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 .
This Office Action is in response to initial filing on 07/03/2024.
Claim 1-20 are currently pending and have been considered below.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 07/03/2024. These drawings are reviewed and accepted by the Examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 8 and 15 are objected to because of the following informalities: the limitation reciting “it’s” should be changed to -- its – or replacing “it’s downlink decoding of” for -- decoding --, in lines 13 and 15 of claim 1, lines 12 and 14 of claim 8, and lines 17 and 19 of claim 15, for grammatical correctness. Appropriate correction/clarification is required.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 1 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12052665. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
Instant claim 1 is broader in scope and thus encompasses the subject matter of conflicting claim 1. Instant claim 1 does not require the “starting the PDCCH monitoring” of conflicting claim 1 and each of the other steps are more broadly written.
Regarding claim 1, the table below shows that claim 1 of the patent contains the elements of claim 1 of the instant application, and therefore, is an obvious variant thereof.
Instant Application 18/763,664
Patent 12/052,665
1. A method for using a power saving signal pattern, comprising:
obtaining a trigger condition by a terminal device, the trigger condition comprising a condition to stop using a power saving signal pattern;
determining that the trigger condition is met by the terminal device;
and stopping using the power saving signal pattern by the terminal device;
wherein the trigger condition comprises at least one of:
the terminal device being in a state of waiting for a response message during a process of initiating a Random Access (RA) request; or the terminal device initiating a scheduling request (SR); or after the terminal device detecting that a corresponding grant exists in a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH); or after a duration of T1 after receiving downlink data grant by the terminal device and its downlink decoding of the downlink data was not successfully decoded, wherein the duration of T1 is a time duration before a DL data retransmission is expected by the UE when receiving downlink data grant by the terminal device and its downlink decoding of the downlink data was not successfully decoded.
1. A method for using a power saving signal pattern, comprising:
obtaining a trigger condition by a terminal device, the trigger condition comprising a condition to stop using a power saving signal pattern and to start physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) monitoring;
determining whether the trigger condition is met by the terminal device;
and stopping using the power saving signal pattern and starting the PDCCH monitoring by the terminal device based on the trigger condition being met;
wherein the trigger condition comprises at least one of:
the terminal device being in a state of waiting for a response message during a process of initiating a routing area (RA) request; when the terminal device initiating a scheduling request (SR); or after the terminal device detecting that a corresponding grant exists in a PDCCH.
Instant claim 2 and conflicting claim 1 correspond.
Instant claim 3 and conflicting claim 2 correspond.
Instant claim 4 and conflicting claim 3 correspond.
Instant claim 5 and conflicting claim 4 correspond.
Instant claim 6 and conflicting claim 5 correspond.
Instant claim 7 and conflicting claim 6 correspond.
Instant claim 8 is broader in scope and thus encompasses the subject matter of conflicting claim 7. Instant claim 8 does not require the “starting the PDCCH monitoring” of conflicting claim 7 and each of the other steps are more broadly written.
Instant claim 9 and conflicting claim 7 correspond.
Instant claim 10 and conflicting claim 8 correspond.
Instant claim 11 and conflicting claim 9 correspond.
Instant claim 12 and conflicting claim 10 correspond.
Instant claim 13 and conflicting claim 11 correspond.
Instant claim 14 and conflicting claim 12 correspond.
Instant claim 15 is broader in scope and thus encompasses the subject matter of conflicting claim 13. Instant claim 15 does not require the “starting the PDCCH monitoring” of conflicting claim 13 and each of the other steps are more broadly written.
Instant claim 16 and conflicting claim 13 correspond.
Instant claim 17 and conflicting claim 14 correspond.
Instant claim 18 and conflicting claim 15 correspond.
Instant claim 19 and conflicting claim 16 correspond.
Instant claim 20 and conflicting claim 8 correspond.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3, 4, 8, 10, 11, 15, 17, 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by applicant’s submission of prior art, Kuang et al (CN109219116A).
Regarding claim 1, Kuang discloses a method for using a power saving signal pattern, comprising:
obtaining a trigger condition by a terminal device (Kuang, page 1, Claim 1 states that “If the terminal device does not receive a signal indicating wake-up within a preset time, wherein the terminal device is configured to receive DRX discontinuously. Note the “If the terminal device does not receive a signal indicating wake-up within a preset time” is fairly characterized as ‘obtaining a trigger condition.’), the trigger condition comprising a condition to stop using a power saving signal pattern (page 1, claim 1 states that “The terminal device stops the activity timer if the activity timer is running” or “If the retransmission timer is running, the terminal device stops the retransmission timer”);
determining whether the trigger condition is met by the terminal device (page 1, claim 1 The terminal device stops the activity timer and the retransmission timer if the activity timer and the retransmission timer are running. Thus, the trigger condition is met); and
stopping using the power saving signal pattern by the terminal device (page 1, claim 1 states that “The terminal device stops the activity timer if the activity timer is running.” Page 2, Claim 3 states that “wherein the stopping of the activity timer by the terminal device comprises: The terminal device stops the activity timer at the beginning of the next DRX cycle of the DRX cycle.”);
wherein the trigger condition comprises at least one of:
the terminal device being in a state of waiting for a response message during a process of initiating a Random Access (RA) request; or
the terminal device initiating a scheduling request (SR) (page 52, [0293], “And because, when the terminal device does not receive a signal indicating to wake up within the preset time, the network device (such as the base station) will not schedule the terminal device in a subsequent period of time, and the terminal can subsequently The short DRX cycle is not applicable, but the long DRX cycle is used to achieve more power saving”); or
after the terminal device detecting that a corresponding grant exists in a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH); or
after a duration of T1 from the terminal device receiving downlink data grant and (its) downlink decoding of the downlink data was not successfully decoded, wherein the duration of T1 is a time duration before a DL data retransmission is expected by the UE when receiving downlink data grant by the terminal device and [the] downlink decoding of the downlink data was not successfully decoded.
Regarding claim 3, Kuang discloses the method of claim 1, wherein obtaining the trigger condition by the terminal device comprises:
receiving, by the terminal device, a broadcast message sent by an access network device, the broadcast message carrying the trigger condition (page 86, [500] states that “the first message is associated with the time information, so that the first message may indicate the Time information for the terminal device to wake up or sleep. Exemplarily, the communication device may configure the time information associated with the first message to the terminal device through a broadcast message or an RRC dedicated message or other messages, or the time information associated with the first message may also be configured; or
receiving, by the terminal device, a dedicated signaling sent by the access network device, the dedicated signaling carrying the trigger condition; or obtaining, by the terminal device, the trigger condition that is pre-determined;
or receiving, by the terminal device, a dedicated signaling sent by the access network device, the dedicated signaling carrying the trigger condition; or obtaining, by the terminal device, the trigger condition that is pre-determined by a communication protocol.
Regarding claim 4, Kuang discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the power saving signal pattern comprises a Go To Sleep (GTS) pattern, the GTS pattern comprising a sleeping starting time and a sleeping duration (page 86, [500], “For example, the first message may be a wake-up signal, then the first message may instruct the terminal device to wake up. Combined with the time information associated with the first message, the first message The time information for waking up the terminal device may be indicated; for another example, the first message may be a go-to-sleep signal, then the first message may instruct the terminal device to sleep. The time information associated with a message; the first message may indicate the sleep time information of the terminal device.”); or the power saving signal pattern comprises a Wake Up Signaling (WUS) pattern, the WUS pattern comprising a starting time offset and a period.
Claim 8 contains subject matter similar to claim 1, and thus, is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 10 contains subject matter similar to claim 3, and thus, is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 11 contains subject matter similar to claim 4, and thus, is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 15 contains subject matter similar to claim 1, and thus, is rejected under similar rationale. (Kuang, page 4, Claim 17, “A terminal device”).
Claim 17 contains subject matter similar to claim 3, and thus, is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 18 contains subject matter similar to claim 4, and thus, is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 20 contains subject matter similar to claim 15, and thus, is rejected under similar rationale. (Kuang, page 4, base station).
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.
Claims 2, 5-7, 9, 12-14, 16 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over applicant’s submission of prior art, Kuang et al (CN109219116A) in view of Wu et al (US 11290958).
Regarding claim 2, Kuang discloses the method according to claim 1, except wherein the condition to stop using the power saving signal pattern is a condition to stop using the power saving signal pattern and to resume PDCCH monitoring. Wu discloses at Step S102: start or stop a monitoring of the PDCCH based on a result of the monitoring of the physical layer power saving signal, in Figure 1; and, In a preferred embodiment of the present disclosure, when the UE is in the RRC connected mode and is configured with the DRX, starting or stopping a monitoring of the PDCCH based on the monitoring result of the physical layer power saving signal includes: stopping the drx-onDurationTimer and/or drx-InactivityTimer, see col. 12, ll. 57-63).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to stop using the power saving signal pattern is a condition to stop using the power saving signal pattern and to resume PDCCH monitoring as taught by Wu because the transition ranks data latency and dependability over power saving once a communication session is successful and thus further enhancing the monitoring of the physical downlink control channel.
Regarding claim 5, Wu further discloses the method of claim 1, comprising:
obtaining, by the terminal device, a failure condition corresponding to the trigger condition (col. 27, ll. 59-65, power saving signaling such as the GTS and PDCCH skipping may also be contained within the ACK DCI or the NACK DCI of the PUSCH, the ACK DCI is the DCI for indicating that the PUSCH, the PUSCH is not successfully decoded by the base station); determining, by the terminal device, whether the failure condition is met (col. 28, ll. 13-27, the DCI format containing the power saving signaling is specifically used for the indication of the power saving signaling, and is not used for the data scheduling or the ACK/NACK indication of the PUSCH, and the UE may monitor the DCI based on the new defined RNTI value); and reusing the power saving signal pattern by the terminal device, based on the failure condition being met (col. 38, ll. 22-30, power saving signaling that indicates the UE to enter the On-Duration from the Opportunity-for-DRX, that is, to start the monitoring of the PDCCH).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to obtain, by the terminal device, a failure condition corresponding to the trigger condition as taught by Wu in order to allow the terminal to sleep and wake up properly and efficiently when notified of coming data.
Regarding claim 6, Wu further discloses the method of claim 5, wherein the failure condition comprises at least one of following conditions: the terminal device setting a timer with a duration of T3 after the trigger condition takes effect, and T3 being expired (col. 6, ll. 35-45, the On-Duration can be continuously extended by the drx-InactivityTimer, and the UE is able to stop the monitoring of the PDCCH only after the expiration of both the drx-onDurationTimer and the drx-InactivityTimer, that is, to enter the Opportunity-for-DRX.); the terminal device receiving a grant response message, the grant response message being a response message of the access network device to a scheduling request (SR) of the terminal device; the terminal device receiving a reestablishment response message, the reestablishment response message being a response message of the access network device to a reestablishment request of the terminal device; the terminal device receiving a cell handover instruction, the cell handover instruction being generated by the access network device after receiving the measurement report request from the terminal device; the terminal device receiving a msg4 message scrambled by a cell radio network temporary identifier (C-RNTI) the msg4 message being generated by the access network device after receiving a RA request from the terminal device; the terminal device receiving expected uplink data grant information retransmitted or newly transmitted; or the terminal device receiving expected downlink data grant information retransmitted (col. 27, ll. 59-65, the ACK DCI is the DCI for indicating that the PUSCH is successfully decoded by the base station, and the NACK DCI is the DCI used for indicating that the PUSCH is not successfully decoded by the base station.).
Regarding claim 7, Wu further discloses the method of claim 6, wherein obtaining the failure condition corresponding to the trigger condition by the terminal device comprises: receiving, by the terminal device, a broadcast message sent by the access network device, the broadcast message carrying the failure condition; or, receiving, by the terminal device, a dedicated signaling sent by the access network device, the dedicated signaling carrying the failure condition (col. 27, ll. 59-65, power saving signaling such as the GTS and PDCCH skipping may also be contained within the ACK DCI or the NACK DCI of the PUSCH, the ACK DCI is the DCI for indicating that the PUSCH, the PUSCH is not successfully decoded by the base station); or, obtaining, by the terminal device, the failure condition that is pre-determined.
Claim 9 contains subject matter similar to claim 2, and thus, is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 12 contains subject matter similar to claim 5, and thus, is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 13 contains subject matter similar to claim 6, and thus, is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 14 contains subject matter similar to claim 7, and thus, is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 16 contains subject matter similar to claim 2, and thus, is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 19 contains subject matter similar to claim 5, and thus, is rejected under similar rationale.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 10129830 to Koc et al: The UE achieves power savings and latency requirements more effectively by communicating its preferences, constraints and/or requirements to an evolved Node B (eNodeB) in the form of UE assistance information. The UE assistance information may include, for example, an indication of a preferred set of discontinuous reception (DRX) settings.
US 20150173016 to Heo et al: DRX operations may be performed independently in multiple serving cells belonging to the different eNBs.
US 20140056200 to Jha et al: he eNB or base station so that eNB or base station can more effectively provide settings to the user equipment. Because the user equipment may have more in depth knowledge about the conditions that exist at the user equipment.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JULIO R PEREZ whose telephone number is (571)272-7846. The examiner can normally be reached 10Am - 6PM EST M-F.
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, Kathy Wang-Hurst can be reached at 5712705371. 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.
/JULIO R PEREZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2644
Prosecution Insights