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 .
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)(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) 5-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Liu (US 2024/0276381)
Regarding Claim 5, Liu teaches a user equipment (UE), comprising a processor, configured to call and run program instructions stored in a memory (¶ [0117], see specifically memory), to execute:
receiving an indication of availability of Tracking Reference Signal (TRS) occasion in an idle/inactive state from a base station (BS) through Layer 1 (L1) based signaling (¶ [0002], see specifically paging DCI) in at least one of the following:
(a) whenever the UE is camped on a same serving cell for at least two paging occasions (POs); and
(b) upon receiving an indication that system information has changed but the UE still remains camped on the same serving cell (¶ [0002], see specifically paging DCI).
Regarding Claim 6, Liu teaches UE according to claim 5, wherein the indication of availability of TRS occasion is carried by paging Early Indication (PEI) when the UE is paging in non-consecutive way in successive PO of a paging frame (¶ [0054] – [0057], see specifically PEI.)
Regarding Claim 7, Liu teaches the indication of availability of TRS occasion is carried by paging Downlink Control Information (DCI) when the UE is paging in consecutive way in successive PO of a paging frame (¶ [0002], see specifically paging DCI)
Regarding Claim 8, Liu teaches the indication of availability of TRS occasion is per cell based (¶ [0036], see specifically SIB at a cell level.)
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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.
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) 1-4 and 23-26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiaomi (3GPP R2-2102863) in view of Koskela (US 2024/0039669).
Regarding Claim 1 and 23, Xaiomi teaches a user equipment (UE), to execute:
receiving an indication of availability of Tracking Reference Signal (TRS) occasion in an idle/inactive state from a base station (BS) through System Information Block (SIB) based signaling (page 4, ¶ 2, see specifically idle/inactive UE’s) in at least one of the following:
(a) whenever the UE does not have a valid version of a stored SIB which is used to configure TRS resource;
(b) upon cell selection or cell-reselection performed by the UE (page 3, section 2.2, see specifically sell selection, cell selection, return from out of coverage); and
(c) when the UE returns from out of coverage (page 3, section 2.2, see specifically sell selection, cell selection, return from out of coverage);
Xaiomi fails to explicitly teach teaches a user equipment (UE), comprising a processor, configured to call and run program instructions stored in a memory.
Koskela from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches a user equipment (UE), comprising a processor, configured to call and run program instructions stored in a memory (¶ [0097], see specifically memory.)
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of telecommunications at the time of the filing of the invention to use the system of Koskela to send the SIB based information about TRS availability on a group level in the system of Xaiomi as taught by the system of Koskela.
The motivation is that using groups of devices allows for the organization of various devices that are related in order to signal availability to some devices in a particular way but not others in the same way.
Regarding Claim 2 and 24, Xiaomi teaches the indication of availability of TRS occasion is associated to presence or absence of a same SIB_X which is used to configure the TRS resource (page 4, ¶ 2 see specifically sib-x)
Regarding Claim 3 and 25, Xiaomi teaches the indication of availability of TRS occasion is configured by a bit carried by SIB_X which is used to configure the same TRS resource (page 4, ¶ 2 see specifically sib-x. note: examiner submits that all data is in the form of bits, and therefore any TRS resource in a data message would be based on one or more bits).
With respect to Claim 4 and 26, Xaiomi fails to explicitly teach the indication of availability of TRS occasion is per paging group based.
Koskela from the same or similar field of endeavor the indication of availability of TRS occasion is per paging group based (¶ [0097], see specifically memory.)
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of telecommunications at the time of the filing of the invention to use the system of Koskela to send the SIB based information about TRS availability on a group level in the system of Xaiomi as taught by the system of Koskela.
The motivation is that using groups of devices allows for the organization of various devices that are related in order to signal availability to some devices in a particular way but not others in the same way.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT M MORLAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5674. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 10 AM - 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, Hadi Armouche can be reached at 571-270-3618. 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 M MORLAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2409
ROBERT M. MORLAN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2409