 discloses a similar system that uses a low-power wake-up signal (LP-WUS) including a synchronization part and a data part (see Figure 6, for example). Further, as indicated throughout, the UE determines the format of the data part (control information bits) based at least on the signal sequence used by the synchronization part (the preamble and/or indication information sequence). For example, see [0100], which discloses that “after the terminal receives the synchronization sequence and/or indication information sequence, it can determine the purpose of the control signal and/or control channel”. See also [0106], for example, which indicates “the purpose of a control signal and/or control channel can be indicated by a preamble sequence, and the terminal executes the instruction information in the control signal and/or control channel only when a specific preamble is detected”. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Wei, modified, to utilize a flexible LP-WUS such that the format is determined based on the particular synchronization sequence/preamble as suggested by Wu ’752. The rationale for doing so would have been to improve the system efficiency by enabling multiple purposes for a single signal/set of bits that is dynamically configurable as suggested by Wu ’752.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wei et al (US 2025/0310881) in view of Li ’582 et al (US 2025/0220582) in view of Cheng et al (US 2024/0015655) in view of Liu et al (US 2025/0159656).
Regarding claim 15: Wei, modified, discloses the limitations of parent claim 7 as indicated above. Wei, modified, does not explicitly disclose the limitations of claim 15 that a transmission rate of the data part of the WUS is determined by at least one of the following: the transmission rate of the data part of the WUS being indicated by the system information, the transmission rate of the data part of the WUS being determined by the signal sequence used by the synchronization part, blind detection of the UE, and the transmission rate of the data part being determined according to duration of the synchronization part. However, Liu discloses a similar system that uses a low-power wake-up signal (LP-WUS) including a preamble and a data field (see [0052], for example). Liu further discloses in at least [0052] that “[t]he preamble field can be used for LP-WUS detection, synchronization, data rate determination, and carrying other information; and the data field can be used to carry the data part”. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Wei, modified, to determine the transmission/data rate of the data part based on the signal sequence of the synchronization part (the preamble) as suggested by Liu. The rationale for doing so would have been to enable multiple data rates that are dynamically configurable by the network as suggested by Liu.
Claims 17 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wei et al (US 2025/0310881) in view of Li ’582 et al (US 2025/0220582) in view of Li ’899 et al (US 2025/0175899).
Regarding claim 17: Wei, modified, discloses the limitations of parent claim 1 as indicated above. Wei does not explicitly disclose the limitations of claim 17 that a frequency domain resource location for the WUS is determined by at least one of the following: an absolute radio frequency channel number, one or more frequency bands for WUS reception reported by the UE to a base station, the UE binding frequency band information for WUS reception through registration information, a Point A and a predefined or preconfigured offset, and a frequency band where a paging occasion (PO) is located. However, Li ’899 discloses a similar system for utilizing an LP-WUS to provide power savings. Further, Li ’899 discloses that the frequency domain resource location of the wake-up signal is determined at least by a reference point (a Point A) and an offset (see at least [0128] – “location of the center subcarrier of the wake-up signal/channel can be derived by a reference point and an offset… reference point can be CRB #0 or point-A for the DL carrier”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Wei to determine the frequency domain resource location for the wake-up signal based on at last a Point A and a predefined or preconfigured offset as suggested by Li ’899. The rationale for doing so would have been to enable the UE to determine the location of the wake-up signal without receiving configuration information and to improve the reliability of the UE receiving the wake-up signal as suggested by Li ’899.
Regarding claim 18: Wei, modified, discloses the limitations of parent claim 1 as indicated above. Wei does not explicitly disclose the limitations of claim 18 that a transmission occasion of the WUS is determined by at least one of the following: a starting point of the transmission occasion of the WUS indicated by system information and/or a preconfigured first offset, a paging frame (PF) and/or a paging occasion (PO) and/or a preconfigured second offset, and paging early indication (PEI). However, Li ’899 discloses a similar system for utilizing an LP-WUS to provide power savings. Further, in at least [0099]-[0102], Li ’899 discloses that the transmission occasion of the wake-up signal (candidate wake-up signal/channel occasion) can be determined “an offset before the PO”. The offset is preconfigured as described in at least [0101], for example. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Wei to determine a transmission occasion based at least on a paging occasion (PO) and a preconfigured second offset as suggested by Li ’899. The rationale for doing so would have been to enable a simple, yet configurable, mechanism for modifying the time location of a transmission occasion of a wake-up signal as suggested by Li ’899.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wei et al (US 2025/0310881) in view of Li ’582 et al (US 2025/0220582) in view of Cheng et al (US 2024/0015655) in view of Wu ’072 et al (US 2021/0007072).
Regarding claim 19: Wei, modified, discloses the limitations of parent claim 1 as indicated above. Wei does not explicitly disclose the limitations of claim 19 that relationship between the WUS and an SSB is indicated by 1-bit information in system information. However, Cheng discloses a similar system utilizing a low-power wake-up signal as disclosed throughout. Further, Cheng discloses that the UE may receive a relationship (QCL-D assumption) between a wake-up signal (LP-WUS) and an SSB through the RRC or SIB (see [0139], for example). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Wei to indicate a relationship (such as a QCL relationship/assumption) between the SSB and LP-WUS to the UE in system information such as a SIB as suggested by Cheng. The rationale for doing so would have been to enable the UE to determine whether or not to drop or postpone the LP-WUS based on this relationship.
Cheng is silent regarding how many bits are used to transmit this relationship (QCL assumption) via the SIB. However, as indicated in Wu ’072, when sending the QCL relationship between two signals (such as the LP-WUS and an SSB), 1-bit of information is required. For example, see [0326], which discloses “[b]ecause the maximum quantity of sent SSBs is 2, 1-bit information is needed to indicate the SSB QCL relationship or SSB index”. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to send the QCL relationship/assumption between the SSB and LP-WUS using 1-bit as suggested by Wu ’072 (which discloses that when the QCL is between two signals, only a single bit is required). The rationale for doing so would have been to minimize the signaling resources utilized indicate the QCL relationship/assumption.
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 April 14, 2026
Prosecution Insights