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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Lin et al (US 2025/0039847).
Regarding Claim 1, Lin teaches an apparatus ([0012], a User Equipment (UE) for receiving Downlink (DL) signaling from a Base Station (BS)) comprising:
means for transmitting, to a network entity ([0089], For a UE, to receive/transmit data from/to different TRPs associated with different cells (including a serving cell and a non-serving cell) may not only result in improvements in the signaling maintenance, but may also facilitate the reliability enhancement. The inter-cell beam management may be indicated to a UE via pre-configuration, a configuration, RRC signaling, one or more DCI formats, or a MAC CE. Furthermore, whether to support inter-cell beam management may be reported by a UE via a UE capability message. In addition, the multi-DCI scheme may be used to indicate the beam information corresponding to a cell which is different from the serving cell. For example, a first DCI format corresponding to a first CORESET pool index (e.g., represented by the CORESETPoolIndex IE) may be used to indicate a beam for the serving cell, and a second DCI format corresponding to a second CORESET pool index may be used to indicate a beam for another cell that is different from the serving cell. To inform the UE with which cell a TRP is associated, a TCI configuration may include an indicator with an additional PCI index (e.g., represented by the additionalPCI IE). This indicator may be used to indicate that a TCI state, or QCL information, refers to a PCI, different from the serving cell's PCI), at least one measurement report,
the network entity providing a serving cell and a target cell for the apparatus ([0097], In the intra-CU with intra-DU case, the serving cell and the target cell may belong to the same DU and the same CU. In the intra-CU with inter-DU case, the serving cell and the target cell may belong to the same CU but may correspond to different DUs. The serving cell may include the source cell),
wherein the serving cell and the target cell share at least a protocol configuration of a radio resource control layer ([0097], In the intra-node mobility scenario, the serving cell and the target cell may share the same RRC layer and PDCP layer. Specifically, the serving cell and the target cell may be intra-CU. For the intra-DU case, the serving cell and the target cell may share the same MAC entity and the RLC layer);
means for receiving, from the network entity, an indication of a handover configuration for a handover of the apparatus to the target cell ([0091], [0259], the first CORESET may be configured in a first cell and the second CORESET may be configured in a second cell. The second cell may be different from the first cell. For example, the second cell may be a target cell for a handover procedure, while the first cell may be a source cell for the handover procedure);
means for performing, based on receiving the indication of the handover configuration, the handover according to the handover configuration ([0091], For a UE operating in an mTRP-based unified TCI framework, various implementations described in the present disclosure may be applied under different scenarios. These scenarios may include a single cell operation, an intra-band CA, an inter-band CA, an intra-node based LTM (e.g., intra-CU inter-DU LTM, intra-CU intra-DU LTM), and an inter-node based LTM (e.g., inter-CU LTM), [0098], In the case of inter-node based LTM, the implementations may apply when a UE is configured with the d-OrJointTCI-StateList IE or the UL-TCI-StateList IE, when the TCI state(s) is activated in the activation command for the mTRP based unified TCI framework, and/or the UE is configured for operation with inter-node mobility).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Yao et al (US 2020/0053649) teaches the WUR device has a demand for movement that is typically done while the device is in a deep sleep state. When the device moves from the original serving AP to another AP and the background service has a demand for communication with the device, the data packet is first transmitted to the original serving AP, and the original serving AP fails to awake the device by sending a wake-up signal. Then the service AP feeds back the reason for the failure to the upper-layer entity. The upper-layer entity may be an access controller (AC) or another entity responsible for connecting and managing multiple APs in the network deployment, and may include an entity, such as RADIUS, Diameter, etc., responsible for the authentication function, and may also include a dynamic host configuration protocol (DHCP) server responsible for IP address allocation, and the like. ([0105])
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARGARET G WEBB whose telephone number is (571)270-7803. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-6:00 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, Charles Appiah can be reached at (571) 272-7904. 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.
/MARGARET G WEBB/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2641
Prosecution Insights