DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to the application filed on 17 December 2024.
Claims 1-9 are under examination.
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 .
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant's cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
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 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsai et al. (US 2025/0203707 A1), hereinafter Tsai, in view of Araujo et al. (US 2024/0195594 A1), hereinafter Araujo.
Regarding claim 1, Tsai discloses:
“A terminal apparatus comprising: one or more memories storing instructions; and one or more processors configured to execute the instructions to” — a node implemented as a UE, including memory and a processor executing stored instructions (¶¶0324–0331; Fig. 6).
“transmit, to a base station apparatus, a user equipment (UE) assistance information message including assistance information, the assistance information being for configuration of a value of a discontinuous reception (DRX) cycle corresponding to a traffic with a non-integer periodicity” — UEAssistanceInformation reporting XR traffic periodicity and a non-integer DRX preference, leading to non-integer DRX configuration. XR traffic includes fractional-millisecond periodicities (¶¶0077–0078, 0099–0103, and 0134; Fig. 3).
“receive, from the base station apparatus, a radio resource control (RRC) reconfiguration message including DRX configuration, the DRX configuration including information for indicating the value of the DRX cycle and information for indicating a value of an on-duration timer” — Tsai teaches network/RRC-configured DRX operation, a configured DRX cycle, and an on-duration controlled by drx-onDurationTimer (¶¶0050–0052). Tsai further teaches receiving non-integer DRX configuration from the base station (¶¶0312–0315; Fig. 4). However, the cited passages do not expressly identify the particular RRCReconfiguration message carrying both values.
“control to monitor a physical downlink control channel in an active time, the active time being based on the information for indicating the value of the DRX cycle and the information for indicating the value of the on-duration timer” — the DRX cycle periodically repeats the on-duration, and active time includes the on-duration during which the UE monitors PDCCH (¶¶0051–0052, 0057, and 0063; Fig. 1).
Tsai does not expressly disclose:
“receive, from the base station apparatus, a RRC reconfiguration message including information for indicating a value of a timer for transmission of the assistance information”; and
“control to transmit, to the base station apparatus, the UE assistance information message including the assistance information based on the information for indicating the value of the timer for the transmission of the assistance information.”
Araujo teaches RRCReconfiguration containing OtherConfig for delivery to the UE (¶0404 and the accompanying CG-Config field descriptions). OtherConfig includes a DRX preference configuration containing an enumerated drx-PreferenceProhibitTimer value (¶0258 and accompanying ASN.1). Araujo also teaches withholding subsequent assistance reports until a prohibit timer expires (¶0192).
Thus, Araujo teaches the recited receipt of an RRCReconfiguration carrying the assistance-reporting timer value and timer-controlled transmission.
It would have been obvious to implement Tsai’s DRX assistance reporting using Araujo’s RRC-delivered reporting configuration and prohibit timer. Both concern network configuration informed by UE assistance for power saving. The modification would limit frequent reports while retaining updated UE preferences, with predictable signaling and power savings.
Regarding the DRX-configuration message, it would also have been obvious to deliver Tsai’s configured DRX cycle and on-duration values through RRCReconfiguration. Tsai already uses RRC for DRX configuration; Araujo identifies RRCReconfiguration as the mechanism for delivering cell-group configuration changes (¶¶0402–0404 and accompanying CG-Config definitions). This would use an established configuration procedure to deliver the parameters controlling Tsai’s DRX operation.
Regarding claim 3, Tsai and Araujo teach “The terminal apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to execute the instructions to receive, from the base station apparatus, a RRC reconfiguration message including information for indicating the transmission of the assistance information, and control to transmit, to the base station apparatus, the UE assistance information message including the assistance information in a case that the information for indicating the transmission of the assistance information indicates the transmission of the assistance information.”
Araujo’s RRCReconfiguration carries OtherConfig, whose drx-PreferenceConfig is specified as SetupRelease {DRX-PreferenceConfig} (¶0258; ¶0404 and accompanying CG-Config field descriptions). The setup alternative establishes the reporting configuration. This structural disclosure, together with network configuration of UE power-saving reports (¶0015), teaches enabling the configured assistance transmission. Applying that control to Tsai would permit the network to select when DRX assistance reporting is enabled.
Regarding claim 4, the claimed base station apparatus performs the network-side operations corresponding to claim 1. Tsai expressly discloses a base station implemented by the processor-and-memory node and transmitting non-integer DRX configuration while receiving UE assistance information (¶¶0319–0331; Figs. 5–6). Araujo supplies the network’s transmission of the RRC reporting configuration and prohibit-timer value, as explained above. The same combination therefore teaches the claimed receipt of assistance information, transmission of DRX and reporting configurations, receipt of timer-controlled reports, and configuration of the terminal’s PDCCH monitoring.
Regarding claim 6, the additional limitations correspond to claim 3 from the base station’s perspective. Araujo’s network-generated RRCReconfiguration containing the SetupRelease DRX preference configuration teaches transmitting the reporting-enable configuration and receiving the resulting configured assistance reports, for the reasons stated for claim 3.
Regarding claim 7, the method limitations correspond to the operations of claim 1 and are unpatentable for the same reasons. Tsai additionally presents the UE operations as a method (¶¶0312–0317; Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 9, the additional method limitations correspond to claim 3 and are unpatentable for the same reasons.
Claims 2, 5, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsai in view of Araujo, as applied to claims 1, 4, and 7, respectively, and further in view of Kim et al. (US 2022/0225377 A1), hereinafter Kim.
Regarding claim 2, Tsai and Araujo teach the terminal apparatus of claim 1 as explained above, but do not expressly disclose “wherein the one or more processors are further configured to execute the instructions to start the timer for the transmission of the assistance information in a case that the assistance information included in the UE assistance information message is different from the last transmitted assistance information and the timer for the transmission of the assistance information is not running.”
Kim teaches determining that the current drx-Preference information differs from the information in the last UEAssistanceInformation transmission and that T346a is not running (¶0132). Under that condition, the UE starts T346a using drx-PreferenceProhibitTimer and initiates transmission of the current DRX preference (¶¶0133–0134).
It would have been obvious to apply Kim’s reporting trigger to the DRX assistance procedure of Tsai and Araujo. Requiring changed assistance information avoids redundant reports, while requiring the timer not to be running enforces the configured reporting interval. Starting the timer upon reporting provides a predictable means of controlling subsequent reports.
Regarding claim 5, the combination teaches “The base station apparatus according to claim 4, wherein the timer for the transmission of the assistance information is started in a case that the assistance information included in the UE assistance information message is different from the last received assistance information and the timer for the transmission of the assistance information is not running.”
Kim teaches the changed-information and timer-not-running trigger followed by timer start and assistance transmission (¶¶0132–0134). In the combined UE/base-station reporting procedure, the base station receives those reports. Comparing the successfully delivered current and preceding reports provides the corresponding received-information condition. Claim 5 does not require the base station itself to start the timer.
Regarding claim 8, the combination teaches “The method according to claim 7, wherein the timer for the transmission of the assistance information is started in a case that the assistance information included in the UE assistance information message is different from the last transmitted assistance information and the timer for the transmission of the assistance information is not running.”
These method limitations correspond to the timer-start operations discussed for claim 2 and are taught by Kim ¶¶0132–0134, with the same rationale for combination.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. Tsai et al. (US 2025/0212290 A1) disclose DRX operation for XR traffic, including UE assistance conveying traffic periodicity and a preference for a non-integer DRX cycle, together with adjustment of DRX timing offsets. Sony, “Power saving UE assistance information,” 3GPP contribution R2-2000869 (2020) discusses network-configured DRX assistance reporting and prohibit timers that limit reporting frequency to reduce signaling overhead and UE power consumption.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LUAT PHUNG whose telephone number is (571)270-3126. The examiner can normally be reached on M-Th 7:30 AM - 6:30 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, Marcus Smith can be reached on 571-27. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Luat Phung/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2468
Prosecution Insights