CTFR 18/609,922 CTFR 75439 Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments filed 16 April 2026 with respect to the claim objection and the double patenting rejection have been fully considered and are persuasive. The claim objection and double patenting rejection have been withdrawn. Applicant's remaining arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argued the claims have distinct power saving advantages not provided by the references used in the rejection. However, Examiner disagrees. Sun discloses saving power in a RRC inactive mode (para. 62) or an idle mode (para. 39, fourth and fifth sentences). Fujishiro discloses DRX as reducing power consumption (para. 165, third sentence. Barakat discloses DRX as having low-power (para. 3) and power saving communication techniques (para. 75, last sentence). The combination of references provides for power savings of an RRC inactive state, paging occasions and DRX monitoring. 07-37-08 Additionally, in response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., power savings) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns , 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Applicant argued the combination of references fails to disclose or suggest the limitations of claims 1 and 9 as a whole. However, Examiner disagrees based on the teachings and motivations of the references as noted in the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection below. Sun discloses an RRC inactive state where short communication is performed without granting resources in order to save on signaling overhead and the UE is able to receive an acknowledgement to an uplink transmission (figs. 5-6; paras. 5, 39 (last sentence), 44 (second sentence), 62 and 68). Also, Sun teaches and makes obvious a user equipment is reachable by a mobile terminating data notification (para. 39; note: paging during an RRC inactive state). Sun fails to disclose an RRC inactive state is in response to an instruction from a radio access network node. Fujishiro discloses and provides motivation for a command (instruction) to change to an RRC low activity state (fig. 6, steps S1 and S6; fig. 7, steps S11 and S15; paras. 53 and 71). Additionally, Sun in view of Fujishiro fails to teach and make obvious in response to detecting at least one condition, wherein the at least one condition is a paging occasion in a paging cycle, entering a discontinuous reception active state for monitoring for one or more messages intended for the user equipment. However, these limitations are taught and made obvious by Barakat as an RRC inactive state and in response to detecting at least one condition, wherein the at least one condition is a paging occasion in a paging cycle (fig. 5; paras. 57-58), entering a discontinuous reception active state for monitoring for one or more messages intended for the user equipment (paras. 57-58). Therefore, the reference combination fairly teaches and makes obvious the claimed invention as a whole. Applicant argued Sun fails to disclose how its embodiments are applied to LTE. However, Examiner disagrees. Sun discloses the invention can operate with different standards including non-cellular standards (para. 25). The grant-free operation is a sole embodiment of Sun (figs. 5-6) and not an obvious addition using other embodiments or references. Sun fairly teaches how figs. 5-6 use system signaling to configure a UE to enter an inactive mode and transmit grant-free uplink signaling. Applicant argued the combination of references including Fuijishiro fails to teach and make obvious a command to change to idle mode. However, Examiner disagrees. The embodiment of Fujishiro used for the rejection is a command to enter an inactive state having reduced signaling (para. 53, third sentence). The embodiment of paras. 49-50 mentioned by Applicant include embodiments of a reduced signaling state (last sentence) and a no signaling state (penultimate sentence) as alternatives. In Sun a UE enters an inactive state after some time (para. 62) which is amenable to have a command for entering the state. Therefore, the combination of Sun in view of Fujishiro fairly teaches and makes obvious an RRC inactive or idle state in response to an instruction as claimed. Applicant argued the combination of references including Barakat fails to teach and make obvious the paging conditions of the claimed invention due to additional teachings of diversity reception. However, Examiner disagrees. The particulars of monitoring of a paging channel of Barakat (paras. 57-58 and fig. 5, step 502) does not require the particulars of enabling diversity (steps 506-510). No parts of monitoring a paging channel (step 502) include the diversity reception (step 510) that occurs at a later time after monitoring has stopped (steps 504-508). One skilled in the art would recognize the teachings of fig. 5, steps 502 and 510 are separate steps despite being shown in the same flow diagram. The rejection uses only the monitoring step of Barakat to make obvious the claimed limitations for paging occasions and DRX. Therefore, the combination of Sun in view of Fujishiro and Barakat fairly teaches and makes obvious the claimed invention. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1, 5, 8-9, 16 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun et al. (US 2018//0092125 as supported by U.S. Provisional application No. 62/399,148) in view of Fujishiro et al. (US 2019/0174570) and Barakat et al. (US 2014/0200040). For dependent claims herein, the motivation to combine is the same as the parent claim unless otherwise noted . Regarding claim 1, Sun discloses a method, comprising: while in RRC inactive or idle state (fig. 5, steps 530-565; fig. 6, steps 620-675; paras. 62 and 68), wherein a user equipment is configured to operate according to a grant-free uplink transmission scheme (step 535 or 625) and is able to receive acknowledgement in response to an uplink data transmission (step 540 or 630). However, the embodiment of Sun fails to disclose wherein a user equipment is reachable by a mobile terminating data notification, but another embodiment discloses this feature (para. 39; note: paging during an RRC inactive state). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have an RRC inactive state wherein a user equipment is reachable by a mobile terminating data notification in the embodiment of Sun. The motivation to have the modification and/or well-known benefits of the modification include, but are not limited to, providing data notifications for a device as is known in the art (Sun, para. 39; MPEP 2143(I)(A)(B)(C)(D) - note: e.g., applying known techniques having predictable results). Further, Sun fails to disclose an RRC inactive state is in response to an instruction from a radio access network node. However, Fujishiro discloses a command to change to an RRC low activity state (fig. 6, steps S1 and S6; fig. 7, steps S11 and S15; paras. 53 and 71). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have an RRC inactive state in response to an instruction from a radio access network node in the invention of Sun. The motivation to have the modification and/or well-known benefits of the modification include, but are not limited to, providing device control as is known in the art (Fujishiro, figs. 6-7 and para. 53 and 71; MPEP 2143(I)(A)(B)(C)(D) - note: e.g., applying known techniques having predictable results). Further, Sun in view of Fujishiro fails to teach and make obvious in response to detecting at least one condition, wherein the at least one condition is a paging occasion in a paging cycle, entering a discontinuous reception active state for monitoring for one or more messages intended for the user equipment. Barakat discloses in an RRC inactive state and in response to detecting at least one condition, wherein the at least one condition is a paging occasion in a paging cycle (fig. 5; paras. 57-58; note: paging monitoring during an RRC inactive (idle) state; note: paging occasions occurring in conjunction with a DRX cycle; note: paging channel at specific scheduled periodic occasions), entering a discontinuous reception active state for monitoring for one or more messages intended for the user equipment (paras. 57-58; note: monitoring for paging during an active portion of a DRX cycle). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have in response to detecting at least one condition, wherein the at least one condition is a paging occasion in a paging cycle, entering a discontinuous reception active state for monitoring for one or more messages intended for the user equipment in the invention of Sun in view of Fujishiro. The motivation to have the modification and/or well-known benefits of the modification include, but are not limited to, implementing timed communication operations and providing power savings as is known in the art (Barakat, paras. 57-58; note: DRX for powering down components and, alternatively, performing periodic communication; MPEP 2143(I)(A)(B)(C)(D) - note: e.g., applying known techniques having predictable results). Regarding claim 5, Sun in view of Fujishiro and Barakat teaches and makes obvious the method according to claim 1, wherein the monitoring for one or more messages comprises monitoring a mobile terminating data notification (Barakat, paras. 57-58; note: monitoring for paging). Regarding claim 8, Sun in view of Fujishiro and Barakat teaches and makes obvious the method according to claim 1, wherein the user equipment is operating in a fifth generation or new radio network (Sun, para. 25), last sentence). Regarding claims 9, 16 and 19, these limitations are rejected on the same ground as claims 1, 5 and 8, respectively. In addition, Sun discloses the apparatus comprises a processor and a memory including computer code (fig. 3 and paras. 48-49) configured to perform the method of claims 1, 5 and 8 . 07-22-aia AIA Claim s 4, 6, 13-15 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun in view of Fujishiro and Barakat as applied to claim 1 or 9 above, and further in view of Xu et al. (US 2013/0308465) . Regarding claims 4, 6 and 14, Sun in view of Fujishiro and Barakat fails to teach and make obvious the method according to claim 1, wherein the user equipment is configured to restart a timer in response to determining that there is a message intended for the user equipment, the method according to claim 1, wherein the monitoring for one or more messages comprises monitoring a physical downlink control channel, and the method according to claim 4, wherein the timer comprises a discontinuous reception inactivity timer or a discontinuous reception retransmission timer . However, Xu discloses these features (fig. 5 and para. 58; note: reset an inactivity timer for DRX and monitoring for paging on a PDCCH). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the user equipment configured to restart a timer in response to determining that there is a message intended for the user equipment, and the monitoring for one or more messages comprises monitoring a physical downlink control channel, and wherein the timer comprises a discontinuous reception inactivity timer or a discontinuous reception retransmission timer in the invention of Sun in view of Fujishiro and Barakat. The motivation to have the modification and/or well-known benefits of the modification include, but are not limited to, physically realizing timed communication as is known in the art (Xu, para. 58; MPEP 2143(I)(A)(B)(C)(D) - note: e.g., applying known techniques having predictable results). Regarding claims 13, 15 and 17, these limitations are rejected on the same ground as claims 4, 14 and 6, respectively . 07-22-aia AIA Claim s 7 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun in view of Fujishiro, Barakat and Xu as applied to claim 6 or 17 above, and further in view of Gao (US 2010/0128646) . Regarding claim 7, Sun in view of Fujishiro, Barakat and Xu fails to teach and make obvious the method according to claim 6, wherein the monitoring the physical downlink control channel comprises monitoring for a paging radio network temporary identifier (P-RNTI) in order to check for the presence of a paging message. However, Gao discloses monitoring a physical downlink control channel by monitoring for a paging radio network temporary identifier (P- RNTI) in order to check for the presence of a paging message (para. 80, second and third sentences; para. 81, first sentence; para. 87, first sentence; fig. 6). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have monitoring the physical downlink control channel further comprise monitoring for a paging radio network temporary identifier (P- RNTI) in order to check for the presence of a paging message in the invention of Sun in view of Fujishiro, Barakat and Xu. The motivation to have the modification and/or well-known benefits of the modification include, but are not limited to, allowing a UE to determine whether or not data is destined for the UE (Gao, paras. 80-81 and 87; fig. 6; MPEP 2143(I)(A)(B)(C)(D) - note: e.g., applying known techniques having predictable results). Regarding claim 18, these limitations are rejected on the same ground as claim 7. Conclusion 07-39 AIA THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 Kevin Harper whose telephone number is 571-272-3166. The examiner can normally be reached weekdays from 11:00 AM to 7:00 PM ET. 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, Yemane Mesfin, can be reached at 571-272-3927. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. For non-official communications, the examiner’s e-mail address is kevin.harper@uspto.gov (MPEP 502.03 – A copy of all received emails relating to an application including proposed amendments and excluding scheduling information for interviews will be placed informally into the application file). 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. /Kevin C. Harper/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2462 Application/Control Number: 18/609,922 Page 2 Art Unit: 2462 Application/Control Number: 18/609,922 Page 3 Art Unit: 2462 Application/Control Number: 18/609,922 Page 4 Art Unit: 2462 Application/Control Number: 18/609,922 Page 5 Art Unit: 2462 Application/Control Number: 18/609,922 Page 6 Art Unit: 2462 Application/Control Number: 18/609,922 Page 7 Art Unit: 2462 Application/Control Number: 18/609,922 Page 8 Art Unit: 2462 Application/Control Number: 18/609,922 Page 9 Art Unit: 2462 Application/Control Number: 18/609,922 Page 10 Art Unit: 2462
Prosecution Insights