DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-2, 4-6, 11, 13, 15, 17, 19-25, 29 and 36-38 are pending in this application and claims 3, 7-10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 26-28 and 30-35 are cancelled.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Oath/Declaration
The applicant’s oath/declaration has been reviewed by the examiner and is found to conform to the requirements prescribed in 37 C.F.R. 1.63.
Priority
As required by M.P.E.P. 201.14(c), acknowledgement is made of applicant’s claim for priority based on applications filed on 08/24/2021 (CHINA 202110977697.8).
Drawings
The applicant’s drawings submitted are acceptable for examination purposes.
Information Disclosure Statement
As required by M.P.E.P. 609(C), the applicant’s submissions of the Information Disclosure Statements dated 02/26/2024 and 01/20/2026 are acknowledged by the examiner and the cited references have been considered in the examination of the claims now pending. As required by M.P.E.P 609 C(2), a copy of the PTOL-1449 initialed.
Abstract
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
Claim Objections
Claims 2, 6 and 36 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 2 recites multiple “or” statement in the claim language not preferred in formal writing. In formal writing, it’s better to separate items with commas and use “or” only before the last limitation. Similar issue exists in claim 6 and 36
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-2, 4-6, 11, 13, 15, 17, 29, 36-38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites “monitoring a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) after a first time point” is vague and indefinite because unclear where is the first time period occurred. For example, whether the first time period occurred at the detecting a wakeup up signal. Similar issue exists in claim 29. Since dependent claims 2, 4-6, 11, 13, 15, 17 and 36-38 depend on corresponding the independent claim 1 or 29, they are rejected for the same reason as described hereinabove.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-6, 11, 13, 17, 19-20, 29 and 36-38 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Nam et al. (US 2021/0051589 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Nam teaches a method for information processing, comprising:
detecting a wake-up signal (UE receiving a default wake up signal (WUS) from BS at 820 see Nam: Fig.8A step 820; ¶[0089]); and
monitoring a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) after a first time point (the UE performs PDCCH monitoring for the PDCCH signaling 830 based on information in the WUS 820. In this regard, the WUS 820 may indicate for the UE to perform active PDCCH monitoring during the on-duration in which PDCCH signaling 830 is transmitted after step 820 see Nam: Fig.8A steps 820-830; ¶[0090]; ¶[0092]).
Regarding claim 2, Nam taught the method of claim 1 as described hereinabove. Name further teaches wherein monitoring the PDCCH after the first time point comprises:
monitoring a PDCCH in N slots within a 1" duration that is after the first time point, wherein N is a positive integer; or
monitoring a PDCCH in a 1s slot that is after the first time point (During the on-duration 640, the UE is an active state and may monitor PDCCH or other signals from the BS and/or transmit UL data to the BS, as indicated by UL/DL communication block 642 after offset 630 see Nam: ¶[0081]; Fig.6); or
monitoring a PDCCH in W slots within first X durations that are after the first time point, wherein X and W each are a positive integer; or
monitoring a PDCCH in first K slots that are after the first time point, wherein K is a positive integer.
Regarding claim 4, Nam taught the method of claim 1 as described hereinabove. Name further teaches wherein monitoring the PDCCH after the first time point comprises: monitoring a PDCCH within a time window that is after the first time point (monitoring a PDCCH during 640 (potential ON duration) that is after WUS occasion 622 (first period) see Nam: Fig.6; ¶[0081]).
Regarding claim 5, Nam taught the method of claim 1 as described hereinabove. Name further teaches wherein the first time point equals to a second time point plus a first time interval (WUS 622 period is offset 630 (as first interval) to a second time period Potential ON duration 642 see Nam: ¶[0081]).
Regarding claim 6, Nam taught the method of claim 5 as described hereinabove. Name further teaches wherein the first time interval comprises a second time interval plus a time interval related to a synchronization signal (SS)/physical broadcast channel (PBCH) block (SSB) period or an SS burst period (the BSs 105 may broadcast the PSS, the SSS, and/or the MIB in the form of synchronization signal block (SSBs) over a physical broadcast channel (PBCH) and may broadcast the RMSI and/or the OSI over a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) and where synchronization signals (e.g., including a primary synchronization signal (PSS) and a secondary synchronization signal (SSS)) see Nam:¶[0049-0050]), or
the first time interval comprises a second time interval plus Y SSB periods, wherein Y is a positive integer; or the first time interval comprises a second time interval plus R SSB burst periods, wherein R is a positive integer; or
the first time interval comprises an interval between a third time point and a slot in which M SSBs or SS bursts closest to the third time point are located, and the third time point equals to the second time point plus a second time interval, wherein M is a positive integer.
Regarding claim 11, Nam taught the method of claim 5 as described hereinabove. Name further teaches wherein the first time interval comprises a second time interval plus a period of a preamble sequence (first time interval can be represent as WUS occasion 622 and offset 630 see Nam: Fig.6); or the first time interval comprises an interval between a third time point and a slot in which a preamble sequence closest to the third time point is located, and the third time point equals to the second time point plus a second time interval (third point can be as beginning of Potential On duration which is equal to WUS occasion plus offset 670 see Nam: Fig.6; ¶[0082]).
Regarding claim 13, Nam taught the method of claim 5 as described hereinabove. Name further teaches wherein the second time point is a position in a sequence of the wake-up signal, or the second time point is an ending position of a sequence of the wake-up signal (the second time point can be beginning of second WUS occasion 660 see Nam: Fig.6; ¶[0082]).
Regarding claim 17, Nam taught the method of claim 5 as described hereinabove. Name further teaches wherein the first time interval is configured via higher-layer signaling (DCI is higher layer signaling see Nam: ¶[0061]).
Regarding claim 19, Nam teaches a method for information processing, comprising:
receiving a wake-up signal (UE receiving a default wake up signal (WUS) from BS at 820 see Nam: Fig.8A step 820; ¶[0089]),
wherein the wake-up signal comprises user equipment (UE) group information (where the WUS DCI includes group of UEs or a per-group basis “the wake-up DCI is sent with cyclic redundancy check (CRC) scrambled by an identifier associated with the UE (e.g., C-RNTI) or the group of UEs (e.g., power saving radio network temporary identifier (PS-RNTI)” see Nam: ¶[0061]).
Regarding claim 20, Nam taught the method of claim 19 as described hereinabove. Nam further teaches wherein the UE group information comprises a UE group identity (ID) (UEs in the same group may be configured with a common identifier (e.g., PS-RNTI) and utilize the same search space set for the wake-up DCI see Nam: ¶[0061]).
Regarding claim 29, claim 29 is rejected for the same reason as claim 1 as described hereinabove. Claim 29 recites a communication apparatus that perform he same functionalities as the method of claim 1 as set forth hereinabove.
Regarding claim 36, claim 36 is rejected for the same reason as claim 2 as described hereinabove.
Regarding claim 37, claim 37 is rejected for the same reason as claim 4 as described hereinabove.
Regarding claim 38, claim 38 is rejected for the same reason as claim 5 as described hereinabove.
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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 15 and 21-25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nam et al. (US 2021/0051589 A1) in view of Zhou et al. (US 2020/0092814 A1).
Regarding claim 15, Nam taught the method of claim 6 as described hereinabove. Nam does not teaches wherein the second time interval is determined based on a capability of a terminal device, or the second time interval is zero.
However, Zhou teaches the wherein the second time interval is determined based on a capability of a terminal device ( base station may request what capabilities for a wireless device to report based on band information and he gap may be determined based on a capability of the UE and/or the gNB see Zhou: ¶[0230-0231]; ¶[0443]), or the second time interval is zero in order to improve power saving in a wireless system (see Zhou: ¶[0058]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to create the invention of Nam to include (or to use, etc.) the wherein the second time interval is determined based on a capability of a terminal device, or the second time interval is zero as taught by Zhou in order to improve power saving in a wireless system (see Zhou: ¶[0058]).
Regarding claim 21, Nam taught the method of claim 20 as described hereinabove. Nam does not teaches wherein the UE group ID is calculated based on a UE ID, a first higher-layer parameter, and a second higher-layer parameter.
However, Zhou teaches wherein the UE group ID is calculated based on a UE ID, a first higher-layer parameter, and a second higher-layer parameter (first configuration parameters include sequence generate parameter based on Group-UE RNIT see ¶[0509] and high layer parameters for Active-BWP-UL-SCell and active -BWP-DL-Scell see Zhou: ¶[0414-0417]); ¶[0256]) or the second time interval is zero in order to improve power saving in a wireless system (see Zhou: ¶[0058]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to create the invention of Nam to include (or to use, etc.) the wherein the UE group ID is calculated based on a UE ID, a first higher-layer parameter, and a second higher-layer parameter as taught by Zhou in order to improve power saving in a wireless system (see Zhou: ¶[0058]).
Regarding claim 22, Nam taught the method of claim 20 as described hereinabove. Nam does not explicitly teaches wherein the UE group ID comprises a first ID and a second ID.
However, Zhou teaches the wherein the UE group ID comprises a first ID and a second ID (each wireless have a identifier (C-RNTI) and a group-UE RNTI include all the C-RNTI “the first wireless device may generate the first WUS based on at least one of: the cell ID; the SSB index of SSB 1; and/or the first identifier of the first wireless device (e.g., C-RNTI 1)” see Zhou: ¶[0490]; ¶[0498]) in order to improve power saving in a wireless system (see Zhou: ¶[0058]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to create the invention of Nam to include (or to use, etc.) the wherein the UE group ID comprises a first ID and a second ID as taught by Zhou in order to improve power saving in a wireless system (see Zhou: ¶[0058]).
Regarding claim 23, the modified Nam taught the method of claim 22 as described hereinabove. Zhou further teaches wherein the first ID is calculated based on a UE ID and a first higher-layer parameter; the second ID is calculated based on the UE ID and a second higher-layer parameter (if a UE is configured by higher layer parameter Active-BWP-DL-SCell a first active DL BWP and by higher layer parameter Active-BWP-UL-SCell a first active UL BWP on a secondary cell or carrier, the UE may use the indicated DL BWP and the indicated UL BWP on the secondary cell as the respective first active DL BWP and first active UL BWP on the secondary cell or carrier and serving each Beam for each UE1-UE3, which each UE have own identifier see Zhou: ¶[0491-0492]; Fig.38) in order to improve power saving in a wireless system (see Zhou: ¶[0058]).
Regarding claim 24, the modified Nam taught the method of claim 22 as described hereinabove. Zhou further teaches wherein the first ID is a remainder obtained by dividing a UE ID by a first higher-layer parameter; the second ID is a remainder obtained by dividing the UE ID by a second higher-layer parameter (The wake-up information may be contained in a DCI addressed to a group of wireless devices (e.g., by a group RNTI). The DCI addressed to the group of wireless devices may be identified by a DCI format and/or a group RNTI and higher layer parameters see Zhou: ¶[0508]; ¶[0414-0417]) in order to improve power saving in a wireless system (see Zhou: ¶[0058]).
Regarding claim 25, Nam taught the method of claim 20 as described hereinabove. Nam does not explicitly teaches wherein the UE group ID is a remainder obtained by dividing a UE ID by a target parameter, and the target parameter is a product of a first higher-layer parameter and a second higher-layer parameter.
However, Zhou further teaches wherein the UE group ID is a remainder obtained by dividing a UE ID by a target parameter, and the target parameter is a product of a first higher-layer parameter and a second higher-layer parameter (group RNTI using wakeup indicators that perform different from RNTI and RRC message comprising parameters indicating wakeup indicator associated with wireless device see: Zhou: ¶[0058]) in order to improve power saving in a wireless system (see Zhou: ¶[0058]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to create the invention of Nam to include (or to use, etc.) the wherein the UE group ID is a remainder obtained by dividing a UE ID by a target parameter, and the target parameter is a product of a first higher-layer parameter and a second higher-layer parameter as taught by Zhou in order to improve power saving in a wireless system (see Zhou: ¶[0058]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GUANG W LI whose telephone number is (571)270-1897. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Thursday 7AM-5PMET.
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, Joseph Avellino can be reached on (571) 272-3905. 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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.
GUANG W. LI
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2478
June 4, 2026
/GUANG W LI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2478
Prosecution Insights