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 Amendments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 06/01/2026, with respect to the 112(f) objection and subsequent 112(b) rejection have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection and rejection of Claim 30 has been withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 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.
Claims 1, 3, 5-7, 11, 15-19, 21, 23-24 and 29-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being anticipated by Liu, Xiao-Lei (CN 111246550 A), hereinafter Liu in view of Naim (US 9137716 B1), hereinafter Naim.
Re. Claims 1, 19, and 30, Liu teaches an apparatus for wireless communication at a user equipment (UE), comprising: a memory; and one or more processors, coupled to the memory (Fig. 3), configured to: receive an indication of a mobility mode associated with the UE (Pg. 3, Line 27 - the electronic device obtains the scene data), wherein the mobility mode indicates an environment associated with the UE (Pg. 3, Line 27- scene data comprises the user behaviour data, at least one electronic geographic position data in the device); and perform an action based at least in part on the mobility mode associated with the UE (Pg. 3, Line 35- Next, electronic equipment according to the obtained scene data, usage scenario. For example, based on the longitude and latitude of the current position and the map data obtained in advance, analyzing whether the field area of the current position on the map. located in the field region under the condition at the current position, judging whether the current use scene is an outdoor scene).
However, Liu does not expressly teach how to receive, via a user interface of the UE and by a selection of a user of the UE.
Yet, Naim explicitly teaches how to receive, via a user interface of the UE and by a selection of a user of the UE (Column 5, Line 56 - The mobility mode can be selected by smartphone 320 based on the mobility status as discussed herein, or can be selected by a user of smartphone 320, such as through a user interface selection).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Naim to the teaching of Liu. The motivation for such would be to improve input collection from the user as Naim provides that the UE can receive input from the user to decide the mobility mode (Column 5, Line 56, Naim). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements, as claimed by known methods, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Re. Claim 29, Claim 29 is the non-transitory computer readable medium storing the instructions described by Claims 1, 19 and 30. Liu further teaches the non-transitory computer readable medium (Pg. 9, Line 29 - memory 109 which can be used to store the software program and various data. Memory 109 mainly comprises storing program area and storage data area, wherein the storage program area may store an operating system, at least one function needed by the application program).
Re. Claims 3 and 21, Liu and Niam teach Claims 1 and 19.
Additionally, Liu further teaches wherein the mobility mode indicating the environment associated with the UE is a passenger vehicle mode including ONE OF: a freeway mode associated with the UE traveling on a freeway, a city mode associated with the UE traveling in a city (Pg. 3, Line 27- the electronic device obtains the scene data. scene data comprises the user behaviour data, at least one electronic geographic position data in the device. wherein, the user behavior data can be obtained according to the operation record of the user of the electronic device, geographic position data can be obtained according to the GPS location data. Additionally, Examiner interprets that only one of the claimed features needs to be mapped because of the presence of “Or”), a rural mode associated with the UE traveling in a rural area, OR a water body mode associated with the UE traveling on a body of water.
Re. Claims 5 and 23, Liu and Niam teach Claims 1 and 19.
Additionally, Liu further teaches wherein the mobility mode indicating the environment associated with the UE is a power conservation mode associated with limited services for the UE to reduce a power consumption of the UE (Pg. 6, Line 39 - judging whether the base band power saving mode is triggered, when the baseband power saving mode is triggered, by the network configuration adjustment of the electronic device into the low power consumption state, which can effectively reduce the network power consumption of the electronic device, so as to save device power consumption to achieve power saving purpose).
Re. Claims 6 and 24, Liu and Niam teach Claims 1 and 19.
Additionally, Liu further teaches wherein the one or more processors, to perform the action, are configured to disable or enable one or more features of the UE based at least in part on the mobility mode associated with the UE (Pg. 6, Line 39 - judging whether the base band power saving mode is triggered, when the baseband power saving mode is triggered, by the network configuration adjustment of the electronic device into the low power consumption state, which can effectively reduce the network power consumption of the electronic device, so as to save device power consumption to achieve power saving purpose).
Re. Claim 7, Liu and Niam teach Claims 1 and 19.
Additionally, Liu further teaches wherein the one or more processors, to perform the action, are configured to override a network control based at least in part on the mobility mode associated with the UE (Pg. 2, Line 24- used for according to the current mode of use of the electronic device or use scene, determining whether the electronic equipment enters preset baseband power saving mode).
Re. Claim 11, Liu and Niam teach Claim 1.
Additionally, Liu further teaches wherein the one or more processors, to perform the action, are configured to perform a sleep operation or a wakeup operation based at least in part on the mobility mode associated with the UE (Pg. 5, Line 39 - adjusting the network configuration of the electronic device into the low power consumption state, specifically comprising the following method: according to the preset sleep parameter, the sleep period is increased in non-continuous receiving according to the preset carrier parameter).
Re. Claim 15, Liu and Niam teach Claims 1 and 19.
Additionally, Liu further teaches wherein the one or more processors, to perform the action, are configured to apply safety features based at least in part on the mobility mode associated with the UE (Pg. 7, Line 16 - the state adjusting module, used for when the electronic device enters the baseband power saving modes of operation, adjusting the network configuration of the electronic device is a low power consumption network configuration state, the network configuration comprising: a capability of the electronic device to report information, network functional configuration of the electronic device, based on speed in the configuration of user assistance information).
Re. Claims 16, Liu and Niam teach Claims 1.
Additionally, Liu further teaches wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: provide the user interface that displays a plurality of possible mobility modes (Fig 2. Pg. 6, Line 32- the user can manually based on user-assisted network speed setting information, the interface adopts the gear adjustment mode, the operation mode is friendly. based on the electronic device interface shown in FIG. 2.)
Re. Claim 17, Liu and Niam teach Claim 1.
Additionally, Liu further teaches wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: determine the mobility mode for the UE based at least in part on signal measurements (Pg. 7, Line 16 - the state adjusting module, used for when the electronic device enters the baseband power saving modes of operation, adjusting the network configuration of the electronic device is a low power consumption network configuration state, the network configuration comprising: a capability of the electronic device to report information, network functional configuration of the electronic device, based on speed in the configuration of user assistance information) and provide, via the user interface, a recommendation to switch to the mobility mode (Pg. 9, Line 25 - interface unit 108 can be used for input (e.g., data information, power, etc.) and one or more element input transmission received in the electronic device 100 or may be used for transmitting data between the electronic device 100 and the external device is received from the external device).
Re. Claim 18, Liu and Niam teach Claims 1.
Additionally, Liu further teaches wherein the user interface provides one or more of a touch interface or a voice command interface (Fig 2. Pg. 6, Line 32 - the user can manually based on user-assisted network speed setting information, the interface adopts the gear adjustment mode, the operation mode is friendly. based on the electronic device interface shown in FIG. 2.).
Claims 2, 8-9, 13-14, 20, 25 and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Niam and He, Xiang-Bin (CN 105142194 A), hereinafter He.
Re. Claims 2 and 20, Liu and Niam teach Claims 1 and 19.
Yet, Liu and Niam does not explicitly teach wherein the mobility mode indicating the environment associated with the UE is a high speed train mode associated with the UE traveling on a high speed train OR a subway mode associated with the UE traveling on a subway.
However, He expressly teaches wherein the mobility mode indicating the environment associated with the UE is a high speed train mode associated with the UE traveling on a high speed train OR a subway mode associated with the UE traveling on a subway (Pg. 2, Line 20 - capable of moving the high-speed UE is from common public-private cell switching to the cell, and the UE moves from railway private cell switching to a common public network cell so as to improve the average throughput rate of UE in high-speed moving and operation smoothness. Additionally, Examiner interprets that only one of the claimed features needs to be mapped because of the presence of “Or”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of He to the teaching of Liu and Niam. The motivation for such would be as He provides that a mobility mode can be based on travelling on a railway (Pg. 2, Line 20, He). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements, as claimed by known methods, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Re. Claims 8, 9 and 25, Liu and Niam teach Claims 1 and 19.
Yet, Liu and Niam does not explicitly teach the one or more processors, to perform the action, are configured to perform a cell search operation and cell measurements based at least in part on the mobility mode associated with the UE, wherein the cell search operation is based at least in part on a property of a cell associated with the mobility mode or performing a channel estimation based at least in part on the mobility mode associated with the UE.
However, He expressly teaches the one or more processors, to perform the action, are configured to perform a cell search operation and cell measurements based at least in part on the mobility mode associated with the UE, wherein the cell search operation is based at least in part on a property of a cell associated with the mobility mode (Pg. 7, Line 7 - resource configuration parameter of the first cell and the second cell are different, for example, different frequency ranges of the frequency spectrum resource configuration parameter of the first cell is applicable to any moving speed of the user device, the resource allocation parameter of the second cell is suitable for moving speed description information is lower than the preset threshold value of the user equipment) or performing a channel estimation based at least in part on the mobility mode associated with the UE (Pg. 7, Line 5- the wireless communication system provided by the embodiment of the invention comprises: in the first cell, the second cell base station, the second user equipment to the first user equipment and the second user equipment, the first user equipment; resource configuration parameter of the first cell and the second cell are different, for example, different frequency ranges of the frequency spectrum resource configuration parameter of the first cell is applicable to any moving speed of the user device, the resource allocation parameter of the second cell is suitable for moving speed description information is lower than the preset threshold value of the user equipment).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of He to the teaching of Liu and Niam. The motivation for such would be as He provides that a cell search can be performed based on the mobility mode (Pg. 7, Line 7, He) and a channel estimation is performed based on the same mobility mode (Pg. 7, Line 5, He). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements, as claimed by known methods, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Re. Claims 13, Liu and Niam teach Claims 1 and 19.
Yet, Liu and Niam does not expressly teach wherein the one or more processors, to perform the action, are configured to perform the action irrespective of a high speed configuration received from a base station.
However, He explicitly teaches wherein the one or more processors, to perform the action, are configured to perform the action irrespective of a high speed configuration received from a base station (Pg. 7, Line 24 - the high and low are relative to the moving speed boundary, higher mobile speed boundary is considered high moving speed lower than the moving speed boundary is considered low moving speed. equal to the moving speed of the borderline can be switched or not switched, residing in the first cell or the second cell.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of He to the teaching of Liu and Niam. The motivation for such would be as He provides that the action is performed regardless of a configuration sent by a base station (Pg. 7, Line 24, He). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements, as claimed by known methods, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Re. Claims 14 and 28, Liu and Niam teaches Claims 1 and 19.
Additionally, Liu further teaches wherein the one or more processors, to perform the action, are configured to apply safety features based at least in part on the mobility mode associated with the UE (Pg. 7, Line 16 - the state adjusting module, used for when the electronic device enters the baseband power saving modes of operation, adjusting the network configuration of the electronic device is a low power consumption network configuration state, the network configuration comprising: a capability of the electronic device to report information, network functional configuration of the electronic device, based on speed in the configuration of user assistance information).
Yet, Liu and Niam does not expressly teach wherein the one or more processors, to perform the action, are configured to perform a handover based at least in part on the mobility mode associated with the UE
However, He explicitly teaches wherein the one or more processors, to perform the action, are configured to perform a handover based at least in part on the mobility mode associated with the UE (Pg. 2, Line 10 - the UE residing in which cell are both depending on its own measurement result of the UE, reporting a measurement result of each cell by the UE to the base station (eNodeB), the eNodeB instructs the UE to perform cell handover according to the measurement result of the UE).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of He to the teaching of Liu and Niam. The motivation for such would be as He provides that a handover is performed based on the mobility mode (Pg. 2, Line 10, He). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements, as claimed by known methods, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Claims 4 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Niam and Gupta et al. (2023/0099551).
Re. Claims 4 and 22, Liu and Niam teach Claims 1 and 19.
Yet, Liu and Niam does not explicitly teach wherein the mobility mode indicating the environment associated with the UE is a vehicle operation mode indicating whether the UE is being operated by an occupant of a vehicle, and wherein one or more capabilities of the UE are locked based at least in part on the vehicle operation mode.
However, Gupta expressly teaches wherein the mobility mode indicating the environment associated with the UE is a vehicle operation mode indicating whether the UE is being operated by an occupant of a vehicle, and wherein one or more capabilities of the UE are locked based at least in part on the vehicle operation mode (¶0205 - The positioning entity of any of clauses 22-38, wherein the at least one processor is configured to restrict the at least one functionality of the UE if the UE is determined to be located in the personal zone in the vehicle by being configured to at least one of: lock the UE; place the UE in sleep mode; turn off a display of the UE; disable touchscreen controls of the UE; pause an application on the UE; turn off the application on the UE; convert an active call to a speaker mode, or any combination thereof).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Gupta to the teaching of Liu and Niam. The motivation for such would be as Gupta provides that a UE can enter a vehicle operation mode that restricts UE usage (¶0205, Gupta). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements, as claimed by known methods, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Claims 10 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Niam, and Zhou, Yu (CN 109660663 A), hereinafter Zhou.
Re. Claims 10, and 26, Liu and Niam teach Claims 1 and 19.
Additionally, Liu further teaches performing a sleep operation or a wakeup operation based at least in part on the mobility mode associated with the UE (Pg. 5, Line 39 - adjusting the network configuration of the electronic device into the low power consumption state, specifically comprising the following method: according to the preset sleep parameter, the sleep period is increased in non-continuous receiving according to the preset carrier parameter).
Yet, Liu and Niam does not expressly teach wherein the one or more processors, to perform the action, are configured to perform an antenna control based at least in part on the mobility mode associated with the UE.
However, Zhou explicitly teaches wherein the one or more processors, to perform the action, are configured to perform an antenna control based at least in part on the mobility mode associated with the UE (Pg. 2, Line 20 - according to the scene information and/or position information of the antenna, determining the configuration parameter, the scene information includes the handheld state, vehicle state and at least one of in the closed state according to the configuration parameter, and adjusting the antenna).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Zhou to the teaching of Liu and Niam. The motivation for such would be as Zhou provides that an antenna control action is performed based on the mobility mode (Pg. 2, Line 10, Zhou). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements, as claimed by known methods, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Claims 12 and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Niam, and Kaburlasos et al. (2023/0101997), hereinafter Kaburlasos.
Re. Claims 12, and 27, Liu and Niam teach Claims 1 and 19.
Yet, Liu and Niam does not expressly teach wherein the one or more processors, to perform the action, are configured to activate or deactivating a processing block based at least in part on the mobility mode associated with the UE.
However, Kaburlasos explicitly teaches wherein the one or more processors, to perform the action, are configured to activate or deactivating a processing block based at least in part on the mobility mode associated with the UE (¶0095 - The control logic being configured to disable the one or more idle-mode power-saving features of the processor includes the control logic being configured to disable one or more of dynamic power gating of idle blocks of the processor. Additionally, Examiner interprets that only one of the claimed features needs to be mapped because of the presence of “Or”) OR perform the action irrespective of a high speed configuration received from a base station (This limitation was taught by He in Claim 13).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Kaburlasos to the teaching of Liu and Niam. The motivation for such would be as Kaburlasos provides a means of activating or deactivating a processing block based on the mobility mode (Kaburlasos, ¶0095). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements, as claimed by known methods, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-30 have been considered but are moot because of the new ground of rejection. Applicant argues on pages 12-14 that reference Liu does not teach where the geographic data is obtained via the user input, rather Liu teaches that the geographic mobility modes are automatically generated when the UE is moved. In response, Examiner has provided new reference Niam, which provides that the mobility mode can be selected using an interface by the user (Column 5, Line 56 - The mobility mode can be selected by smartphone 320 based on the mobility status as discussed herein, or can be selected by a user of smartphone 320, such as through a user interface selection). Examiner finds that, when taken in light of Liu’s UE disclosure which contains a touch panel and a structure for touch based user input, that the method of Liu using mobility mode data can be read in light of the Niam disclosure to cause a person having ordinary skill in the art to conclude that a user can prompt a UE to select a mobility mode using a touch based user interface. As such, Examiner has amended the rejection to reflect this new understanding and provides the above stated rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Mach, Tomasz (2013/0208610) - ¶0015-0046
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 NOAH JAMES SUGDEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7406. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 9:00-6:00 ET, Fri 9:00-1:00 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, Khaled Kassim can be reached at (571) 270-3770. 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.
/N.J.S./Examiner, Art Unit 2475
/KHALED M KASSIM/supervisory patent examiner, Art Unit 2475
Prosecution Insights