DETAILED ACTION
This office action is a response to an amendment submitted on 06/26/2026.
Claims 1-3, 5-6, 8, 10-11, 13-14, 16 and 19-20 are pending for examination.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application.
Drawings
The Examiner contends that the drawings submitted on 12/19/2023 are acceptable for examination proceedings.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) was submitted. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
Claims 1-3, 5-6, 8, 10-11, 13-14, 16 and 19-20 have been amended.
Claims 4, 7, 9, 12, 15 and 17- 18 have been cancelled.
Response to Arguments
The previous 35 U.S.C 112 rejection of claims 3-13 has been withdrawn in view of applicant’s amendment.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) have been considered but are moot under the new ground of rejection.
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 1-3, 5-6, 8, 10-11, 13-14, 16 and 19-20 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.
Claim1 recites the limitation “an RRC connection related to a first cell”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. it’s unclear that “an RRC connection related to a first cell” is same as the “an RRC connection related a first cell” in line 6 or different first cell.
Claim1 recites “in first state”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. it’s unclear that “first state” is same first state as in lines 10 or different state.
Claim 19 recites the limitation “the first cell” in line 8 without previously reciting “a first cell”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 20 recites the limitation “the first cell” in line 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. it’s unclear that “the first cell” is same as the “first cell” in line 3 or different first cell.
Claims 2-3, 5-6, 8, 10-11, 13-14, 16 depend on their parent claim 1, thus they are also rejected for the same reasoning.
Appropriate corrections are required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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 non-obviousness.
Claims 1-3, 5-6, 14, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin et al. (US 20230189349 A1), hereinafter “Lin”; in view of Kim et al. (US 20230262540 A1); hereinafter “Kim”; and in further view of Li et al. (US 20220256622 A1), hereinafter “Li”.
Regarding claim 1, Lin teaches a user equipment (UE) for wireless communications, the UE comprising: a transceiver; and a processor, wherein the transceiver and the processor are configured to [Lin: Abstract teaches method and device for sending data by terminal device; Fig. 8]:
Receive a first signaling used for an RRC connection related to a first cell [Lin: Fig. 3; Par. 76- 99 teaches of receiving RRC connection information related to NG-eNB], the first signaling is used to configure a value of a first timer [Lin: Fig. 3,4; Par. 104-107 teaches terminal device sends first information during first timer]; and
Transmitting a first signal, wherein the first signal is used for an RRC connection related to a first cell [Lin: Par. 76- 99 UE sends RRC configuration request]; on a condition that first cell is in a first state [Lin: Par. 77- 87 teaches based on the UE request, transmission is determined by eNB (based on the Specification Par. 278-279, cell can only accessible in first state/standup/awake; and it’s obvious that eNB is in first state/awake in order to be able to communicate) and the PUR is only valid within a cell for current configuration, that is, when the UE detects that the cell changes and initiates random access in a new cell, the UE needs to release the PUR configured ] accompanying the first signal, starting the first timer after the first cell enters the first state [Lin: Par. 104- 108 further teaches transmitting information during running of the first timer]; [Lin: Fig.2; Par. 80- 88 teaches of detecting idle state, Par. 90- 98 further teaches of UE establish RRC connection resume after transmitting request; if resume is not completed within certain time UE to enter an idle state (second state)];
PNG
media_image1.png
630
472
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However, Lin does not teach compared to the first cell being in first state, when on a condition that the first cell is in second state, start the first timer after the first cell enters the first state.
Nevertheless, Kim, in the similar field of endeavor teaches compared to the first cell being in first state, when on a condition that the first cell is in second state, start the first timer after the first cell enters the first state [Kim: Par. 211- 218 and Table 10, Par. 276, Figs 12-15 teaches T310 timer can be started upon detecting N310 out-of sync indication of a serving cell (second state) UE start the timer].
PNG
media_image2.png
574
686
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time the invention was made to utilize the teachings of Kim for sending information about cell state. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to utilize the teachings of Kim in the Lin system in order to improve failure recovery in wireless communication [Kim: abstract].
However, Lin in view of Kim does not teach broadcast information transmitted by the first cell in the first state is more than broadcast information transmitted in the second state.
Nevertheless, LI, in the similar filed of endeavor, teaches broadcast information transmitted by the first cell in the first state is more than broadcast information transmitted in the second state [Li: Figs. 6, 7; Par. 90- 113 teaches of after receiving dedicate signaling, then performing monitoring during the timer and detecting a power saving signal (second state is less since power saving is a state with less broadcast information)].
PNG
media_image3.png
494
464
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time the invention was made to utilize the teachings of Li for further optimize power saving and connection during different sate data transmission. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to utilize the teachings of Li in the Lin/ Kim system in order to provide monitoring and dynamic adjustment of timer behavior based on signaling and power saving conditions [Li: Abstract].
Regarding claim 2, the combined Lin/Kim in view of Li teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 1. Lin/ Kim in view of Li further teaches an expiration of the first timer is used to trigger connection failure [Lin: Par. 9 teaches first timer is used to represent a time window of RRC connection establishment resume].
Regarding claim 3, the combined Lin/Kim in view of Li teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 1. Lin/Kim in view of Li further teaches transmit a second signal indicative of a request to wake up the first cell, wherein the second signal is a physical-layer signal and wherein after the first cell is wake up, the first cell enters the first state [Lin: Par. 76 teaches of sending RRC connection resume signal/information to eNB]; Fig. 4; Par. 104- 108 teaches of RRC connection resume after receiving first information from terminal during running of a first timer].
Regarding claim 5, the combined Lin/Kim in view of Li teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 1. Lin/Kim in view of Li further teaches the first signal is used to request an establishment of an RRC connection or to request a resume of an RRC connection [Lin: Par. 76 teaches of sending RRC connection resume signal/information to eNB]; and wherein the first signal comprises an RRC message [Lin: Fig. 3 illustrates of RRC messages transmission between UE and eNB]; and wherein a stopping condition of the first timer comprises: receiving a response to the first signal [Lin: Fig. 11; Par. 195- 205 teaches of during the running of first timer, terminal device send first information to cell where cell is responded to connection establishment resume].
Regarding claim 6, the combined Lin/Kim in view of Li teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 2. Lin/Kim in view of Li further teaches accompanying the first signal, starting the first timer comprises; on a condition that first cell is in the first state and when the first signal is transmitted, the first timer is started[Lin: Par. 104- 108 further teaches transmitting information during running of the first timer] on a condition that when the first cell is in the second state and when the first signal is transmitted and the first cell is waken up, the first timer is started [Lin: Fig. 11; Par. 195- 205 teaches of during the running of first timer, terminal device send first information to cell where cell is responded to connection establishment resume].
Regarding claim 14, the combined Lin/Kim in view of Li teaches all the limitations in the parent claim 1. Lin/Kim in view of Li further teaches transmit a first random access signal [Lin: Fig. 3];
wherein candidate resources used for transmitting the first random access signal are related to whether the first cell is in the first state or the second state [Lin: Fig. 3; Par. 87- 95 teaches of deciding to switch to an idle state].
Regarding claim 19, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth for claim 1.
Regarding claim 20, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth for claim 1.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8, 10, 11, 13, 16 are 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record (see attached PTO-892) and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
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 KYAW Z SOE whose telephone number is (571)270-0304. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-5pm.
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, Charles C Jiang can be reached at 5712707191. 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.
/KYAW Z SOE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2412
Prosecution Insights