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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 06/26/2026 have been fully considered but are deemed unpersuasive.
The applicant’s arguments assert that Tie et al. (US 2026/0046779, “Tie”) does not teach or suggest “perform a cell reselection in accordance with receiving the one or more low-power synchronization signals while in the idle mode,” because Tie discloses waking a main radio circuit and conducting RRM measurements before performing cell reselection.
This arguments are not commensurate in scope with claims 1 and 16. Claims 1 and 16 recite receiving low-power (LP) synchronization signals (SS) via a second radio, which has lower power consumption than a first radio, while the UE is in idle mode, and performing cell reselection “in accordance with” receiving the LP-SS. Claims 1 and 16 do not recite that the first radio must remain disabled through the cell-reselection process; that reselection must be performed solely with the second radio; that the LP-SS must be the exclusive basis for reselection; or that the first radio cannot be activated and used for subsequent RRM measurement associated with reselection.
Tie teaches that when a terminal device enters an RRC idle state or RRC inactive state, the terminal device may set its main link to a disabled state and monitor a WUS from a base station by using a wake-up link. Tie further teaches that, after receiving the WUS using the wake-up link, the terminal device wakes the main link and performs processing including RRM measurement, paging-message transmission, cell reselection, and cell handover in [Tie, 0105]. Thus, Tie teaches a responsive cell-reselection sequence in which reception of a low-power wake-up signal through the wake-up link causes or leads to activation of the main link and cell reselection.
Accordingly, Tie’s use of a main radio for RRM measurement after receipt of the signal through the wake-up link does not conflict with, or fall outside the scope of, claims 1 and 16. Rather, the claimed “in accordance with receiving” language encompasses Tie’s disclosed sequence because the cell reselection occurs in response to – and as a result of – the UE receiving the wake-up signal through the wake-up link.
The rejection does not rely on Tie alone to teach all aspects of the claimed LP-SS arrangement. Chen teaches a UE configured with LP-SS resources, including time and frequency resources for LP-SS; a low-power mode; LP-SS detection/measurement; and an RRC idle or inactive operating context. Tie is relied upon for the known idle/inactive-state arrangement in which reception of a signal through a low-power wake-up link initiates the subsequent cell-reselection process.
It would have been obvious to a PHOSITA, at the time of the invention, to apply Tie’s idle/inactive-state, wake-up-link-triggered reselection procedure to Chen’s UE configured to receive LP-SS. The combination would predictably permit the UE to retain its normal/main radio in a disabled or low-power condition until reception of an LP-SS through the lower-power receiver indicates that further processing, including reselection-related processing, is appropriate. This modification would advance the shared power-saving objective identified by Tie-reducing terminal-device power consumption while retaining the LP-SS resource configuration and detection functions taught by Chen.
The applicant’s argument’s assertion that Tie teaches a “separate and distinct process” does not identify a limitation that excludes Tie’s sequence. Claims 1 and 16 neither prescribe a particular intermediate processing sequence after LP-SS receipt nor prohibit additional RRM measurement before final reselection. Therefore, the fact that Tie wakes the main link and performs RRM measurement before or as part of the cell reselection procedure does not distinguish the claims from the Chen-Tie combination.
Therefore, the Applicant’s arguments overall are deemed unpersuasive, and the previous rejections are hereby maintained.
The applicant also presented other arguments drawn to the various dependent claims. However, said other arguments are all dependency based, depending from the arguments drawn to the independent claims’ limitations discussed above.
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) 1-2, 8-9, 12-13 and 16-17 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (US 2025/0184898, “Chen”) in view of Tie et al. (US 2026/0046779, “Tie”).
Examiner’s note: in what follows, references are drawn to Chen unless otherwise mentioned.
Chen comprises the following features:
With respect to independent claims:
Regarding claim 1, a user equipment (UE), comprising: one or more memories storing processor-executable code ([0308] “The memory 1610 stores at least a part of a program 1630.”); and one or more processors coupled with the one or more memories (See Fig. 16 for 1610 “Processor” and 1620 “Memory”) and individually or collectively operable to execute the code to cause the UE to:
receive, via a first radio of the UE, an indication of one or more resources for reception of low-power synchronization signals associated with a second radio of the UE ([0067 and Fig. 2A] “the terminal device 120 may be indicated a set of PRBs or subcarriers, and the frequency resources of the set of PRBs or subcarriers are used by the LP signal 212.”, and [0089] “the network device 110 may configure or indicate to the terminal device 120 a set of time resources of the LP-SS.”),
wherein the second radio is associated with lower power consumption than the first radio ([0058] “the terminal device 120 may be in an LP mode. In the context of the present disclose, the terms “LP mode”, “low power mode””);
receive, via the second radio, one or more low-power synchronization signals over the one or more resources in accordance with an idle mode of the UE ([0220] “the terminal device 120 may be in an RRC idle mode or an inactive mode. The terminal device 120 may measure the detected LP-SS (alternatively, the terminal device 120 may be configured to measure the LP-SS)”); and
perform a cell reselection in accordance with receiving the one or more low-power synchronization signals while in the idle mode ([0244] “in accordance with a determination that the terminal device 120 wakes up from the LP mode, the terminal device 120 selects a cell”. Note that cell selection in an idle mode will be discussed in view of Tie.),
wherein an association between the UE and one or more network entities is based at least in part on the cell reselection in accordance with receiving the one or more low-power synchronization signals ([0244] “in accordance with a determination that a first tracking area code associated with the selected cell is different from a second tracking area code associated with an initial cell in which before the terminal device 120 entering the LP mode, the terminal device 120 starts an initial access procedure.”).
It is noted that while disclosing LP-SS, Chen does not specifically teach about cell selection in an idle mode. It, however, had been known in the art before the effective date of the instant application as shown by Tie as follows;
cell (re)selection while in an idle mode ([Tie, 0105] “for entering the RRC idle state or the RRC inactive state, the terminal device may set the main link to enter the disabled state, and monitor the WUS from the base station by using the wake-up link. After receiving the WUS from the base station by using the wake-up link, the terminal device wakes up the main link, in other words, the main link enters the operating state, and the terminal device further performs processing processes such as RRM measurement, transmission of a paging message, cell reselection”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of instant application to modify Chen by using the features of Tie in order to reduce power consumption such that “this application provide a wake-up method, a neighboring cell measurement method, and an apparatus, to reduce power consumption of a terminal device.” [Tie, 0006].
Regarding claim 16, it is a method claim corresponding to the method claim 1, and is therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of claim 1.
With respect to dependent claims:
Regarding claims 2 and 17, the UE of claim 1 and the method of claim 16, respectively, wherein the one or more processors are individually or collectively further operable to execute the code to cause the UE to:
perform a received power measurement on a low-power synchronization signal of the one or more low-power synchronization signals while in the idle mode ([0145] “the plurality of signals in the LP-SS set may be utilized for beam measurement.”, and [0203] “the terminal device 120 may measure the signal quality of the LP-SS, and determine whether it is out of the coverage of the LP-SS based on the measurement results. In some example embodiments, the measurement results may be at least one of the metrics: a receive signal strength indicator (RSSI), a power ratio, or an SNR.”), wherein performing the cell reselection is based at least in part on the received power measurement ([0245] “a determination that the terminal device 120 is configured to measure a detected LP synchronization signal and is in a RRC connected mode, the terminal device 120 transmits a report to the network device 110, where the report includes at least one of: a measurement result based on the LP synchronization signal”, and [0246] “in accordance with a determination that the terminal device 120 is in the coverage and is in a RRC idle mode or an inactive mode, the terminal device 120 starts an initial access procedure.”).
Regarding claim 8, the UE of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are individually or collectively further operable to execute the code to cause the UE to:
determine whether to perform measurements on low-power synchronization signals or synchronization signal blocks received on a serving cell based at least in part on a signal strength of the one or more low-power synchronization signals or a signal strength of one or more synchronization signal blocks, or both ([0204] “the RSSI may be an RSSI of LP-SS or LP-WUS. For example, the RSSI may be measured based on the signal strength of the OOK on-symbols in the LP signal (such as LP-SS).”).
Regarding claim 9, the UE of claim 8, wherein the one or more processors are individually or collectively further operable to execute the code to cause the UE to: perform received power measurements on the low-power synchronization signals based at least in part on the signal strength of the one or more low-power synchronization signals satisfying a first threshold ([0196] “the terminal device 120 may determine that the terminal device 120 is out of the coverage of the LP-SS based on at least one of: … a received signal strength of the LP-SS lower than a threshold strength”).
Regarding claim 12, the UE of claim 1, wherein, to receive the indication of the one or more resources, the one or more processors are individually or collectively operable to execute the code to cause the UE to:
receive, on a serving cell, system information that indicates a time and frequency location of resources for reception of low-power synchronization signals on the serving cell, or a non-serving cell, or both, wherein the one or more resources are based at least in part on the time and frequency location ([0067] “an LP signal (LP-SS or LP-WUS) occupy a set of time/frequency resources for a serving cell. FIG. 2A illustrates a schematic diagram of resources 210 occupied by an LP signal which can be used in some example embodiments of the present disclosure. …, the terminal device 120 may be indicated a set of PRBs or subcarriers, and the frequency resources of the set of PRBs or subcarriers are used by the LP signal 212.”, and [0089] “the network device 110 may configure or indicate to the terminal device 120 a set of time resources of the LP-SS.”).
Regarding claim 13, the UE of claim 1, wherein, to receive the indication of the one or more resources, the one or more processors are individually or collectively operable to execute the code to cause the UE to:
receive, on a serving cell, system information that indicates a time and frequency location of resources for reception of synchronization signal blocks on the serving cell, or a non-serving cell, or both, wherein the one or more resources are based at least in part on the time and frequency location ([0096] “the LP-SS 322 is one of a plurality of signals associated with a plurality of transmit beams of the network device 110 or QCLed with a plurality of SSBs to be transmitted by the network device 110, respectively. In this case, the terminal device 120 may determine a TX beam or an index of SSB, based on the received LP-SS 322.”).
Claim(s) 6-7 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (US 2025/0184898, “Chen”) in view of Tie et al. (US 2026/0046779, “Tie”) and further in view of Huang (US 2023/0120407).
Examiner’s note: in what follows, references are drawn to Chen unless otherwise mentioned.
Regarding claim 6, the UE of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are individually or collectively further operable to execute the code to cause the UE to:
receive, via the first radio, system information that indicates a criterion for reception of the one or more low-power synchronization signals received on a serving cell ([0230] “the terminal device 120 receives, prior to entering the LP mode, an indication of an initial HFN in a serving cell”, [0231] “the indication of the initial HFN is transmitted by one of: system information, RRC signalling”, and [0232] “the terminal device 120 determines an initial HFN based on an instant when control information is received by the terminal device 120, the control information indicating the terminal device 120 to enter the LP mode”); and
monitor for the one or more low-power synchronization signals on the serving cell based at least in part on the criterion being satisfied ([0237] “the terminal device 120 enters the LP mode by switching off a main mode”),
wherein receiving the one or more low-power synchronization signals is based at least in part on the monitoring ([0240] “At block 1410, the terminal device 120 detects an LP synchronization signal from a network device 110.”).
It is noted that while disclosing LP-SS, Chen does not specifically teach about a criterion. It, however, had been known in the art before the effective date of the instant application as shown by Huang as follows;
indicate a criterion ([Huang, 0109] “when the UE entering INACTIVE state, and/or when no qualified beam (e.g. SSB or CSI-RS) with CG resource can be found, and/or the change of best beam or the change of qualified beam is changed, and/or the beam used in the current transmissions is no longer valid (e.g., below a threshold which can be configured in either system information or dedicated signaling before or when the UE entering INACTIVE state).”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of instant application to modify Chen by using the features of Huang in order to provide higher quality of service such that “The method also includes monitoring, after transmission of the first message, a control channel with a network temporary identifier for a response to the first message.” [Huang, 0005].
Regarding claim 7, the UE of claim 6, wherein the criterion corresponds to a threshold signal strength of synchronization signal blocks received on the serving cell (See aforesaid [Huang, 0109]), or a mobility state of the UE, or both (These alternatives are not examined.).
Claim(s) 11 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (US 2025/0184898, “Chen”) in view of Tie et al. (US 2026/0046779, “Tie”) and further in view of Zhang (US 2022/0353914).
Examiner’s note: in what follows, references are drawn to Chen unless otherwise mentioned.
Regarding claim 11, it is noted that while disclosing LP-SS, Chen does not specifically teach about measurements based on signal strength below a threshold. It, however, had been known in the art before the effective date of the instant application as shown by Zhang as follows;
the UE of claim 8, wherein, to receive the one or more low-power synchronization signals, the one or more processors are individually or collectively operable to execute the code to cause the UE to:
perform received power measurements on the synchronization signal blocks based at least in part on the signal strength of the one or more synchronization signal blocks failing to satisfy a third threshold ([Zhang, 0133] “The wireless communication device may determine that each of the one or more SSBs and/or CSI-RSs has a RSRP that meets or exceeds (e.g., equal to and/or higher than) a first threshold. The wireless communication device may determine that each of the one or more SSBs and/or CSI-RSs has a RSSI that is below (e.g., less than and/or equal to) a second threshold.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of instant application to modify Chen by using the features of Zhang in order to facilitate enablement of different data services such that “the wireless communication device may identify a plurality of synchronization signal blocks (SSBs) or channel state information reference signals (CSI-RSs) meeting a first threshold.” [Zhang, 0006].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 3-5, 10, 14-15 and 18-20 were objected with allowable subject matter in the previous office action dated 03/27/2026, and said claims remain objected now.
The claims contain the following underlined features which, when combined with other features of the claim, prior art of record failed to anticipate or render obvious before the effective filing date of the instant application was filed:
Regarding claims 3 and 18, the UE of claim 2 and the method of claim 17, respectively, wherein the one or more processors are individually or collectively further operable to execute the code to cause the UE to:
obtain a metric based at least in part on the received power measurement and a mapping between received power measurements of the one or more low-power synchronization signals and received power measurements of synchronization signal blocks, wherein performing the cell reselection is based at least in part on the metric.
Regarding claims 4-5 and 19-20, these claims depend from claims 3 and 18, respectively, and thus are objected.
Regarding claim 10, the UE of claim 8, wherein the one or more processors are individually or collectively further operable to execute the code to cause the UE to: perform received power measurements on the low-power synchronization signals and the synchronization signal blocks based at least in part on the signal strength of the one or more low-power synchronization signals failing to satisfy a first threshold and the signal strength of the one or more synchronization signal blocks satisfying a second threshold.
Regarding claim 14, the UE of claim 13, wherein the one or more processors are individually or collectively further operable to execute the code to cause the UE to:
receive, via the first radio, a synchronization signal block on the non-serving cell based at least in part on the system information; and
determine an availability of the non-serving cell for reception of the one or more low-power synchronization signals based at least in part on a received power of the synchronization signal block,
wherein receiving the one or more low-power synchronization signals is based at least in part on the availability.
Regarding claim 15, the UE of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are individually or collectively further operable to execute the code to cause the UE to:
receive, via the first radio, system information that indicates a criterion for reception of the one or more low-power synchronization signals received on a non-serving cell; and
monitor for the one or more low-power synchronization signals on the non-serving cell based at least in part on the criterion being satisfied,
wherein receiving the one or more low-power synchronization signals is based at least in part on the monitoring.
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 extension fee 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 Harry H. Kim whose telephone number and email address are as follows; 571-272-5009, harry.kim2@uspto.gov.
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, Derrick Ferris can be reached at 571-272-3123.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from www.uspto.gov. For questions or assistance, 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.
/HARRY H KIM/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2411
Prosecution Insights