Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
2. This communication is in response to the Application No. 18/899,144 filed on 9/27/24. Claims 1 – 20 has been examined.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
3. 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.
4. 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.
5. Claim(s) 1,9, 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tirronen et al. (US 2016/0050624, Tirronen hereafter).
Regarding claim 1, Tirronen teaches A method performed by an electronic device in a cellular communication network, the method comprising:
monitoring for paging subframes transmitted at a paging subframe repeat interval (the wireless device wakes up from the sleep state when the current time t as monitored by the clock is more than t.sub.PAGE−t.sub.s, where t.sub.PAGE is the future point in time indicating an upcoming reception occasion and t.sub.s is a first time period, so that the wireless device wakes up t.sub.s milliseconds before the upcoming reception occasion, paragraph 92; The correct time t.sub.PAGE is related to the DRX cycle length and/or the reception event. The time can be absolute, to be used one time, or alternatively a periodic indication, paragraph 133);
receiving the paging subframes (The UE, or the wireless device 110, calculates, or determines, e.g. in an initial negotiation phase, a first point in time, such as a correct time t.sub.PAGE, for the next DL reception occasion (subframe), paragraph 133; The UE wakes up again at a third point in time, i.e. t SFN milliseconds before the paging occasion, paragraph 143);
generating, based at least in part on the paging subframes received, paging triggers having a paging trigger repeat interval equal to the paging subframe repeat interval (the UE also reads the UTC information from SIB-16. The UTC information may be read at some point in time in order to enable calibration of the low power clock. When the low power clock is calibrated a future point in time, such as t.sub.PAGE may be referred to using the UTC information+SFN, paragraph 136; The UE may read the UTC information from SIB-16 again, so that the always-on and low power clock can be calibrated to correct time. In this action, the UE thus has time information from the low power clock and time information based on UTC (or the like), paragraph 140); and
adjusting a reference timer of the electronic device based at least in part on the paging triggers (the UE also reads the UTC information from SIB-16. The UTC information may be read at some point in time in order to enable calibration of the low power clock. When the low power clock is calibrated a future point in time, such as t.sub.PAGE may be referred to using the UTC information+SFN, paragraph 136; The UE may read the UTC information from SIB-16 again, so that the always-on and low power clock can be calibrated to correct time. In this action, the UE thus has time information from the low power clock and time information based on UTC (or the like), paragraph 140).
Regarding claim 9, the electronic device substantially has same limitations as claim 1, thus the same rejection is applicable.
Regarding claim 16, the non-transitory computer redable medium substantially has same limitations as claim 1, thus the same rejection is applicable.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. 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.
7. 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.
8. 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.
9. Claim(s) 2, 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tirronen et al. (US 2016/0050624, Tirronen hereafter) in further view of Parr et al. (US 2019/0173573, hereafter).
Regarding claim 2, Tirronen teaches method of claim 1, even though Tirronen teaches registering cellular communication network, receiving a UTC from the base station, and adjusting timer however does not specifically teach and/or suggest prior to monitoring the paging subframe performing those steps.
Parr teaches prior to monitoring the paging subframes (the paging reception time of a satellite terminal. Prior to reception, the satellite terminal can wake up and attempt to acquire the forward link channels. During the time the satellite terminal is attempting acquisition, the forward link signal levels may be raised to increase the link margin for both acquisition and the page, paragraph 108):
registering to the cellular communication network by communicating with a base station that transmits the paging subframes as an access point (A terminal that is about to transmit should read these flags, but may not be required to learn of all the available space relays that are available. In another scenario, a newly registering terminal may go through the process of reading all the SI, including descriptions of space relays, paragraph 110; terrestrial hub, Abstract, throughout specification), and
receiving coordinated universal time (UTC) information from the base station (UTC, paragraph 68),
wherein adjusting the reference timer includes synchronizing a local UTC maintained by the reference timer with UTC (If GPS timing is available, the satellite terminal may use this as a basis for synchronizing its transmitter. If not, the terminal may transmit with synchronization based on its local reference oscillator. In this case, consideration shall be given to the potential frequency error, and how it might impact neighboring channels or how it might impact compliance with any regulatory requirements. Emergency transmissions may include information such as the identity of the satellite terminal and its location, paragraph 107).
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art at the time of the filing to combine the teachings of Parr’s prior to monitoring performing the steps of registering, and synchronizing with the system of Tirronen. One would be motivated to combine these teachings because it can help adjust the UTC timer prior to monitoring; making the system more effective.
Regarding claim 10, the electronic device substantially has same limitations as claim 2, thus the same rejection is applicable.
Allowable Subject Matter
10. Claims 3 – 8, 11 – 15, 17 – 20 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
11. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TANMAY K SHAH whose telephone number is (571)270-3624. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri - 8:00 - 5:00.
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, Chieh Fan can be reached at 571-272-3042. 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.
TANMAY K. SHAH
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2632
/TANMAY K SHAH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2632
Prosecution Insights