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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
In communications filed on 6/12/2026, claims 1-20 are presented for examination. Claims 1, 11, and 20 are independent.
Amended claim(s): 1, 9, and 19.
Applicants’ arguments, see Applicant Arguments/Remarks filed 6/12/2026, with respect to claim(s) rejected under prior art have been fully considered but are not persuasive. Applicant argues the Park does not disclose the claimed invention allegedly because “claimed invention neither requires knowledge of another device's DRX configuration nor reports another device's DRX status to the network.” See Ramarks filed 6/12/26. However, the claimed invention requires the UE to “determining whether the user equipment receives a Acknowledge (ACK) signal; counting time or counter, after the ACK signal is received”. In other words the claimed invention works based on receiving a signal from another device. As such Applicant’s arguments have no merit. Park discloses all the elements as claimed.
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 20240397578 A1 (hereinafter ‘Park’).
As regards claim 1, Park (US 20240397578 A1) discloses: A controlling method for a user equipment which is a communication device (Park: Fig. 1, ¶5), comprising: setting a waiting section for receiving a retransmission (RETX) grant signal or a Negative Acknowledgement (NACK) signal; (Park: ¶5-¶6, ¶189, i.e., setting up retransmission signal timer)
determining whether the user equipment receives a Acknowledge (ACK) signal; (Park: Fig. 6, ¶87, ¶189, i.e., receiving HARQ ACK/NACK)
counting time or counter, after the ACK signal is received; (Park: ¶202, i.e., timer counter once HARQ ACK/NACK received)
determining whether the waiting section is reached; and (Park: ¶202-¶208, i.e., timer counter reaches a scheduled period)
stopping monitoring a Physical Downlink Control Channel (PDCCH) and/or a Physical Hybrid ARQ Indicator Channel (PHICH), after the waiting section is reached. (Park: ¶202-¶208, i.e., stop monitoring PDCCH/PHICH for HARQ)
Claims 11 and 20 recite substantially the same features recited in claim 1 above and are rejected based on the rationale discussed in the rejection.
As regards claim 2, Park discloses the controlling method for the user equipment according to claim 1, wherein the waiting section for receiving the RETX grant signal or the NACK signal is trained in advance. (Park: ¶5-¶6, ¶189)
Claim 12 recites substantially the same features recited in claim 2 above and is rejected based on the rationale discussed in the rejection.
As regards claim 3, Park discloses the controlling method for the user equipment according to claim 1, wherein the waiting section for receiving the RETX grant signal or the NACK signal is default. (Park: ¶202-¶208)
Claim 13 recites substantially the same features recited in claim 3 above and is rejected based on the rationale discussed in the rejection.
As regards claim 4, Park discloses the controlling method for the user equipment according to claim 1, wherein the waiting section for receiving the RETX grant signal or the NACK signal is two HARQ transmission responses. (Park: ¶146)
Claim 14 recites substantially the same features recited in claim 4 above and is rejected based on the rationale discussed in the rejection.
As regards claim 5, Park discloses the controlling method for the user equipment according to claim 1, wherein the waiting section for receiving the RETX grant signal or the NACK signal is one HARQ transmission response. (Park: ¶145)
Claim 15 recites substantially the same features recited in claim 5 above and is rejected based on the rationale discussed in the rejection.
As regards claim 6, Park discloses the controlling method for the user equipment according to claim 1, wherein the waiting section for receiving the RETX grant signal or the NACK signal is zero HARQ transmission response. (Park: ¶153-¶154)
Claim 16 recites substantially the same features recited in claim 6 above and is rejected based on the rationale discussed in the rejection.
As regards claim 7, Park discloses the controlling method for the user equipment according to claim 1, wherein in a UL HARQ cycle, one of a plurality of HARQ transmission responses is not monitored. (Park: ¶90-¶100, ¶153-¶180)
Claim 17 recites substantially the same features recited in claim 7 above and is rejected based on the rationale discussed in the rejection.
As regards claim 8, Park discloses the controlling method for the user equipment according to claim 1, wherein in a UL HARQ cycle, not all of a plurality of HARQ transmission responses are monitored. (Park: ¶90-¶100, ¶153-¶180)
Claim 18 recites substantially the same features recited in claim 8 above and is rejected based on the rationale discussed in the rejection.
As regards claim 9, Park discloses the controlling method for the user equipment according to claim 1, wherein in a UL HARQ cycle, the user equipment is not waked up for all of a plurality of HARQ transmission responses. (Park: ¶202)
Claim 19 recites substantially the same features recited in claim 9 above and is rejected based on the rationale discussed in the rejection.
As regards claim 10, Park discloses the controlling method for the user equipment UE according to claim 1, wherein the DRX active time includes the time while: - onDurationTimer or drx-InactivityTimer or drx-RetransmissionTimer or drx-RetransmissionTimerShortTTI or drx-ULRetransmissionTimer or drx-ULRetransmissionTimerShortTTI or mac-ContentionResolutionTimer is running; or (Park: Park: ¶202-¶208) - a Scheduling Request is sent on PUCCH/SPUCCH and is pending; or - an uplink grant for a pending HARQ retransmission can occur and there is data in the corresponding HARQ buffer for synchronous HARQ process; or - a PDCCH indicating a new transmission addressed to the C-RNTI of the MAC entity has not been received after successful reception of a Random Access Response for the preamble not selected by the MAC entity ; or mpdcch-UL-HARQ-ACK-FeedbackConfig is configured and repetitions within a bundle are being transmitted according to UL_REPETITION_NUMBER.
Conclusion
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 SYED A ZAIDI whose telephone number is (571)270-5995. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday: 5:30AM-5:30PM.
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, Jeffrey Nickerson can be reached at (469) 295-9235. 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.
/SYED A ZAIDI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2432
Prosecution Insights