DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present U.S. non-provisional application is being examined under the first-inventor-to-file provisions of the AIA . The present U.S. non-provisional application, filed on November 1, 2023, is the U.S. national stage of an international PCT application, filed on January 17, 2023, and claims benefit to a U.S. provisional application, filed on January 18, 2022.
Response to Amendment
This Office action is responsive to the amendment and arguments on February 20, 2026. The specification was amended. Claims 25, 45 and 47 were amended. Claims 46 and 48-51 were canceled. Claims 25, 27, 28, 30-32, 45, 47, 52 and 53 are pending for consideration in the present U.S. non-provisional application.
Response to Arguments
The arguments (page 6) directed to objection to the specification have been considered. The arguments are directed to the amendment, and considered as sufficient to overcome the objection. Accordingly, the objection to the specification is withdrawn.
The arguments (page 6) directed to rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112 have been considered. The arguments are directed to the amendment, and considered as sufficient to overcome the rejections. However, the amendment raises additional new matter rejections. It was previously noted with reference to MPEP 2163 that the applicant should specifically point out support for any amendments made to the disclosure, however that guidance was not followed. Since there is such a gap between the claims and the specification (pp. 1-5), consideration of abandonment is encouraged. Accordingly, the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112 are revised.
The arguments (pages 6-8) directed to the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been considered. The arguments are directed to the amendment, and considered as not sufficient to overcome the rejections. The arguments indicate (A) that Hu does not describe determining a pre-MG status in response to one or more triggering conditions because Hu at paragraphs [0057] and [0066] describes automatically activating or deactivating a pre-MG according to a trigger event. However, automatically activating or deactivating a pre-MG is considered as within the scope of determining a pre-MG status. The arguments indicate (B) that the prior art teaches away from determining the pre-MG status because the purpose of Hu is to automatically activate or deactivate the pre-MG according to predefined rules. However, the mere disclosure of more than one alternative in the prior art does not constitute a teaching away from any of the alternatives because such disclosure does not criticize, discredit, or otherwise discourage the solution claimed. In re Fulton, 391 F.3d 1195, 1201, 73 USPQ2d 1141, 1146 (Fed. Cir. 2004). The arguments indicate (C) that the effective prior art date of Zhang is August 10, 2022 whereas the priority date of the present U.S. non-provisional application is January 18, 2022. However, the new matter rejections herein render the priority date moot because the subject matter of the claims is not described in the U.S. provisional application to which benefit is claimed. Accordingly, the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 are maintained.
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.
Claims 25, 27, 28, 30-32, 45, 47, 52 and 53 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hu et al. (US 2024/0305974 A1) in view of Zhang et al. (US 2025/0142423 A1).
25. An apparatus for use in a user equipment (UE), wherein the apparatus (Hu, FIG. 4) comprises: memory to store information related to a configured pre-configured measurement gap (pre-MG) (Hu, FIG. 4, Id.); and one or more processors (Hu, FIG. 4, Id.) configured to:
identify occurrence of a triggering event related to the configured pre-MG (Hu, paras. [0057], [0066], “…In some optional embodiments, for the third manner, the rule includes at least one of a first rule or a second rule. The first rule is to automatically activate or deactivate the pre-MG according to a trigger event, where the trigger event includes at least one of: BWP switching, adding an MO, removing an MO, adding a PSCell, releasing a PSCell, changing a PSCell, adding an SCell, releasing an SCell, changing an SCell, activating an SCell, deactivate an SCell, or a dedicated measurement requirement. The second rule is to deactivate the pre-MG if an MG is not required by any of configured MOs; or activate the pre-MG if an MG is required by any one of the configured MOs.”);
check, based on occurrence of the triggering event, a status of the configured pre-MG (Hu, paras. [0057], [0066], “…In some optional embodiments, for the third manner, the rule includes at least one of a first rule or a second rule. The first rule is to automatically activate or deactivate the pre-MG according to a trigger event, where the trigger event includes at least one of: BWP switching, adding an MO, removing an MO, adding a PSCell, releasing a PSCell, changing a PSCell, adding an SCell, releasing an SCell, changing an SCell, activating an SCell, deactivate an SCell, or a dedicated measurement requirement. The second rule is to deactivate the pre-MG if an MG is not required by any of configured MOs; or activate the pre-MG if an MG is required by any one of the configured MOs.” Id.); and
change, based on the occurrence of the triggering event, the status of the configured pre-MG (Hu, paras. [0057], [0066], “…In some optional embodiments, for the third manner, the rule includes at least one of a first rule or a second rule. The first rule is to automatically activate or deactivate the pre-MG according to a trigger event, where the trigger event includes at least one of: BWP switching, adding an MO, removing an MO, adding a PSCell, releasing a PSCell, changing a PSCell, adding an SCell, releasing an SCell, changing an SCell, activating an SCell, deactivate an SCell, or a dedicated measurement requirement. The second rule is to deactivate the pre-MG if an MG is not required by any of configured MOs; or activate the pre-MG if an MG is required by any one of the configured MOs.” Id.),
wherein the one or more processors are further configured to refrain from checking the status of the configured pre-MG when the status is provided via network signaling (Zhang, paras. [0051], [0052], “There are mainly two types of activation/deactivation mechanisms for the pre-MG: one is a network device controlled activation/deactivation mechanism and the other is a UE-autonomous activation/deactivation mechanism. The two activation/deactivation mechanisms correspond to two different capabilities of the UE. […] If the UE supports both of the two capabilities, that is, the UE supports both of the two activation/deactivation mechanisms of pre-MGs, when the network device configures activation/deactivation indication information of pre-MGs, a network device controlled activation/ deactivation mechanism may be used preferentially…” It is noted that preferential use of the network-controlled mechanism corresponds to refraining from checking the pre-MG activation/ deactivation status via the UE-autonomous mechanism.)
Hu et al. may not seem to describe the identical claimed invention, however in the same field of endeavor, Zhang et al. provides prior art disclosure for the claimed invention, such as wherein the one or more processors are further configured to refrain from checking the status of the configured pre-MG when the status is provided via network signaling (Zhang, paras. [0051], [0052], Id.) The prior art disclosure and suggestions of Zhang et al. for reasons of performing a combined configuration of a plurality of types of measurement gaps (Zhang, paras. [0002], [0003], “…A related technology proposes a plurality of types of measurement gaps (MGs, also referred to as measurement intervals), such as a pre-configured measurement gap (pre-MG), a network controlled small gap (NCSG), and multiple concurrent measurement gaps. However, there is currently no suitable solution to how to perform a combined configuration of a plurality of types of measurement gaps.” Id.) In view of the prior art of record, the claimed invention 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, for reasons of performing a combined configuration of a plurality of types of measurement gaps.
27. The apparatus of claim 25, wherein the triggering event is related to bandwidth part (BWP) switching (Hu, paras. [0057], [0066], Id.)
28. The apparatus of claim 25, wherein the triggering event is related to activation or deactivation of a secondary cell (SCell) (Hu, paras. [0057], [0066], Id.)
30. The apparatus of claim 25, wherein the triggering event is related to adding or removing a measurement object (MO) (Hu, paras. [0057], [0066], Id.)
31. The apparatus of claim 25, wherein identifying the triggering event is based on identifying receipt of a radio resource control (RRC) message for the triggering event (Hu, paras. [0057], [0066], Id.)
32. The apparatus of claim 31, wherein the RRC message is a RRCReconfiguration information element (IE) (Hu, paras. [0057], [0066], Id. MPEP 2143, RRC reconfiguration IE is considered as a simple substitution of one known RRC message for another that yields predictable results.)
45. A user equipment (UE) configured for operation in a 5G NR network, the UE comprising: processing circuitry; and memory, wherein the processing circuitry is (Hu, FIG. 4, Id.) configured to:
decode radio-resource control (RRC) signalling to configure the UE with a pre-configured measurement gap (Pre-MG) pattern (Hu, paras. [0057], [0066], Id.);
activate or deactivate the Pre-MG pattern in response to a triggering condition (Hu, paras. [0057], [0066], Id.);
perform one or more measurements during pre-configured measurement gaps (MGs) of the Pre-MG pattern when the Pre-MG pattern is activated (Hu, paras. [0057], [0066], Id.),
wherein the triggering condition comprises one or more of a plurality of triggering conditions comprising: bandwidth part (BWP) switching; activation or deactivation of secondary cells (SCells); and addition or removal of measurement objects (Hu, paras. [0057], [0066], Id.), and
wherein the processing circuitry (Hu, FIG. 4, Id.) is further configured to:
determine an activation or deactivation status of the Pre-MG pattern in response to one or more of the triggering conditions (Hu, paras. [0057], [0066], Id.); and
refrain from determining the activation or deactivation status of the Pre-MG pattern when the network provides the activation or deactivation status via network signaling (Zhang, paras. [0051], [0052], Id.)
Hu et al. may not seem to describe the identical claimed invention, however in the same field of endeavor, Zhang et al. provides prior art disclosure for the claimed invention, such as refrain from determining the activation or deactivation status of the Pre-MG pattern when the network provides the activation or deactivation status via network signaling (Zhang, paras. [0051], [0052], Id.) The prior art disclosure and suggestions of Zhang et al. for reasons of performing a combined configuration of a plurality of types of measurement gaps (Zhang, paras. [0002], [0003], Id.) In view of the prior art of record, the claimed invention 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, for reasons of performing a combined configuration of a plurality of types of measurement gaps.
47. The UE of claim 45, wherein to activate or deactivate the Pre-MG pattern, the processing circuitry is configured to change the activation or deactivation status of the Pre-MG pattern in response to one or more of the triggering conditions (Hu, paras. [0057], [0066], Id.)
52. The UE of claim 47, wherein when activated, the Pre-MG pattern remains active throughout a measurement period during which the one or more measurements are performed (Hu, paras. [0057], [0066], Id.)
53. The apparatus of claim 25, wherein the configured pre-MG is activated throughout a measurement period, and wherein the one or more processors are configured to: perform a measurement during the configured pre-MG (Hu, paras. [0057], [0066], Id.)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112 that forms the basis for all new matter rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
Claims 25, 27, 28, 30-32, 45, 47, 52 and 53 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claims contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 25 was amended to recite “wherein the one or more processors are further configured to refrain from checking the status of the configured pre-MG when the status is provided via network signalling.” The amendment was drawn from claim 49, however claim 49 was not part of the original disclosure. Still further, the claimed invention is not supported in the specification to a person having ordinary skill in the art. The specification describes identifying or checking the pre-MG status (Specification, pp. 4-5, “…For a pre-MG with signaling based (de)activation status, the NW may update the per-bandwidth part (BWP) status indication to the UE in the same RRCReconfiguation information element (IE) that is used to indicate a change to the pre-MG configuration and the MO. When the UE receives the RRCReconfigution IE, the UE may be able to identify the pre-MG status. […] In the situation wherein the activation or deactivation of the pre-MG is signaling-based, this case may result from an erroneous NW implementation because at least the pre-MG status indication may be required to be updated and forwarded to the UE by, for example, an RRC message for pre-MG configuration…”) however said description is not sufficient to convey possession of the claimed invention as a whole because it does not describe anything beyond identifying or checking the pre-MG status, i.e. the description does not describe refraining from checking the pre-MG status. Accordingly, the claimed invention is not supported in the specification to a person having ordinary skill in the art. Claims 27, 28, 30-32 and 53 are dependent therefrom.
Claim 45 was amended to recite “refrain from determining the activation or deactivation status of the Pre-MG pattern when the network provides the activation or deactivation status via network signaling.” The amendment was drawn from claim 49, however claim 49 was not part of the original disclosure. Still further, the claimed invention is not supported in the specification to a person having ordinary skill in the art. The specification describes identifying or checking the pre-MG status (Specification, pp. 4-5, “…For a pre-MG with signaling based (de)activation status, the NW may update the per-bandwidth part (BWP) status indication to the UE in the same RRCReconfiguation information element (IE) that is used to indicate a change to the pre-MG configuration and the MO. When the UE receives the RRCReconfigution IE, the UE may be able to identify the pre-MG status. […] In the situation wherein the activation or deactivation of the pre-MG is signaling-based, this case may result from an erroneous NW implementation because at least the pre-MG status indication may be required to be updated and forwarded to the UE by, for example, an RRC message for pre-MG configuration…”) however said description is not sufficient to convey possession of the claimed invention as a whole because it does not describe anything beyond identifying or checking the pre-MG status, i.e. the description does not describe refraining from checking the pre-MG status. Accordingly, the claimed invention is not supported in the specification to a person having ordinary skill in the art. Claims 47 and 52 are dependent therefrom.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record (PTO-1449, PTO-892) and not relied upon is considered pertinent to the subject matter of the present U.S. non-provisional application.
XIAOMI (WO 2023/060576 A1) provides prior art disclosure considered as relevant to the subject matter of the claimed invention (XIAOMI, Abstract, “Provided in the present disclosure are a method and apparatus for sending or receiving capability indication information, and a device and a storage medium, which are applied to the technical field of wireless communications. The method comprises: sending capability indication information to a network device, wherein the capability indication information is used for indicating whether a user equipment supports pre-configured measurement gap activation or deactivation. In the present disclosure, capability indication information is introduced, such that a network device can determine, on the basis of capability indication information sent by a user equipment, whether the user equipment supports pre-configured measurement gap activation or deactivation, thereby facilitating the network device determining whether there is a need to indicate to the user equipment (UE) that a pre-configured measurement gap is activated or deactivated, such that the UE determines the pre-configured measurement gap more clearly and accurately, and smoothly performs corresponding measurement control.”)
Kazmi et al. (US 2024/0098540 A1) provides prior art disclosure considered as relevant to the subject matter of the claimed invention (Kazmi, Abstract, “Systems and methods for activation and/or deactivation of preconfigured measurement gaps are disclosed. In one embodiment, a method performed by a User Equipment (UE) comprises receiving, from a network node, information that indicates one or more pre-configured measurement gap patterns. The method further comprises determining that a first set of one or more conditions for using a pre-configured measurement gap pattern is satisfied, the pre-configured measurement gap pattern being one of the one or more pre-configured measurement gap patterns. The method further comprises determining a time instance at which to start using the pre-configured measurement gap pattern and starting performance of a measurement using the pre-configured measurement gap pattern at or after the determined time instance. In this manner, the UE is enabled to activate a preconfigured measurement gap pattern in response to the first set of one or more conditions for using the pre-configured measurement gap pattern being satisfied.”)
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 Timothy J. Weidner whose telephone number is (571) 270-1825. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00 AM - 5:00 PM, Eastern Standard Time.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing by using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, the applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) form provided at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ayaz R. Sheikh can be reached on (571) 272-3795. 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. In order 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 more 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.
/TIMOTHY J WEIDNER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2476