DETAILED ACTION
This is in response to Applicant’s reply dated 4/7/26. Claims 1-3, 5-8, 10-12, 14-15, 17, 21-22, 24-25, and 27 have been examined. Claims 4, 9, 13, 16, 18-20, 23, 26, and 28-30 have been cancelled.
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 . 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.
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)(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.
Claim(s) 1-3 and 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being unpatentable by VIVO, “Consideration on use of NCD-SSB instead of CD-SSB for RedCap UE”; R4-2117806; 3GPP TSG-RAN WG4 Meeting #101-e, Electronic Meeting, Nov.1 – 12, 2021 (included in IDS; hereafter VIVO).
Regarding Claim 1 (Currently Amended),
A user equipment (UE) for wireless communication, comprising: at least one memory; and at least one processor coupled to the at least one memory and configured to:
obtain at least one of: a first measurement of a first synchronization signal block (SSB) that is associated with a serving cell of the UE or a downlink (DL) reference signal that is quasi-colocated with the first SSB, or a second measurement of a second SSB is associated with a non-serving cell or a DL reference signal that is quasi-colocated with the second SSB within a bandwidth of an initial DL bandwidth part configured by a serving cell of the UE [VIVO: Sec. 1: Introduction; RAN1 respectfully requests RAN2 and RAN4 to provide feedback about the use of NCD-SSB instead of CD-SSB … for idle … mode procedures for serving and non-serving cells for a Rel-17 RedCap UE operating with an initial … DL BWP not containing CD-SSB; 1) [RAN2/4] whether it is feasible to use NCD-SSB for serving and non-serving cell measurements for idle … mode for all or some of RRM, RLM, BFD, link recovery, RO selection mobility, time/frequency tracking and AGC; 2) [RAN2/4] whether it is feasible to use NCD-SSB as QCL source of other DL channels/signals … transmitted in idle … mode in the initial … DL BWP of RedCap UE; Sec. 2; Proposal 1, Sec. 2: Discussion; … it is feasible to use NCD-SSB for serving and non-serving cell measurements for idle … mode; Sec. 2; Proposal 7: … we suggest that the design principle of using NCD-SSB for RedCap UE is when NCD-SSB is configured, CD-SSB based actions could be done through NCD-SSB and from RAN4 measurement point of view, the dependency on CD-SSB should not be needed; Sec. 1: Introduction; Option 1: for a separate initial DL BWP … RedCap UE does NOT expect it to contain SSB/CORESET#0/SIB …; Option 2: for a separate initial DL BWP … if it is configured for random access while not for paging in idle … mode, RepCap does NOT expect it to contain SSB/CORESET#0/SIB]; and
perform a cell reselection operation based on at least one of the first measurement or the second measurement [VIVO: Sec. 2; Proposal 7: … we suggest that the design principle of using NCD-SSB for RedCap UE is when NCD-SSB is configured, CD-SSB based actions could be done through NCD-SSB and from RAN4 measurement point of view, the dependency on CD-SSB should not be needed; Sec. 2; Proposal 3; … it is possible for a NCD-SSB to be located at the sync raster …; Sec. 2: Discussion; 9.2.1.2; Cell Reselection; cell reselection is always based on CD-SSBs located on the synchronization raster (see clause 45.2.4); Sec. 2; Proposal 1, Sec. 2: Discussion; … it is feasible to use NCD-SSB for serving and non-serving cell measurements for idle … mode for all or some of RRM, BFD, link recovery, RO (radio access channel occasion) selection, mobility, time/frequency tracking and AGC];
Note:Cell reselection is done through NCD-SSB. During a mobility event (i.e. a handover), a cell reselection and then a RO selection is performed.
wherein each of the first SSB and the second SSB is a non-cell-defining synchronization signal block (NCD-SSB) [VIVO: [VIVO: Sec. 1: Introduction; RAN1 respectfully requests RAN2 and RAN4 to provide feedback about the use of NCD-SSB instead of CD-SSB … for idle … mode procedures for serving and non-serving cells for a Rel-17 RedCap UE operating with an initial … DL BWP not containing CD-SSB; Sec. 2: Discussion; … it is feasible to use NCD-SSB for serving and non-serving cell measurements for idle … mode for all or some of RRM, BFD, link recovery, RO (radio access channel occasion) selection, mobility, time/frequency tracking and AGC].
Regarding Claim 2,
wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: indicate a set of capabilities of the UE and UE assistance information (UAI) associated with at least one of a measurement relaxation, the cell reselection operation, a small data transmission, or a small data reception of the UE in an inactive mode or an idle mode; and receive a configuration message for the measurement relaxation associated with the cell reselection operation [VIVO: Sec. 2; Proposal 7: … we suggest that the design principle of using NCD-SSB for RedCap UE is when NCD-SSB is configured, CD-SSB based actions could be done through NCD-SSB and from RAN4 measurement point of view, the dependency on CD-SSB should not be needed; Sec. 2; Proposal 3; … it is possible for a NCD-SSB to be located at the sync raster …; Sec. 2: Discussion; 9.2.1.2; Cell Reselection; cell reselection is always based on CD-SSBs located on the synchronization raster (see clause 45.2.4); Sec. 1: Introduction; the network may choose to configure SSB or MIB-configured CORESET#0 or SIB1 to be within the respective DL BWP].
Regarding Claim 3,
wherein a cell-defining synchronization signal block (CD-SSB) is not present in the initial DL bandwidth part of the UE [VIVO: Sec. 1: Introduction; RAN1 respectfully requests RAN2 and RAN4 to provide feedback about the use of NCD-SSB instead of CD-SSB … for idle … mode procedures for serving and non-serving cells for a Rel-17 RedCap UE operating with an initial … DL BWP not containing CD-SSB].
Regarding Claims 6-8, which recite the same claim limitations as those in claims 1-3 above, the same rationale of rejection as presented in claims 1-3 is applicable.
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.
Claim(s) 5 and 10are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over VIVO in view of Qualcomm, “Remaining Issues on Procedures of RedCap UE”, 3GPP TSG RAN WG1 Meeting #111, R1-2212086, Toulouse, France, Nov. 14-18, 2022 (hereafter 3GPP-2086).
Regarding Claim 5,
VIVO teaches:
wherein the initial DL bandwidth part is configured … at the UE in an inactive mode or an idle mode and is less than a total bandwidth of the serving cell [VIVO: less than total bandwidth == not include CD-SSB and the entire CORESET#0; Sec. 1: Introduction; Option 1: for a separate initial DL BWP (if it does not include CD-SSB and the entire CORESET#0), RedCap UE does NOT expect it to contain SSB/CORESET#0/SIB …; Sec. 2; Proposal 1; it is feasible to use NCD-SSB for serving and non-serving cell measurements for idle … for all or some of RRM, RLM, link recovery, RO selection, mobility, time/frequency tracking and AGC].
However, VIVO does not teach that the initial DL bandwidth part is configured for a small data transmission or a small data reception at the UE ….
3GPP-2086 teaches:
wherein the initial DL bandwidth part is configured for a small data transmission or a small data reception at the UE in an inactive mode or an idle mode and is less than a total bandwidth of the serving cell [3GPP-2806: Sec. 4; according to [1], when a RedCap UE in RRC_INACTIVE state monitors Type1-PDCCH within an initial DL BWP) without CD-SSB, the RedCap UE is not required to monitor Type2-PDCCH CSS set outside its initial DL BWP; if the RedCap UE performs SDT in an initial DL BWP without CD-SSB, the UE does not expect the initial DL BWP to include CORESET#0 and Type0/0A/2-PDCCH CSS sets [1]].
Note:
[1] incorporated by reference is 3GPP TS 38.213, V17.3.0 (Sept. 2022).
It would have been obvious for POSITA before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of VIVO and 3GPP-2086 in order to avoid the increase of UE complexity [3GPP-2086: Sec. 3].
Regarding claim 10, which recites the same claim limitations as those in claim 5 above, the same rationale of rejection as presented in claim 5 is applicable.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11-12, 14-15, 17, 21-22, 24-25, and 27 have been allowed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 4/7/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues regarding claim 1 on pages 9-10 of the Remarks section that VIVO teaches in Sec. 9.2.1.2 that “cell reselection is always based on CD-SSBs located on the synchronization raster.” VIVO’s Proposal 7 merely suggests that “CD-SSB based actions could be done through NCD-SSB”, which is for future analysis and potential standards development, not a disclosure of a system that actually perform cell reselection based on NCD-SSB measurements.
Examiner’s Response:
VIVO teaches that RAN1 respectfully requests RAN2 and RAN4 to provide feedback about the use of NCD-SSB instead of CD-SSB … for idle … mode procedures for serving and non-serving cells for a Rel-17 RedCap UE operating with an initial … DL BWP not containing CD-SSB [VIVO: Sec. 1: Introduction]. Moreover, VIVO teaches that it is feasible to use NCD-SSB for serving and non-serving cell measurements for idle … mode for all or some of RRM, BFD, link recovery, RO (radio access channel occasion) selection, mobility, time/frequency tracking and AGC [VIVO: Sec. 2: Proposal 1]. In other words, NCD-SSB is used for serving and non-serving measurements for idle mode, for example, during a mobility event (handover) or a RO selection, thus reading on “each of the first SSB and the second SSB is a non-cell-defining synchronization signal block (NCD-SSB).”
VIVO’s Proposal 7 alongside Proposal 1 describes what is known in the art and is not a study item for future analysis and potential standards development. In 3GPP document, a study item is generally designated by an acronym “FFS”. Given this capability to use NCD-SSB for mobility or RO selection, VIVO states explicitly that “the principle of using NCD-SSB for the UE with reduced capability is when NCD-SSB is configured, the NCD-SSB works like CD-SSB and CD-SSB-based actions could be based on NCD-SSB [VIVO: Sec. 2; Proposal 7]. As a result, NCD-SSB performs a cell reselection (NCD-SSB performs RO selection after a cell reselection), thus teaching “… a cell reselection operation based on at least one of the first measurement or the second measurement.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See also, WO 2023/079,662 (steps S22 & S23 of Fig. 10).
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 SAAD A WAQAS whose telephone number is (571)270-5642. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 - 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, 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.
SAAD A. WAQAS
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2468
/Saad A. Waqas/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2468
Prosecution Insights