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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/18/2024 and 04/10/2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements have been considered by the examiner.
Specification
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.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
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 1-12, 19, and 21 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, the claim recites the limitation “performing a measurement on a measurement object based on the measurement configuration information and a threshold value” in lines 7-8, but fails to recite any sort of condition associated with the threshold value (e.g., performing a measurement when the measurement gap overhead is greater than/less than or equal to the threshold value, refer to Paragraphs [0058]-[0060] of applicant’s specification, filed 11/18/2024), rendering the scope of the claim indefinite.
Additionally, the preamble of the claim recites configuring a measurement gap, but fails to recite any actual step of configuring a measurement gap, rendering the claim incomplete for omitting essential method steps. See MPEP § 2172.01. At most, the claim recites receiving measurement configuration information comprising measurement gap configuration information, and performing a measurement based on the measurement configuration information.
Regarding claims 2-12 and 21, the claims are rejected for depending on claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 19, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as claim 1 above.
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)(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.
Claims 13-14, 20, and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Cheng et al. (US 2019/0059093 A1), hereinafter referred to as Cheng.
Regarding claim 13, Cheng method for configuring a measurement gap (Cheng – Paragraph [0008], note method, measurement object for each of the plurality of measurement gap periods; Paragraph [0087], note the measurement configuration also includes a measurement gap configuration which contains a measurement gap length (MGL) and a measurement gap repetition period (MGRP)), performed by a network device, the method comprising:
sending measurement configuration information to user equipment (Cheng – Paragraph [0087], note the UE chooses a measurement object to measure, and follows a measurement configuration from the base station to perform measurements, measurement configuration to the UE1 through higher layer signaling (e.g., RRC signaling)),
wherein the measurement configuration information comprises a plurality of pieces of measurement gap configuration information (Cheng – Paragraph [0081], note measurement object configurations listed in the measurement configuration; Paragraph [0087], note the measurement configuration also includes a measurement gap configuration which contains a measurement gap length (MGL) and a measurement gap repetition period (MGRP)), different pieces of measurement gap configuration information corresponding to different measurement objects (Cheng – Paragraph [0079], note measurement configuration having an information element (IE) indicating one or more restricted/selected measurement object IDs, the UE only needs to monitor the measurement object(s) indicated by the restricted/selected measurement object ID(s) in the measurement gap configuration).
Regarding claim 14, Cheng teaches wherein sending the measurement configuration information to the user equipment comprises:
sending Radio Resource Control (RRC) signaling to the user equipment, wherein the RRC signaling comprises the measurement configuration information (Cheng – Paragraph [0087], note the BS1 configures measurement object configurations in a measurement configuration to the UE1 through higher layer signaling (e.g., RRC signaling)).
Regarding claim 20, Cheng teaches a network device (Cheng – Fig. 18; Paragraph [0151], note node 1800 may be a base station), comprising:
a processor (Cheng – Paragraph [0151], note a processor 1826); and
a memory storing a computer program executable by the processor (Cheng – Paragraph [0155], note the memory 1828 may store computer-readable, computer-executable instructions 1832 (e.g., software codes) executable by processor 1826);
wherein the processor is configured to perform the method of claim 13 (Cheng – Paragraph [0155], note cause the processor 1826 to perform various functions described herein, for example, with reference to Figs. 1 through 17).
Regarding claim 22, Cheng teaches a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, having stored therein instructions that, when executed by a processor, cause the processor to perform the method of claim 13 (Cheng – Fig. 18; Paragraph [0155], note the memory 1828 may include computer-storage media in the form of volatile and/or non-volatile memory, the memory 1828 may store computer-readable, computer-executable instructions 1832 (e.g., software codes) that are configured to, when executed, cause the processor 1826 to perform various functions described herein, for example, with reference to Figs. 1 through 17).
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 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.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheng in view of Kanneath Abraham et al. (US 2023/0328572 A1), hereinafter referred to as Abraham.
Regarding claim 16, Cheng does not teach wherein the measurement configuration information further comprises a priority of a measurement gap.
In an analogous art, Abraham teaches wherein the measurement configuration information further comprises a priority of a measurement gap (Abraham – Paragraph [0062], note measurement gap configuration for supporting multiple measurement gaps with gap sharing and gap priority from release 17 is given in Table 1; Paragraph [0065], note the gapPriority indicates the priority of this measurement gap (see TS 38.133)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Abraham into Cheng in order to indicate gap priority in measurement configuration information through RRC to resolve collisions between measurement gap occasions (Abraham – Paragraph [0061]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-12 and 19 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Claim 15 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim 13, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Applicant’s independent claims recite performing a measurement on a measurement object based on the measurement configuration information and a threshold value, wherein the threshold value is configured for measurement gap overhead control, which is neither taught nor suggested by the prior art.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Tenny et al. (US 2019/0124533 A1) discloses inter-frequency measurement gap configuration (which includes a measurement gap pattern and related information) communicated to a UE via RRC along with measurement objects.
Cui et al. (US 2019/0174343 A1) discloses the network configuring two measurement gaps via RRC for the UE to perform measurements on FR1/LTE and FR2 measurement objects.
Zheng et al. (US 2022/0174623 A1) discloses a network device indicating priorities of measurement gaps.
He et al. (US 2022/0322308 A1) discloses an RRC message modifying/reconfiguring one or more parameters of a measurement gap configuration.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BAILOR C HSU whose telephone number is (571)272-1729. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 9:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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.
/BAILOR C HSU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2461
Prosecution Insights