DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/11/24 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claim(s) 21, 23, 24, 29, 30, 32, 33, 38, and 39 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Huang et al. (U.S. 2022/0104044) (hereinafter “Huang”). Huang teaches all of the limitations of the specified claims with the reasoning that follows.
Regarding claim 21, “a first device comprising: at least one processor; and at least one memory including computer program codes; the at least one memory and the computer program codes are configured to, with the at least one processor, cause the first device at least to: determine one or more parameters for compensating a delay associated with at least one evaluation of a measurement, the measurement comprising at least one of the following: a radio link monitoring, or a beam failure detection” is anticipated by the UE 201 (first device) of Figure 2 that includes a processor 232 coupled to a memory 231 including a program 236 (computer program codes) as spoken of on page 2, paragraph [0025]; where the UE will exit a radio link monitoring/beam failure detection (RLM/BFD) measurement relaxation when any condition of relax criteria (parameters for compensating delay) A2, B2, C2, and/or D2 is fulfilled, where the relax criteria A2 is SINR/SNR channel condition of a serving cell/beam, the relax criteria B2 is UE speed based on SINR/SNR variation, the relax criteria C2 is RSRP channel condition of a serving cell, and the relax criteria D2 is UE speed based on RSRP variation as spoken of on pages 3-4, paragraphs [0037]-[0038]; and where a time interval between each measurement for the relaxed RLM/BFD measurement state is K times longer than (delay associated with evaluation of measurement) a time interval for a normal RLM/BFD measurement state as spoken of on page 4 (see claim 10).
Lastly, “in accordance with a determination that the first device is to be switched from a relaxed measurement mode to a non-relaxed measurement mode, perform the measurement compensation in the non-relaxed measurement mode based on the one or more parameters” is anticipated by the UE that exits (switches from) the relaxed RLM/BFD measurement state (relaxed measurement mode) and reverts back to a normal RLM/BFD measurement state (non-relaxed measurement mode) in the event that (based on) one or more of the relax criteria (parameters) A2, B2, C2, D2 are fulfilled as spoken of on pages 3-4, paragraphs [0037]-[0038]; where the UE 201 includes a measurement state transition handling circuit 293 that handles normal state and relaxed state transition based on the relax criteria, and a measurement circuit 294 that performs relaxed or normal RLM/BFD measurements (compensated measurement for delay) accordingly as spoken of on page 2, paragraph [0026].
Regarding claim 23, “wherein the first device is caused to determine the one or more parameters by: receiving a configuration for compensating the delay from a second device; and determining the one or more parameters from the configuration” is anticipated by base station 202 (second device) of Figure 2 that includes an RLM/BFD configuration circuit 283 that configures RLM and BFD and corresponding measurements for UEs and communicates with UEs (receives configuration) to implement the RLM/BFD functionalities as spoken of on page 2, paragraph [0024].
Regarding claim 24, “wherein the second device comprises a network device” is anticipated by the base station 102 (network device) of wireless network 100 of Figure 1.
Regarding claim 29, “wherein the first device comprises a terminal device” is anticipated by the UE 101 (terminal device) of wireless network 100 of Figure 1.
Regarding claim 30, “a method comprising: determining one or more parameters for compensating a delay associated with at least one evaluation of a measurement, the measurement comprising at least one of the following: a radio link monitoring, or a beam failure detection” is anticipated by the UE 201 (first device) of Figure 2 that includes a processor 232 coupled to a memory 231 including a program 236 (computer program codes) as spoken of on page 2, paragraph [0025]; where the UE will exit a radio link monitoring/beam failure detection (RLM/BFD) measurement relaxation when any condition of relax criteria (parameters for compensating delay) A2, B2, C2, and/or D2 is fulfilled, where the relax criteria A2 is SINR/SNR channel condition of a serving cell/beam, the relax criteria B2 is UE speed based on SINR/SNR variation, the relax criteria C2 is RSRP channel condition of a serving cell, and the relax criteria D2 is UE speed based on RSRP variation as spoken of on pages 3-4, paragraphs [0037]-[0038]; and where a time interval between each measurement for the relaxed RLM/BFD measurement state is K times longer than (delay associated with evaluation of measurement) a time interval for a normal RLM/BFD measurement state as spoken of on page 4 (see claim 10).
Lastly, “in accordance with a determination that the first device is to be switched from a relaxed measurement mode to a non-relaxed measurement mode, performing the measurement in the non-relaxed measurement mode based on the one or more parameters” is anticipated by the UE that exits (switches from) the relaxed RLM/BFD measurement state (relaxed measurement mode) and reverts back to a normal RLM/BFD measurement state (non-relaxed measurement mode) in the event that (based on) one or more of the relax criteria (parameters) A2, B2, C2, D2 are fulfilled as spoken of on pages 3-4, paragraphs [0037]-[0038]; where the UE 201 includes a measurement state transition handling circuit 293 that handles normal state and relaxed state transition based on the relax criteria, and a measurement circuit 294 that performs relaxed or normal RLM/BFD measurements (compensated measurement for delay) accordingly as spoken of on page 2, paragraph [0026].
Regarding claim 32, “wherein determining the one or more parameters comprises: receiving a configuration for compensating the delay from a second device; and determining the one or more parameters from the configuration” is anticipated by base station 202 (second device) of Figure 2 that includes an RLM/BFD configuration circuit 283 that configures RLM and BFD and corresponding measurements for UEs and communicates with UEs (receives configuration) to implement the RLM/BFD functionalities as spoken of on page 2, paragraph [0024].
Regarding claim 33, “wherein the second device comprises a network device” is anticipated by the base station 102 (network device) of wireless network 100 of Figure 1.
Regarding claim 38, “wherein the first device comprises a terminal device” is anticipated by the UE 101 (terminal device) of wireless network 100 of Figure 1.
Regarding claim 39, “a non-transitory computer readable medium comprising program instructions that, when executed by an apparatus, cause an apparatus to perform at least the following: determining one or more parameters for compensating a delay associated with at least one evaluation of a measurement, the measurement comprising at least one of the following: a radio link monitoring, or a beam failure detection” is anticipated by the UE 201 (apparatus) of Figure 2 that includes a processor 232 coupled to a memory 231 (non-transitory computer readable medium) including a program 236 (program instructions) as spoken of on page 2, paragraph [0025]; where the UE will exit a radio link monitoring/beam failure detection (RLM/BFD) measurement relaxation when any condition of relax criteria (parameters for compensating delay) A2, B2, C2, and/or D2 is fulfilled, where the relax criteria A2 is SINR/SNR channel condition of a serving cell/beam, the relax criteria B2 is UE speed based on SINR/SNR variation, the relax criteria C2 is RSRP channel condition of a serving cell, and the relax criteria D2 is UE speed based on RSRP variation as spoken of on pages 3-4, paragraphs [0037]-[0038]; and where a time interval between each measurement for the relaxed RLM/BFD measurement state is K times longer than (delay associated with evaluation of measurement) a time interval for a normal RLM/BFD measurement state as spoken of on page 4 (see claim 10).
Lastly, “in accordance with a determination that the first device is to be switched from a relaxed measurement mode to a non-relaxed measurement mode, perform the measurement compensation in the non-relaxed measurement mode based on the one or more parameters” is anticipated by the UE that exits (switches from) the relaxed RLM/BFD measurement state (relaxed measurement mode) and reverts back to a normal RLM/BFD measurement state (non-relaxed measurement mode) in the event that (based on) one or more of the relax criteria (parameters) A2, B2, C2, D2 are fulfilled as spoken of on pages 3-4, paragraphs [0037]-[0038]; where the UE 201 includes a measurement state transition handling circuit 293 that handles normal state and relaxed state transition based on the relax criteria, and a measurement circuit 294 that performs relaxed or normal RLM/BFD measurements (compensated measurement for delay) accordingly as spoken of on page 2, paragraph [0026].
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.
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.
Claim(s) 22 and 31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang in view of Thangarasa et al. (U.S. 2023/0397282) (hereinafter “Thangarasa”).
Regarding claims 22 and 31, Huang teaches claims 21 and 30 as described above. Huang does not explicitly teach “wherein the first device is caused to determine the one or more parameters by: determining a first time interval within which an indication of out-of-sync is transmitted from a lower layer of the first device to an upper layer of the first device; determining a second time interval of a timer associated with the measurement; and determining the one or more parameters based on the at least one evaluation, the first and the second time intervals.
However, Thangarasa teaches a method for adapting a radio link procedure for UE power saving where a UE is evaluating radio link monitoring and different radio link monitoring indications are triggered and send to higher layers, where the UE stays in normal mode and operates the radio link procedures according to normal procedures during time period B and C since out-of-sync indications are triggered during time period B (first time interval) and an radio link failure timer is running during time period C (second time interval) as shown in Figure 4 and spoken of on page 9, paragraph [0138].
Given the above references, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to apply the use of time periods related to out-of-sync indications and a radio link failure timer as taught in Thangarasa to the radio link monitoring system of Huang in order to provide effective detection that radio conditions are poor (e.g. SNR level has decreased or decreased more than a certain threshold) such that the UE may determine whether to enter or exit a power saving mode as spoken of on page 9, paragraph [0138] of Thangarasa as well as page 4, paragraphs [0039]-[0040] of Huang.
Claim(s) 25 and 34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang in view of Hu (U.S. 2024/0196333).
Regarding claims 25 and 34, Huang teaches claims 21 and 30 as described above. Huang does not explicitly teach “wherein the one or more parameters comprising: a first compensation value for a threshold value of a counter associated with the measurement; or a second compensation value for duration of a timer associated with the measurement”.
However, Hu teaches a method and system for relaxation measurement in a beam failure detection (BFD) environment where in response to the physical layer of a terminal receiving BFD timer information (second compensation value for duration of timer) of the MAC layer, the BFD timer information indicating that the BFD timer has not been started and the block error rate BLER is less than or equal to a BLER threshold, it is determined to trigger the physical layer to perform a relaxed measurement of BFD, the BLER corresponds to the currently measured SINR (parameter) as spoken of on page 4, paragraph [0077].
Given the above references, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to apply the usage of BFD timer information in relation to a BFD timer as taught in Hu to the radio link monitoring system of Huang in order to improve the beam failure detection in the system by utilizing a timer set to a finite interval of time, thereby ensuring beam failure detection capability while reducing resource usage from continuously monitoring for failures as spoken of on page 4, paragraphs [0077]-[0078] of Hu.
Claim(s) 26 and 35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang in view of Niu et al. (U.S. 2024/0073728) (hereinafter “Niu”).
Regarding claims 26 and 35, Huang teaches claims 21 and 30 as described above. Huang does not explicitly teach “wherein the first device is further caused to: transmit, to a second device, an indication of a capability for compensating the delay”.
However, Niu teaches a method of relaxing evaluation of radio link quality where a terminal device 120 transmits capability information to the network device 110, where the capability information indicates a capability to relax evaluation (capability related to delay compensation) of a radio link as spoken of on page 4, paragraph [0054].
Given the above references, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to apply the capability information transmission taught in Niu to the radio link monitoring system of Huang in order to improve the radio link monitoring in the system by providing explicit indication of capability for relaxed measurement such that the network knows beforehand whether or not relaxed measurement is supported as spoken of on page 4, paragraph [0054] of Niu.
Claim(s) 27, 28, 36, and 37 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang in view of Dong et al. (U.S. 2023/0156508) (hereinafter “Dong”).
Regarding claims 27, 28, 36, and 37, Huang teaches claims 21 and 30 as described above. Huang does not explicitly teach “wherein the measurement comprises the radio link monitoring, and wherein the first device is caused to perform the measurement by: determining a reference time interval for triggering the radio link failure during the radio link monitoring by at least partially compensating the delay based on the one or more parameters; and performing the radio link monitoring based on the reference time interval” or “wherein the measurement is beam failure detection, and wherein the first device is caused to perform the measurement by: determining a reference time interval for triggering the beam failure during the beam failure detection by at least partially compensating the delay based on the one or more parameters; and performing the beam failure detection based on the reference time interval”.
However, Dong teaches a method and device for managing measurement of radio link quality using relaxed measurement where a UE 102 may be configured with (determined) two monitoring timers that use a first indication period (reference time interval) in a relaxed measurement and a second indication period (reference time interval) in a non-relaxed measurement as spoken of on page 4, paragraphs [0034]-[0035].
Given the above references, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to apply the use of multiple indication periods for radio link failure detection and beam failure detection as taught in Dong to the radio link monitoring system of Huang in order to address the negative impact on radio link failure detection and beam failure detection caused by relaxed measurement by ensuring that enough time is provided to detect failures as spoken of on page 4, paragraph [0034] of Dong.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. References considered relevant to this application are listed in the attached “Notice of References Cited” (PTO-892).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL J. MOORE, JR., whose telephone number is (571)272-3168. The examiner can normally be reached M-F (9am-4pm).
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.
/MICHAEL J MOORE JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2467
Prosecution Insights