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
This action is responsive to the application filed on 02/23/2024 has a total of 30 claims pending in the application; there are 4 independent claims and 26 dependent claims, all of which are ready for examination by the examiner.
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 1-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SELVAGANAPATHY et al. Publication No. (US 2024/0276452 A1) in view of Nimbalker et al. Publication No. (US 2022/0078879 A1).
Regarding claim 1, SELVAGANAPATHY teaches an apparatus for wireless communications at a user equipment (UE) (terminal device UE-210 [0049] FIG.2), comprising:
a processor (processor 710 FIG.7);
memory coupled with the processor (one or more memories 720 coupled to the processor 710 [0113] FIG.7); and
instructions stored in the memory and executable by the processor to cause the apparatus (computer program 730 in memory 720 includes computer executable instructions that are executed by the associated processor 710 [0117] FIG.7) to:
receive, from a first network entity of a non-terrestrial network (Low Earth Orbiting (LEO) satellite 230 of Non-Terrestrial Network (NTN) 200 [0048] FIG.3), a first message indicating a location parameter associated with a wake up signal configuration (the UE 210 may receive, from the satellite 230, an indication that the receiving of the identification information is activated based on the Tracking Area (TA) of the UE [0058-59] FIG.3; The identification information may comprise wake-up signals (WUS), the WUS may indicate to the UE 210 whether it should monitor a paging occasion. For example, the WUS may be either a sequence or bit(s) [0065-67] FIG.3);
determine that the UE is located within a geographic area (Cell 122 FIG.1) associated with the location parameter based at least in part on the receiving of the first message (As the satellite moves in a satellite moving direction, a UE in an idle mode is served by in a first cell 112 broadcasting a code of a first tracking area (TA). The code of the first TA is TAC1, at time T1, a second UE is served by a second cell 122 broadcasting a code of a second TA. The code of the second TA is TAC2 [0041-44] FIG.1); and
monitor for a signal from the first network entity based at least in part on the determining that the UE is located within the geographic area (the identification information may indicate the UE 210 to monitor the paging message, while the configuration information may indicate the UE 210 how to monitor the identification information and link the identification information to a tracking area [0056-58] FIG.3).
SELVAGANAPATHY does not explicitly teach monitor for a first wake up signal.
Nimbalker teaches a UE to monitor for a first wake up signal (Nimbalker: a wireless device (510) configured for Discontinuous Reception, DRX, includes monitoring (1602) for a first wakeup signal, WUS, during a first WUS monitoring occasion [0188-194] FIG.19).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified SELVAGANAPATHY by the teaching of Nimbalker to monitor for a first wake up signal in order to let the network more confidently configure a low aggregation level without risking losing the UE in cases it moves out of coverage of the WUS (Nimbalker: [0097-99] FIG.4).
Regarding claim 2, SELVAGANAPATHY teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the instructions are further executable by the processor to cause the apparatus to: monitor for a second wake up signal from a second network entity of the non-terrestrial network based at least in part on the determining that the UE is located within the geographic area (the identification information may comprise an offset between the WUS and a paging occasion (PO) for the UE, configuring different time offsets between WUS and a PO for the UE. For example, first WUS corresponding to TA1 may have time offset 1 to the PO, while second WUS corresponding to TA2 may have offset 2 to the same PO [0069-70] FIG.1).
Regarding claim 3, SELVAGANAPATHY teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the instructions are further executable by the processor to cause the apparatus to: determine that the UE is located outside of the geographic area after monitoring the first wake up signal; and refrain from monitoring for a second instance of the first wake up signal based at least in part on the determining that the UE is located outside of the geographic area (if the UE 210 receives the additional WUS, the UE 210 may determine that the paging message is directed to the additional TA. If the TA where the UE 210 is located is different from the additional TA, the UE 210 may skip monitoring a channel (for example, PDSCH) carrying the paging message. In this way, false wake-up of the UE 210 may be avoided [0067] FIG.2).
Regarding claim 4, SELVAGANAPATHY teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the location parameter comprises a cell identifier, a reference location associated with the geographic area, a radius, or any combination thereof (As a satellite moves in a satellite moving direction, the second cell 122 moves within a border 105 of the first TA and “soft switch” of TA is performed in the second cell 122. Upon the “soft switch”, at time T2, the second cell 122 broadcasts TAC1 and TAC2. [0042-43] FIG.1).
Regarding claim 5, SELVAGANAPATHY teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the instructions to determine that the UE is located within the geographic area associated with the location parameter are executable by the processor to cause the apparatus to: determine that the UE is located within a radius distance from a reference location (tacking area update (TAU) and cell reselection of the UE at time T2 [0043-44] FIG.1).
Regarding claim 6, SELVAGANAPATHY teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the instructions are further executable by the processor to cause the apparatus to: receive, from the first network entity, a selection parameter that corresponds to the geographic area and indicates a set of resources used by the first wake up signal, the wake up signal configuration comprising the set of resources; and determine to use the set of resources based at least in part on the selection parameter, wherein the monitoring for the first wake up signal is based at least in part on the set of resources (the identification information comprises a sequence of wake-up signals, information about a resource for reception of the wake-up signals, an offset between the sequence of wake up signals and a paging occasion for the first device, a paging early indication indicating whether the paging message is presented in the paging occasion, information about a search space for control information scheduling the paging message, information about a resource carrying the paging message, an index of the tracking area, a paging identity for scrambling the control information scheduling the paging message, or information about a non-anchor carrier carrying the paging message. [0082] FIG.2).
Regarding claim 7, SELVAGANAPATHY teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the instructions are further executable by the processor to cause the apparatus to: receive, from the first network entity, a selection parameter that corresponds to the geographic area and indicates a signal group identity used by the first wake up signal (the identification information may comprise group wake-up signals (GWUS) if supported by a cell [0065] FIG.1); and determine to use the signal group identity based at least in part on the selection parameter, wherein the monitoring for the first wake up signal is based at least in part on the signal group identity (the identification information may comprise group wake-up signals (GWUS) if supported by a cell [0065] FIG.1).
Regarding claim 8, SELVAGANAPATHY teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the geographic area associated with the location parameter for the first wake up signal is defined by one or more wake up signal registration areas, one or more global navigation satellite system coordinates, one or more tracking area codes (TACs), one or more virtual cell identifiers, one or more zone identifiers, one or more geo-fencing parameters, or any combination thereof (As the satellite moves in a satellite moving direction, a UE in an idle mode is served by in a first cell 112 broadcasting a code of a first tracking area (TA). The code of the first TA is TAC1, at time T1, a second UE is served by a second cell 122 broadcasting a code of a second TA. The code of the second TA is TAC2 [0041-44] FIG.1).
Regarding claim 9, SELVAGANAPATHY teaches the apparatus of claim 8, wherein the one or more wake up signal registration areas each comprise one or more second tracking area codes (TACs), or one or more second virtual cell identifiers, one or more second zone identifiers, one more second cell identities, or any combination thereof (As the satellite moves in a satellite moving direction, a UE in an idle mode is served by in a first cell 112 broadcasting a code of a first tracking area (TA). The code of the first TA is TAC1, at time T1, a second UE is served by a second cell 122 broadcasting a code of a second TA. The code of the second TA is TAC2 [0041-44] FIG.1).
Regarding claim 10, SELVAGANAPATHY teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the instructions are further executable by the processor to cause the apparatus to: transmit, to a network device of a network, a second message indicating one or more preferences for the geographic area associated with the first wake up signal, a capability to use the geographic area associated with the first wake up signal, location information, or any combination thereof, wherein the network comprises the non-terrestrial network, and wherein the receiving of the first message indicating the location parameter associated with the wake up signal configuration is based at least in part on the transmitting of the second message (before receiving the identification information, the UE 210 may transmit (310), to the satellite 230, an indication that UE 210 has capability for receiving the identification information based on the TA. In turn, the UE 210 may receive (320), from the satellite 230, an indication that the receiving of the identification information is activated. [0059-60] FIG.3).
Regarding claims 11-17, the independent claim and each dependent claim are related to the same limitation set for hereinabove in claims 1-10, where the difference used is the limitations were presented from the “NTN network entity” side and the wordings of the claims were interchanged within the claim itself or some of the claims were presented as a combination of two or more previously presented limitations. This change does not affect the limitation of the above treated claims. Adding these phrases to the claims and interchanging the wording did not introduce new limitations to these claims. Therefore, these claims were rejected for similar reasons as stated above.
Regarding claims 18-24, the independent claim and each dependent claim are related to the same limitation set for hereinabove in claims 1-10, where the difference used is the limitations were presented from an “apparatus at the UE” side and the wordings of the claims were interchanged within the claim itself or some of the claims were presented as a combination of two or more previously presented limitations. This change does not affect the limitation of the above treated claims. Adding these phrases to the claims and interchanging the wording did not introduce new limitations to these claims. Therefore, these claims were rejected for similar reasons as stated above.
Regarding claims 25-30, the independent claim and each dependent claim are related to the same limitation set for hereinabove in claims 1-10, where the difference used is the limitations were presented from an “apparatus at the NTN network entity” side and the wordings of the claims were interchanged within the claim itself or some of the claims were presented as a combination of two or more previously presented limitations. This change does not affect the limitation of the above treated claims. Adding these phrases to the claims and interchanging the wording did not introduce new limitations to these claims. Therefore, these claims were rejected for similar reasons as stated above.
Conclusion
When responding to this office action, Applicant is advised to clearly point out the patentable novelty which he or she thinks the claims present, in view of the state of the art disclosed by the references cited or the objections made. He or she must also show how the amendments avoid such references or objections See 37 CFR 1.111 (c).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABDELNABI O MUSA whose telephone number is (571)270-1901, and email address is abdelnabi.musa@uspto.gov ‘preferred’. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9:00 am - 5:00 pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kevin Bates, can be reached on 571-2723980. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
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.
/ABDELNABI O MUSA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2472