DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed May 12, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Examiner has taken a further look at the previously cited prior art Kim (US 2023/0093248) and the foreign application (KR 10-2021-0069291) from which Kim claims priority and determined both Kim and its parent foreign application further teach the amended features or claim limitations. The above foreign application teaches in Sections 0228 – 0229 (See EPO Spacenet for translation of said foreign application) that the subgrouping ID is based on number of subgroups for both CN and UE_ID subgrouping. Additionally, since UE_ID subgrouping is involved said subgrouping ID is also based on a UE_ID. Kim therefore further teaches the limitations in question.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(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) 13, 14, 25 – 28, 33 – 35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kim (US 2023/0093248)
Regarding Claim 13, Kim teaches a method performed by a user equipment (UE) in a wireless communication system, the method comprising: receiving, from a base station, system information including first information on a number of subgroups for UE identity (ID) based subgrouping and second information on a number of subgroups for a core network (CN) assigned subgrouping (system information (Sections 0172, 0173), UE_ID based subgrouping and CN assigned subgrouping (Section 0219)); and determining a subgroup ID, based on a UE_ID, the first information and the second information the system information (Sections 0223 – 0224, the subgrouping ID is based on number of subgroups for both CN and UE_ID subgrouping, since UE_ID subgrouping is involved said subgrouping ID is also based on a UE_ID).
Regarding Claim 27, Kim teaches a user equipment (UE) in a wireless communication system, the UE comprising: at least one transceiver; and at least one processor communicatively coupled to the at least one transceiver (Figure 2, UE (100)) and at least one memory, communicatively coupled to the at least one processor, storing instructions executable by the at least one processor (Figure 2, UE (100)) to cause the UE to: receive, from a base station, system information including first information on a number of subgroups for UE identity (ID) based subgrouping and second information on a number of subgroups for a core network (CN) assigned subgrouping (system information (Sections 0172, 0173), UE_ID based subgrouping and CN assigned subgrouping (Section 0219)); and determine a subgroup ID, based on a UE ID, the first information and the second information (Sections 0223 – 0224, the subgrouping ID is based on number of subgroups for both CN and UE_ID subgrouping, since UE_ID subgrouping is involved said subgrouping ID is also based on a UE_ID).
Regarding Claim 35, Kim teaches one or more non-transitory computer-readable storage media storing computer-executable instructions that, when executed by at least one processor of a user equipment (UE) (Figure 2, UE (100), memory comprises executable code run by said processor), cause the UE to perform operations, the operations comprising: receiving, from a base station, system information including first information on a number of subgroups for UE identity (ID) based subgrouping and second information on a number of subgroups for a core network (CN) assigned subgrouping (system information (Sections 0172, 0173), UE_ID based subgrouping and CN assigned subgrouping (Section 0219)); and determining a subgroup ID, based on a UE ID, the first information and the second information (Sections 0223 – 0224, the subgrouping ID is based on number of subgroups for both CN and UE_ID subgrouping, since UE_ID subgrouping is involved said subgrouping ID is also based on a UE_ID).
Regarding Claims 14, 28, Kim teaches all of the claimed limitations recited in Claims 13, 27. Kim further teaches wherein the subgroup ID corresponds to a sum of a value associated with the UE ID and the number of subgroups for the CN assigned subgrouping (Sections 0223 – 0224, UE_ID subgrouping number reads on a value associated with the UE_ID, combination of the UE_ID subgrouping number and CN subgrouping number).
Regarding Claims 25, 33, Kim teaches all of the claimed limitations recited in Claims 13, 27. Kim further teaches wherein the UE is in a cell supporting the UE ID based subgrouping (Section 0221, UEs are mobile and thus can be in various cells).
Regarding Claims 26, 34, Kim teaches all of the claimed limitations recited in Claims 13, 27. Kim further teaches wherein the UE is not configured with a CN assigned subgroup ID (Section 0226, no assigned subgroup ID).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 15 – 18, 29 – 32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US 2023/0093248) in view of Nagano et al. (US 2024/0073863).
Regarding Claims 15, 29, Kim teaches all of the claimed limitations recited in Claims 13, 27. Kim does not teach receiving, from the base station, downlink control information (DCI) including bit information associated with paging early indication (PEI), wherein each bit in the bit information indicates one subgroup.
Nagano, which also teaches PEI, teaches receiving, from the base station, downlink control information (DCI) including bit information associated with paging early indication (PEI), wherein each bit in the bit information indicates one subgroup (Section 0092).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Kim with the above features of Nagano for the purpose of controlling monitoring of PEI appropriately as taught by Nagano.
Regarding Claims 16, 30, Kim combination teaches all of the claimed limitations recited in Claims 15, 29. Kim does not teach wherein a length of the bit information is determined based on a number of subgroups.
Nagano, which also teaches PEI, teaches wherein a length of the bit information is determined based on a number of subgroups (Section 0092).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Kim with the above features of Nagano for the purpose of controlling monitoring of PEI appropriately as taught by Nagano.
Regarding Claims 17, 31, Kim combination teaches all of the claimed limitations recited in Claims 15, 29. Kim does not teach identifying that a corresponding bit for a subgroup of the UE in the bit information is set to 1.
Nagano, which also teaches PEI, teaches identifying that a corresponding bit for a subgroup of the UE in the bit information is set to 1 (Sections 0096, 0097, bits can be 0 or 1 thus rendering a scenario wherein a bit for a subgroup of the UE is set to 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Kim with the above features of Nagano for the purpose of controlling monitoring of PEI appropriately as taught by Nagano.
Regarding Claim 18, 32, Kim combination teaches all of the claimed limitations recited in Claims 17, 31. Kim does not teach monitoring a paging occasion (PO) for receiving a paging message, based on the identification.
Nagano, which also teaches PEI, teaches monitoring a paging occasion (PO) for receiving a paging message, based on the identification (Section 0096, 0097).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Kim with the above features of Nagano for the purpose of controlling monitoring of PEI appropriately as taught by Nagano.
Conclusion
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 RAYMOND S DEAN whose telephone number is (571)272-7877. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 6:00-2:30, EST.
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, Anthony S Addy can be reached at 571-272-7795. 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.
/RAYMOND S DEAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2645 Raymond S. Dean
July 27, 2026
Prosecution Insights