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 .
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) 1, 4-7, 9, 12-15, 17, 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Uemura et al. (US 2026/0032773 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Uemura discloses the method comprising: configuring, by a base station (BS), a user equipment (UE) (see [0135], “the base station device 20 notifies (configures, instructs, and transmits) the terminal device”) with a cell discontinuous transmission (DTX)/discontinuous reception (DRX) configuration (see [0135], configures Cell DTX/DRX) defined by a DTX/DRX periodicity (see [0135], “consider a period in which the cell active period on duration timer is running as the active period of Cell DTX/DRX”), a DTX/DRX starting slot or offset (see [0132], “ started from a timing (time T90) at which an offset”), and a DTX/DRX active period (see [0132], “DTX/DRX active period ”); and
enabling or disabling, by the BS, the cell DTX/DRX configuration at the UE (see [0123], “the Cell DTX/DRX configuration, the base station device 20 may dynamically instruct enabling, disabling, or switching of the configuration according to a traffic volume, the number of connected terminal devices”).
Regarding claims 9 and 17, a method and user equipment (UE) comprising:
a processor (processor, fig. 2); and
a non-transitory computer readable storage medium storing instructions (see memory [0050]) that,
when executed, cause the processor to:
receiving, by a user equipment (UE) (see [0103], “ the base station device 20 notifies (configures, instructs, transmits) the terminal device”), a cell discontinuous transmission
(DTX)/discontinuous reception (DRX) configuration from a base station (BS) (see cell DTX/DRX from base station [01119]), wherein the cell DTX/DRX configuration is defined by a DTX/DRX periodicity (see period [0132]), a DTX/DRX starting slot (see started and offset [0132]) or offset, and a DTX/DRX active period;
receiving, from the BS, a signal to enable or disable (see “whether or not to enable the Cell DTX/DRX ” [0120]) the cell DTX/DRX configuration at the UE (see Terminal device fig. 7); and
enabling or disabling the cell DTX/DRX configuration at the UE based on the signal (see see “whether or not to enable the Cell DTX/DRX ” [0120] on terminal device).
Regarding claims 4 and 12, Uemura discloses the methods of claim 1 and 9, wherein, in an inactive period of the cell DTX/DRX configuration, the UE is configured to suspend at least one of periodic and semi-persistent channel state information (CSI) measurements (stops reporting CSI, [0061]), beam management procedures, and periodic and semi-persistent CSI reports (see [0061], “stops periodic or semi-periodic uplink transmission”).
Regarding claims 5 and 13, Uemura discloses the methods of claim 1 and 9, wherein a message exchange between the UE and the BS for a random access channel (RACH) procedure continues through an inactive period of the cell DTX/DRX configuration (see [0080], “The terminal device may transmit a specific random access channel even in the inactive period).
Regarding claims 6 and 14, Uemura discloses the method of claim 5 and 13, wherein, in the inactive period of the cell DTX/DRX configuration, the UE monitors a PDCCH for a random access response (RAR) or a contention resolution message of the RACH procedure (see Random access response [0140]).
Regarding claims 7 and 15, Uemura discloses the method of claim 1 and 9, further comprising configuring, by the BS, the UE to monitor (see monitor [0060]) periodic occasions in an inactive period (see inactive period [0060]) of the cell DTX/DRX configuration for data with low latency requirements, wherein the periodic occasions comprise PDCCH occasions (see PDCCH [0060]) or uplink (UL) wake-up signal occasions.
Regarding claim 19, Uemura discloses the UE of claim 17, wherein:
a message exchange between the UE and the BS for a random-access channel (RACH)
procedure continues through an inactive period of the cell DTX/DRX configuration (see [0080], “The terminal device may transmit a specific random access channel even in the inactive period); or
the instructions further cause the processor to monitor periodic occasions in an inactive
period of the cell DTX/DRX configuration for data with low latency requirements, wherein the
periodic occasions comprise PDCCH occasions (see PDCCH [0060]) or uplink (UL) wake-up signal occasions.
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.
Claim(s) 2 & 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uemura in view of Lei et al. (US 2021/0243609 A1).
Regarding claims 2 & 10; Uemura discloses the methods of claim 1 and claim 9, wherein enabling or disabling the cell DTX/DRX configuration comprises enabling a cell DTX configuration, wherein in an inactive period of the cell DTX configuration (see [0132], “inactive period of Cell DTX/DRX.”),
Uemura does not specifically disclose however Lei discloses the UE is configured to suspend monitoring of a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) (see [0094], discloses “suspend monitoring the PDCCH”);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to combine the teachings of Uemura with that of Lei. Doing so would improve the co-existence of RATs and improve redundancy ([0099], Lei).
Claims 3 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uemura in view of Kung et al. (US 2022/0352964 A1).
Regarding claim 3 & 11, Uemura discloses the methods of claim 1 and 9,
wherein enabling or disabling the cell DTX/DRX configuration comprises enabling a cell DRX configuration (s), wherein in an inactive period of the cell DRX configuration (see inactive period [0113]),
Uemura does not disclose however Kung discloses the UE is configured to suspend configured grant (CG)-physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) transmissions (see suspend configured uplink grants of configured grant [0144]) and suspend scheduling request (SR) transmissions (stop transmitting scheduling requests [0357]);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to combine the teachings of Uemura with that of Lei. Doing so would conform to well-known standards in the field of invention.
Claims 8, 16 & 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uemura in view of Dimou et al. (US 2024/0259849 A1).
Regarding claims 8, 16 & 20, Uemura discloses the methods of claim 1, 9 & 17, wherein the UE is configured with a connected mode (C)-DRX configuration, and the UE maintains the C-DRX (see C-DRX, [0083]) configuration in an inactive period of the C-DRX configuration that overlaps an active period of the cell DTX/DRX configuration ([0083], overlap with inactive and active).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to combine the teachings of Uemura with that of Dimou. Doing so would reduce energy consumed (see [0082]).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uemura in view of Lei et al. (US 2021/0243609 A1) in further view of Kung et al. (US 2022/0352964 A1).
Regarding claim 18, Uemura discloses the UE of claim 17, wherein:
in enabling or disabling the cell DTX/DRX configuration (see enabling [0120]), the instructions cause the
processor to enable a cell DTX configuration at the UE (see enable [0120]),
in enabling or disabling the cell DTX/DRX configuration, the instructions cause the
processor to enable a cell DRX configuration at the UE (see enable [0120]),
), and
the instructions further cause the processor to suspend at least one of periodic and semi-
persistent channel state information (CSI) measurements (stops reporting CSI, [0061]), beam management procedures, and periodic and semi-persistent CSI reports in an inactive period of the cell DTX/DRX configuration (see [0061], “stops periodic or semi-periodic uplink transmission”).
Uemura does not specifically disclose however Lei discloses and the instructions further cause the processor to suspend monitoring of a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) in an inactive period of the cell DTX configuration(PDCCH) (see [0094], discloses “suspend monitoring the PDCCH”);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to combine the teachings of Uemura with that of Lei. Doing so would improve the co-existence of RATs and improve redundancy ([0099], Lei); or
Uemura in view of Kang do not explicitly disclose the instructions further cause the processor
to suspend configured grant (CG)-physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) ((see suspend configured uplink grants of configured grant [0144])) transmissions and scheduling request (SR) transmissions in an inactive period of the cell DRX configuration (stop transmitting scheduling requests [0357]); or
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to combine the teachings of Uemura with that of Lei. Doing so would conform to well-known standards in the field of invention.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.Babaci (US 2024/0267987 A1)
Cheng et al. (US 2024/0284551 A1)
Zhou et al. (US 2025/0280466 A1)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to K. WILFORD SHAHEED whose telephone number is (469) 295-9175. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9 am-6pm; CST; ALT Friday. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. The examiner’s Supervisor, Jinsong Hu, can be reached at (571)272-3965, where attempts to reach the examiner are unsuccessful.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/KHALID W SHAHEED/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2643