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 .
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.
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)(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.
Claim(s) 15-17 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Cheng et al. (US 2021/0368374 A1).
Regarding claim 15, Cheng appears to disclose a method, comprising:
receiving, by a processor of an apparatus, a configuration of one or more measurement gaps (MGs) from a network node ([0086]-[0087] disclosing the base station configures the user equipment with measurement gap configuration via RRC signalling, medium access control (MAC) control element (CE) or downlink control information (DCI));
receiving, by the processor, a downlink control information (DCI) or a medium access control-control element (MAC-CE) from the network node, wherein the DCI or the MAC-CE indicates an adaptation of at least one of the one or more MGs ([0086]-[0087], [0095] disclosing the network can send a MAC CE or DCI to activate/deactivate the measurement gap); and
applying, by the processor, the adaptation of the at least one of the one or more MGs ([0086]-[0087] the UE uses the periodicity of the measurement gap until deactivated, implicitly disclosing the UE uses the measurement gap when said measurement gap is activated).
Regarding claim 16, Cheng appears to disclose the method of Claim 15, wherein the adaptation of the at least one of the one or more MGs comprises one of the following:
activating the at least one of the one or more MGs ([0086]-[0087]);
deactivating the at least one of the one or more MGs ([0086]-[0087]);
skipping the at least one of the one or more MGs; and
changing a setting of the at least one of the one or more MGs ([0086]-[0087]).
Regarding claim 17, Cheng appears to disclose the method of Claim 16, wherein the setting comprises at least one of the following:
a measurement gap repetition period; and a measurement gap length (Fig. 7, [0074]).
Regarding claim 19, Cheng appears to disclose the method of Claim 15, wherein: the DCI comprises a scheduling DCI, a non-scheduling DCI, or a DCI specific for MG adaptation; or the DCI or the MAC-CE is received on a primary cell (PCell) or a primary secondary cell (PSCell) ([0086]-[0087]).
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) 1-5, 8-12 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheng et al. (US 2021/0368374 A1) in view of Hahn et al. (US 2017/0127397 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Cheng appears to disclose a method, comprising:
transmitting, by a processor of an apparatus ([0140]), a configuration of one or more measurement gaps (MGs) to a user equipment (UE) ([0086]-[0087] disclosing the base station configures the user equipment with measurement gap configuration via RRC signalling, medium access control (MAC) control element (CE) or downlink control information (DCI));
transmitting, by the processor, a downlink control information (DCI) or a medium access control-control element (MAC-CE) to the UE, wherein the DCI or the MAC-CE indicates an adaptation of at least one of the one or more MGs ([0086]-[0087], [0095] disclosing the network can send a MAC CE or DCI to activate/deactivate the measurement gap).
Cheng does not disclose the following; however, Hahn suggests determining, by the processor, a specific type of traffic associated with the UE ([0032], [0178]-[0179] disclosing the measurement gaps are configured in order to meet the latency requirements of the specific service).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention of Cheng to configure the measurement gaps as taught by Hahn because this prevents a specific service such as a mission critical service from being stopped due to the measurement gap configuration ([0023]).
Regarding claim 2, Cheng appears to disclose the method of Claim 1, wherein the adaptation of the at least one of the one or more MGs comprises one of the following:
activating the at least one of the one or more MGs ([0086]-[0087]);
deactivating the at least one of the one or more MGs ([0086]-[0087]);
skipping the at least one of the one or more MGs; and
changing a setting of the at least one of the one or more MGs ([0086]-[0087]).
Regarding claim 3, Cheng appears to disclose the method of Claim 2, wherein the setting comprises at least one of the following:
a measurement gap repetition period; and a measurement gap length (Fig. 7, [0074]).
Regarding claim 4, Cheng does not disclose the following; however, Hahn suggests the method of Claim 2, wherein the DCI, the MAC-CE, or a radio resource control (RRC) signaling indicates whether the UE performs a transmission or reception operation or not during the deactivated or skipped one or more MGs ([0237]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention of Cheng to configure the measurement gaps as taught by Hahn because this prevents a specific service such as a mission critical service from being stopped due to the measurement gap configuration ([0023]).
Regarding claim 5, Cheng appears to disclose the method of Claim 1, wherein the DCI comprises a scheduling DCI, a non-scheduling DCI, or a DCI specific for MG adaptation ([0086]-[0087]).
Regarding claim 8-12, the claims are directed towards an apparatus, comprising: a transceiver which, during operation, wirelessly communicates with a user equipment (UE); and a processor communicatively coupled to the transceiver such that, during operation, the processor performs operations comprising the method of claims 1-5. Cheng discloses such an embodiment (Fig. 17, [0103]-[0104], [0140]); accordingly, claims 8-12 are rejected on the grounds presented above for claims 1-5.
Regarding claim 18, Cheng does not disclose the following; however, Hahn suggests the method of Claim 16, wherein the DCI, the MAC-CE, or a radio resource control (RRC) signaling indicates whether the apparatus performs a transmission or reception operation or not during the deactivated or skipped one or more MGs ([0237]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention of Cheng to configure the measurement gaps as taught by Hahn because this prevents a specific service such as a mission critical service from being stopped due to the measurement gap configuration ([0023]).
Claim(s) 6, 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheng et al. (US 2021/0368374 A1) in view of Hahn et al. (US 2017/0127397 A1) further in view of He et al. (US 2022/0322308 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Cheng does not expressly disclose the following; however, He suggests the method of Claim 1, wherein the DCI or the MAC-CE is transmitted on a primary cell (PCell) or a primary secondary cell (PSCell) (Fig. 4, 405, 410, [0152], [0155]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the techniques of Cheng as suggested by He because this can improve measurements received outside of an active bandwidth part, improve throughput at the UE and facilitate improved handover decisions ([0098]).
Regarding claim 13, the claim is directed towards the apparatus which performs the method of claim 6; accordingly, claim 13 is rejected on the grounds presented above for claim 6.
Claim(s) 7, 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheng et al. (US 2021/0368374 A1) in view of Hahn et al. (US 2017/0127397 A1) further in view of Palle Venkata et al. (US 2025/0056363 A1).
Regarding claim 7, Cheng does not disclose the following; however, Palle Venkata suggests the method of Claim 1, further comprising:
receiving, by the processor, assistance information from the UE, wherein the assistance information comprises at least one of the following ([0052], [0069]);
information indicating whether the UE is in a condition for MG adaptation; a link condition of the UE; an indication of an extended reality (XR) mode being in use by the UE; and an XR traffic pattern of the UE ([0052], [0069]); and
determining, by the processor, the adaptation of the at least one of the one or more MGs according to the assistance information ([0017], [0069]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effecti8ve filing date of the invention to modify the techniques of Cheng as suggested by Palle Venkata because this can improve power saving for the user equipment ([0017]).
Regarding claim 14, the claim is directed towards the apparatus which performs the method of claim 7; accordingly, claim 14 is rejected on the grounds presented above for claim 7.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheng et al. (US 2021/0368374 A1) in view of Palle Venkata et al. (US (US 2025/0056363 A1).
Regarding claim 20, Cheng does not disclose the following; however, Palle Venkata suggests the method of Claim 15, further comprising:
reporting, by the processor, assistance information to the network node ([0052], [0069]), wherein the assistance information comprises at least one of the following:
information indicating whether the apparatus is in a condition for MG adaptation; a link condition of the apparatus; an indication of an extended reality (XR) mode being in use by the apparatus; and an XR traffic pattern of the apparatus ([0052], [0069]); and
wherein the adaptation of the at least one of the one or more MGs is determined according to the assistance information ([0017], [0069]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effecti8ve filing date of the invention to modify the techniques of Cheng as suggested by Palle Venkata because this can improve power saving for the user equipment ([0017]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Xu et al. (US 2023/0319865 A1) discloses setting measurement gaps based on the least common multiple of the measurement gap periodicity and the communication resource periodicity ([0144]); Hasegawa et al. (US 2024/0187903 A1) discloses setting a measurement gap pattern based on traffic type ([0155]); Thangarasa et al. (US 2025/0039708 A1) discloses low mobility relaxation criteria ([0081]).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Joseph A Bednash whose telephone number is (571)270-7500. The examiner can normally be reached 7 AM - 4:30 PM 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, Huy Vu can be reached at (571)272-3155. 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.
/JOSEPH A BEDNASH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2461
Prosecution Insights