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 argues Claim 7 stands rejected under § 103 as unpatentable over the combination of Lee and Manolakos. In the interest of advancing prosecution and without conceding the propriety of the rejection, claim 1 is amended to recite "wherein the time period includes a ranging time window and a ranging time gap." Support for this amendment can be found throughout Applicant's specification and at least at [0029]-[0031] and [0039]-[0041].
The Examiner notes upon further inspection of the amendment, the amendment appears to include the portion that what was already known in the art (i.e., a time period includes a ranging time window and a ranging time gap). Applicant’s original disclosure is noted below.
[0022] The legacy mechanisms in 3GPP LTE and NR have provided general principles of window and gap configuration for different measurements. In the legacy mechanisms, a source to be measured is a network node (e.g., for a synchronization signal block (SSB) measurement timing configuration (SMTC) measurement, a system frame number (SFN) and frame boundary timing difference (SFTD) measurement, and a reference signal time difference (RSTD) measurement) or the UE itself (e.g., for an in-device coexistence (IDC) measurement). As a result, the information of when the measurement window and corresponding gap are needed is known to the network or the UE. For ranging, a source to be measured is a target UE, and such information could be unknown to the network or to the observer UE. In this case, additional information exchange is needed before the configuration, including the type of configuration, the target UE's identifier (ID), relative capabilities of the observer UE, and/or relative capabilities of the target UE as proposed in the embodiments of the present application. Moreover, some additional mechanisms may be needed, e.g., to allow the network to find the target/observer UE for an observer/target UE in or out of its coverage.
[0023] In legacy mechanisms, only a UE that performs a measurement needs to be configured with a measurement window and/or a measurement gap, i.e., the measurement window and/or gap are only for reception. For ranging, both a source to be measured (e.g., a target UE) and a termination to perform measurement (e.g., an observer UE) need such configuration. In this case, the configured window and/or gap for ranging can be target-specific and with different purposes for reception and/or for transmission, and whether the gap is necessary may depend on a specific UE's capabilities and a purpose of the gap. The network needs to configure ranging windows or gaps aligning with both observer and target UEs.
Paragraphs 0024-0028 of the Applicant’s original disclosure further outlines a number of issues in legacy systems. However, the Examiner was unable to find sufficient language in the claims that would appear to address the issues (i.e., novelty or inventive step).
Applicant argues the Office relies on the single "measurement gap" in Manolakos [0122]-[0149] as describing the claimed "at least one of a ranging time window and a ranging time gap" (Office Action, pp. 5-6). However, the amended claim 7 recites that the time period includes both a "ranging time window" and a "ranging time gap." In Manolakos, the RF tuning/switch and the measurement occur inside the exact same gap (i.e., "measurement gap"), and Manolakos does not disclose configuration information that establishes distinct periods for the measurement (e.g., a "ranging time window" as claimed) and the RF switch (e.g., a "ranging time gap" as claimed).
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
As noted in the rejection below, RC Measurement – GAP https://blog.csdn.net/qq_33083519/article/details/118610854 (09.07.2021) has rendered the amendment obvious. See at least Case 1 and Case 2
PNG
media_image1.png
200
400
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Applicant argues, as indicated on page 5 of the Office Action, Lee does not teach to "receive, from a network node, first configuration information regarding a time period related to a ranging measurement operation between the first UE and one or more second UEs, wherein the time period includes at least one of a ranging time window and a ranging time gap" and to "execute a radio frequency (RF) switch procedure for the ranging measurement operation during the ranging time gap" as recited in original claim 7. Therefore, Lee is also silent on "wherein the time period includes a ranging time window and a ranging time gap" recited in amended claim
Applicant is reminded in response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the amended have been considered but is moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged with respect to the amendment.
Applicant argues the combination of Manolakos and Lee is improper. Manolakos appears to be directed to receive-only downlink measurements (e.g., DL-PRS) from a base station, whereas Lee is directed to UE-to-UE (sidelink) ranging. Therefore, a generic receive-only measurement gap from Manolakos cannot simply be applied to a UE-to-UE system in Lee, as sidelink ranging requires coordinating complex transmission and reception roles between UEs that a simple downlink measurement gap does not address. Lee and Manolakos, either alone or in combination, do not disclose, teach, or in any way suggest the subject matter of claim 7, particularly as amended. As such, Applicant requests that the § 103 rejection of claim 7 be withdrawn.
However, the Examiner respectfully disagrees.
The test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference.... Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of those references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art.” In reKeller, 642 F.2d 413, 425, 208 USPQ 871, 881 (CCPA 1981). See also In reSneed, 710 F.2d 1544, 1550, 218 USPQ 385, 389 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (“[I]t is not necessary that the inventions of the references be physically combinable to render obvious the invention under review.”); and In reNievelt, 482 F.2d 965, 179 USPQ 224, 226 (CCPA 1973) (“Combining the teachings of references does not involve an ability to combine their specific structures.”).
Therefore, the rejection is maintained as proper and made final. Please see rejection below for Application of the additional reference that addresses the additional feature.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 6-10, 12, 14-17, 19-20 and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. US Patent Pub. No.: 2020/0296614 A1, hereinafter, ‘Lee’ in view of Manalakos et al., US 20220038927 A1, hereinafter, ‘Manolakos’ and further in view of RC Measurement - GAP https://blog.csdn.net/qq_33083519/article/details/118610854 (09.07.2021) (English Translation), hereinafter, ‘RC measurement’.
Consider Claim 1, Lee teaches a base station (e.g., see Base station 1410 of figure 14) for wireless communication, comprising: at least one memory(e.g., see memory 1412 of figure 14); and at least one processor(e.g., see processor 1411 of figure 14 ) coupled with the at least one memory and configured to cause the base station to: transmit, to a first user equipment (UE), first configuration information (e.g., see at least figure 9, S910, “ Ranging configuration information” and figure 12, S1210, “ranging configuration information”) regarding a ranging measurement operation between the first UE and one or more second UEs (e.g., see figure 9 - steps 920 and 930- RNG REQ, RNG -RES).
However, Lee does not specifically teach first configuration information regarding a time period related to a ranging measurement operation between the first UE and one or more second UEs, wherein the time period includes at least one of a ranging time window and a ranging time gap, wherein the ranging measurement operation is executed by the first UE to the one or more second UEs during the ranging time window, and wherein a radio frequency (RF) switch procedure for the ranging measurement operation is executed by the first UE during the ranging time gap.
In analogous art, Manolakos teaches configuration information regarding a time period related to measurement operation (e.g., see at least measure gap configuration 1120, figure 11 and noted in at least 0142-0149), wherein the time period includes at least one of a time window and a time gap (e.g., see at least measure gap timing as notes in at least 0122-0149 ), wherein the measurement operation is executed by a first node to the one or more second nodes during the time window(e.g., see at least 0145- “In NR, the serving cell configures a UE with periodic measurement gaps during which the UE is expected to perform RRM measurements.”), and wherein a radio frequency (RF) switch procedure for the measurement operation is executed by the node during the time gap (e.g., this is met based on the teachings of at least 0146- “at the start of a measurement gap, the UE tunes to the target frequency, then performs the measurement, and then tunes back (i.e., switch RF)to the source frequency at the end of the gap. No uplink transmission is permitted inside a measurement gap, as the UE is not synchronized to the uplink timing for inter-frequency or inter-RAT cells”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to perform the measurements between the two UEs using configured measurement windows as defined the standard and applied in Manolakos to arrive at the claimed first configuration information regarding a time period related to a ranging measurement operation between the first UE and one or more second UEs, wherein the time period includes at least one of a ranging time window and a ranging time gap, wherein the ranging measurement operation is executed by the first UE to the one or more second UEs during the ranging time window, and wherein a radio frequency (RF) switch procedure for the ranging measurement operation is executed by the first UE during the ranging time gap for purpose improving signaling efficiencies.
However, Lee in view of Manolakos does not specifically teach a ranging time window and ranging gap.
In analogous art, RC measurement teaches a ranging time window and ranging gap (e.g., see entire article include section as illustrated below.)
PNG
media_image1.png
200
400
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to try a ranging time window and ranging gap for the purpose of configuring measurement periods.
Consider Claim 7 and as applied to the Processor of claim 16 and Method of claim 22, Lee teaches a first user equipment (UE) for wireless communication (e.g., UE 1420, figure 14 teaches a UE ), comprising: at least one memory(e.g., see memory 1422, of figure 14 teaches a UE with a memory); and at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory and configured (e.g., see processor 1421, figure 14 teaches a UE with a processor) to cause the first UE to: receive, from a network node, first configuration information regarding measurement operation(e.g., see at least figure 9, S910, “ Ranging configuration information” and figure 12, S1210, “ranging configuration information”), execute the ranging measurement operation to the one or more second UEs(e.g., see figure 9 - steps 920 and 930).
Lee does not teach to receive, from a network node, first configuration information regarding a time period related to a ranging measurement operation between the first UE and one or more second UEs, wherein the time period includes at least one of a ranging time window and a ranging time gap; execute the ranging measurement operation to the one or more second UEs during the ranging time window; and execute a radio frequency (RF) switch procedure for the ranging measurement operation during the ranging time gap (i.e., the base station configures the UE to perform measurements between the UE and another device that is not necessarily the Base Station).
In analogous art, Manolakos teaches to receive, from a network node, first configuration information regarding a time period related to a measurement operation (e.g., see at least measure gap configuration 1120, figure 11 and noted in at least 0142-0149), wherein the time period includes at least one of a ranging time window and a ranging time gap(e.g., see at least measure gap timing as notes in at least 0122-0149 ); execute the ranging measurement operation during the ranging time window(e.g., see at least 0145- “In NR, the serving cell configures a UE with periodic measurement gaps during which the UE is expected to perform RRM measurements.”); and execute a radio frequency (RF) switch procedure for the ranging measurement operation during the ranging time gap(e.g., this is met based on the teachings of at least 0146- “at the start of a measurement gap, the UE tunes to the target frequency, then performs the measurement, and then tunes back (i.e., switch RF )to the source frequency at the end of the gap. No uplink transmission is permitted inside a measurement gap, as the UE is not synchronized to the uplink timing for inter-frequency or inter-RAT cells”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to perform the measurements between the two UEs using configured measurement windows as defined the standard and applied in Manolakos to arrive at the claimed first configuration information regarding a time period related to a ranging measurement operation between the first UE and one or more second UEs, wherein the time period includes at least one of a ranging time window and a ranging time gap, wherein the ranging measurement operation is executed by the first UE to the one or more second UEs during the ranging time window, and wherein a radio frequency (RF) switch procedure for the ranging measurement operation is executed by the first UE during the ranging time gap for purpose improving signaling efficiencies.
However, Lee in view of Manolakos does not specifically teach a ranging time window and ranging gap.
In analogous art, RC measurement teaches a ranging time window and ranging gap (e.g., see entire article include section as illustrated below.)
PNG
media_image1.png
200
400
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to try a ranging time window and ranging gap for the purpose of configuring measurement periods.
Consider Claims 2, 8 and 17, Lee teaches the configuration information (e.g., see at least figure 9, S910, “Ranging configuration information” and figure 12, S1210, “ranging configuration information”).
However, Lee does not specifically teach wherein the first configuration information includes at least one of: configuration information regarding the ranging time window; and configuration information regarding the ranging time gap.
In analogous art, Manolakos teaches to receive, from a network node, first configuration information regarding a time period related to a measurement operation (e.g., see at least measure gap configuration 1120, figure 11 and noted in at least 0142-0149), wherein the time period includes at least one of a ranging time window and a ranging time gap(e.g., see at least measure gap timing as notes in at least 0122-0149 ).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide configuration information regarding ranging window and time for the purpose of improving signaling efficiencies between device nodes.
Consider Claims 6, 14 and 20, Lee teaches wherein the ranging measurement operation includes at least one of: a ranging reference signal (RS) transmission at an observer UE; a ranging RS transmission at a target UE(e.g., see reference signal or sequence noted in at least 0157); a ranging RS reception at the observer UE(e.g., see reference signal or sequence noted in at least 0157); a ranging RS reception at the target UE; a target-unaware ranging signal transmission at the observer UE; a target-unaware ranging signal reflection reception at the observer UE; a positioning reference signal (PRS) transmission via a sidelink (e.g., see sidelink communication as described with respect to figures 18 and 19), wherein the sidelink is between two of the observer UE, the target UE, and an anchor UE, and wherein the PRS transmission is performed via at least one of the observer UE, the target UE, and the anchor UE; and a PRS reception via the sidelink, wherein the PRS reception is performed via the at least one of the observer UE, the target UE, and the anchor UE.
Consider Claim 9, Lee teaches the claimed invention except wherein the configuration information regarding the ranging time window includes at least one of: an indication indicating the first UE can execute which measurement kind of the ranging measurement operation in the ranging time window; a role of the first UE when using the ranging time window; an identifier (ID) of a UE associated with the ranging measurement operation within the one or more second UEs; an indication indicating whether the ranging time window can be used by the first UE for all of the one or more second UEs; one or more preconditions of the ranging time window applied to the first UE; a time length of the ranging time window; a repetition period in a time domain of the ranging time window; a start time offset to the repetition period in the time domain of the ranging time window; timing advance applied at the first UE when using the ranging time window; a frequency band associated with the ranging time window; and a reference cell indicator associated with the ranging time window.
In analogous art, Manolakos teaches one or more preconditions of the ranging time window applied to the first UE (i.e., this is met based on measurement gap configuration – noted in figure 11); a time length of the ranging time window (i.e., this is met based on the measurement period noted in at least figure 11); a repetition period in a time domain of the ranging time window (i.e., this is met based on the measurement repetition noted in at least figure 11).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to try wherein the configuration information regarding the ranging time window includes at least one of: an indication indicating the first UE can execute which measurement kind of the ranging measurement operation in the ranging time window; a role of the first UE when using the ranging time window; an identifier (ID) of a UE associated with the ranging measurement operation within the one or more second UEs; an indication indicating whether the ranging time window can be used by the first UE for all of the one or more second UEs; one or more preconditions of the ranging time window applied to the first UE; a time length of the ranging time window; a repetition period in a time domain of the ranging time window; a start time offset to the repetition period in the time domain of the ranging time window; timing advance applied at the first UE when using the ranging time window; a frequency band associated with the ranging time window; and a reference cell indicator associated with the ranging time window for the purpose of performing measurements.
Consider Claim 10, Lee teaches the claimed invention except wherein the configuration information regarding the ranging time gap includes at least one of: an indication indicating whether the RF switch procedure related to the ranging time gap is only dedicated for the ranging measurement operation or is shared between the ranging measurement operation and a further measurement operation; an indication indicating the first UE can execute which switch kind of the RF switch procedure in the ranging time gap, wherein a switch kind of the RF switch procedure includes at least one of: the RF switch procedure for transmission, and the RF switch procedure for reception; a role of the first UE when using the ranging time gap; an identifier (ID) of a UE associated with the RF switch procedure within the one or more second UEs; one or more preconditions of the ranging time gap applied to the first UE; a time length of the ranging time gap; a repetition period in a time domain of the ranging time gap; a start time offset to the repetition period in the time domain of the ranging time gap; timing advance applied at the first UE when using the ranging time gap; a frequency band associated with the ranging time gap; and a reference cell indicator associated with the ranging time gap.
In analogous art, Manolakos teaches in at least 0146- “at the start of a measurement gap, the UE tunes to the target frequency, then performs the measurement, and then tunes back to the source frequency at the end of the gap. No uplink transmission is permitted inside a measurement gap, as the UE is not synchronized to the uplink timing for inter-frequency or inter-RAT cells”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to try (see specifically bolded and underlined features that are suggested in the cited sections of Manolakos )wherein the configuration information regarding the ranging time gap includes at least one of: an indication indicating whether the RF switch procedure related to the ranging time gap is only dedicated for the ranging measurement operation or is shared between the ranging measurement operation and a further measurement operation; an indication indicating the first UE can execute which switch kind of the RF switch procedure in the ranging time gap, wherein a switch kind of the RF switch procedure includes at least one of: the RF switch procedure for transmission, and the RF switch procedure for reception; a role of the first UE when using the ranging time gap; an identifier (ID) of a UE associated with the RF switch procedure within the one or more second UEs; one or more preconditions of the ranging time gap applied to the first UE; a time length of the ranging time gap; a repetition period in a time domain of the ranging time gap; a start time offset to the repetition period in the time domain of the ranging time gap; timing advance applied at the first UE when using the ranging time gap; a frequency band associated with the ranging time gap; and a reference cell indicator associated with the ranging time gap for the purpose of performing measurements.
Consider Claims 12 and 19, Lee teaches wherein the first configuration information or the request is included in at least one of: a radio resource control (RRC) signaling message (e.g., see at least RRC exchanges suggested in 0048); a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE); a system information broadcast message; a dedicated sidelink signaling message; a sidelink MAC CE; and a sidelink system information broadcast message.
Claim(s) 15 and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. US Patent Pub. No.: 2020/0296614 A1, hereinafter, ‘Lee’ in view of Manalakos et al., US 20220038927 A1, hereinafter, ‘Manolakos’ and further in view of Wu US Patent Pub. No.: 2018/0255493 and further in view of RC Measurement - GAP https://blog.csdn.net/qq_33083519/article/details/118610854 (09.07.2021) (English Translation), hereinafter, ‘RC measurement’.
Consider Claims 15 and 21, Lee as modified by Manolakos teaches the claimed invention except wherein the at least one processor is further configured cause the first UE to: reselect or handover to a second cell different from a first cell of the first UE, wherein the first cell is configured by the first configuration information; and release the first configuration information.
In analogous art, Wu teaches wherein the at least one processor is further configured cause the first UE to: reselect or handover to a second cell different from a first cell of the first UE, wherein the first cell is configured by the first configuration information; and release the first configuration information (e.g., see release or modify the configuration 0042-0046).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing to try wherein the at least one processor is further configured cause the first UE to: reselect or handover to a second cell different from a first cell of the first UE, wherein the first cell is configured by the first configuration information; and release the first configuration information for the purpose of resource optimization.
Claim(s) 5, 11, 13 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. US Patent Pub. No.: 2020/0296614 A1, hereinafter, ‘Lee’ in view of Manalakos et al., US 20220038927 A1, hereinafter, ‘Manolakos’ and further in view of RC Measurement - GAP https://blog.csdn.net/qq_33083519/article/details/118610854 (09.07.2021) (English Translation), hereinafter, ‘RC measurement’ and further in view Jiang et al. US Patent Pub. No.: 2019/0373621, hereinafter, ‘Jiang’.
Consider Claims 5, 11 and 18, Lee as modified by Manolakos teaches the claimed invention except wherein the at least one processor is further configured to cause the base station to receive a request for the time period from the first UE.
In analogous art, Jiang teaches in paragraph 0060 whereby the at least one RTT ranging scheduling message (i.e., a time period) at 402/502 is transmitted in response to a ranging scheduling request transmitted by the UE 405 to the fixed reference node 505(i.e., a Base station ) (or another network component that schedules the RTT ranging procedure 400 on behalf of the fixed reference node and/or other fixed reference nodes).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the timing request as suggested by jiang for the purpose of improving signaling efficiencies between device nodes.
Consider Claim 13, Lee as modified by Manolakos teaches the claimed invention except wherein the request includes at least one of: an indication for requesting the first configuration information; an indication indicating whether the first UE can execute the ranging measurement operation in the ranging time window; an indication indicating whether the first UE can execute the RF switch procedure in the ranging time gap; a role of the first UE when using the ranging time window; the role of the first UE when using the ranging time gap; an identifier (ID) of a third UE associated with the ranging measurement operation within the one or more second UEs; an ID of a fourth UE associated with the RF switch procedure within the one or more second UEs; an indication indicating whether the ranging time window can be used by the first UE for all of the one or more second UEs; an indication indicating whether the ranging time gap can be used by the first UE for all of the one or more second UEs; an indication indicating whether the ranging time gap is only dedicated for the ranging measurement operation or is shared between the ranging measurement operation and a further measurement operation; capability information of the first UE associated with the ranging time window; capability information of the first UE associated with the ranging time gap; a time length of the ranging time window; a time length of the ranging time gap; a repetition period in a time domain of the ranging time window; a repetition period in the time domain of the ranging time gap; start time of the ranging time window; start time of the ranging time gap; start time offset to a repetition period in the time domain of the ranging time window; start time offset to a repetition period in the time domain of the ranging time gap; timing advance of the ranging time.
In analogous art, Jiang teaches an indication indicating whether the first UE can execute the ranging measurement operation in the ranging time window (i.e., this would be indicated based on a request for a schedule to perform said execution in paragraph 0060 whereby the at least one RTT ranging scheduling message (i.e., a time period) at 402/502 is transmitted in response to a ranging scheduling request transmitted by the UE 405 to the fixed reference node 505(i.e., a Base station ) (or another network component that schedules the RTT ranging procedure 400 on behalf of the fixed reference node and/or other fixed reference nodes).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to try wherein the request includes at least one of: an indication for requesting the first configuration information; an indication indicating whether the first UE can execute the ranging measurement operation in the ranging time window; an indication indicating whether the first UE can execute the RF switch procedure in the ranging time gap; a role of the first UE when using the ranging time window; the role of the first UE when using the ranging time gap; an identifier (ID) of a third UE associated with the ranging measurement operation within the one or more second UEs; an ID of a fourth UE associated with the RF switch procedure within the one or more second UEs; an indication indicating whether the ranging time window can be used by the first UE for all of the one or more second UEs; an indication indicating whether the ranging time gap can be used by the first UE for all of the one or more second UEs; an indication indicating whether the ranging time gap is only dedicated for the ranging measurement operation or is shared between the ranging measurement operation and a further measurement operation; capability information of the first UE associated with the ranging time window; capability information of the first UE associated with the ranging time gap; a time length of the ranging time window; a time length of the ranging time gap; a repetition period in a time domain of the ranging time window; a repetition period in the time domain of the ranging time gap; start time of the ranging time window; start time of the ranging time gap; start time offset to a repetition period in the time domain of the ranging time window; start time offset to a repetition period in the time domain of the ranging time gap; timing advance of the ranging time window; timing advance of the ranging time gap; a frequency band associated with the ranging time window; and a frequency band associated with the ranging time gap for the purpose of performing measurements.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20240080687- teaches a method and an apparatus for configuration a period for SSB measurement. The method includes: detecting an SSB of a neighboring cell within the period for SSB measurement, in which the period for SSB measurement includes: an SSB measurement timing configuration (SMTC) window and/or a measurement gap; and reporting update indication information based on a detection result of the SSB, in which the update indication information is configured to update a period configuration at a network side, and the period configuration includes indication information for determining the period for SSB measurement. [0190] Exemplarily, the network configures or updates the public SMTC window/measurement gap based on the range of transmission delay differences.
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 CHARLES TERRELL SHEDRICK whose telephone number is (571)272-8621. The examiner can normally be reached 8A-5P.
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, Matthew D Anderson can be reached at 571 272 4177. 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.
/CHARLES T SHEDRICK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2646
Prosecution Insights