DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Status of Claims
2. This communication is responsive to Application No. 19/246,171 filed on June 23, 2025, which is DIV of 18/260,411 (US 12,519,507 B2). Claims 1-12 are subject to examination.
Information Disclosure Statement (IDS)
3. The IDSs submitted on 06/23/25, 07/16/25, 09/12/25, 10/16/25, 01/16/26, 02/27/26, 05/13/26, 06/12/26, 08/07/26 and 09/08/26 have been entered and considered by the Examiner.
Claim Objections
4. Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: “non-transitory, processor-readable” (line 1) should be replaced with “non-transitory processor-readable”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
5. 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.
6. Claims 1-12 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 pre-AIA the Applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites “at least one of: (1) a measurement indication indicating a first measurement of a first signal type, or a second measurement of a second signal type, or a combination thereof, the first signal type being for non-RIS-reflected (non-reconfigurable-intelligent-surface-reflected) signal transfer between the network entity and the UE and the second signal type being for RIS-reflected signal transfer between the network entity and the UE; or (2) a first UL-PRS (uplink positioning reference signal) of the first signal type, or a second UL-PRS of the second signal type, or a combination thereof; or (3) an indication of a power-saving mode of the UE; and transmit, to the UE via the transceiver, a message in response to the at least one signal, the message indicating for the UE to report measurement of DL-PRS (downlink PRS) of only one type of the first signal type or the second signal type, or indicating for the UE to transmit UL-PRS of only one type of the first signal type or the second signal type” (lines 7-19). The limitation “the first/second signal type” has insufficient antecedent basis because the recitation of “or” each of the above limitation is considered independent form each other. Hence, renders claim 1 and its dependent claims indefinite. Similar rejection applies to claims 4, 7 and 10.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
7. 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 may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived 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:
I. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
II. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
III. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
IV. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
8. 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.
9. Claims 1-2, 4-5, 7-8 and 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chuang (US 2016/0266634 A1) and in view of Wang (US 2016/0295504 A1).
Regarding claims 1, 4, 7 & 10, Chuang teaches a network entity (Figure 1: “Network”, Figure 2: 20, Figure 4: “Base Station”, Paragraph 28: a communication device is user equipment (UE), Paragraph 29: the communication device 20 is the communication device and/or the network & Paragraph 41: the base station is the network) comprising: a transceiver configured to transmit and receive wireless signals (Figure 2: 220 & Paragarph 29: the communication interfacing unit 220 is a transceiver to transmit and receive signals); a memory (Figure 2: 210 “Storage Unit”); and a processor (Figure 2: 200 “Processing Means”) communicatively coupled to the transceiver and the memory and configured to: receive, via the transceiver from a UE (user equipment), at least one signal comprising at least one of: (1) a measurement indication indicating a first measurement of a first signal type, or a second measurement of a second signal type, or a combination thereof, the first signal type being for non-RIS-reflected (non-reconfigurable-intelligent-surface-reflected) signal transfer between the network entity and the UE and the second signal type being for RIS-reflected signal transfer between the network entity and the UE; or (2) a first UL-PRS (uplink positioning reference signal) of the first signal type, or a second UL-PRS of the second signal type, or a combination thereof; or (3) an indication of a power-saving mode of the UE (Figure 4: 400 & Paragraph 41: the UE Capability Information message 400 includes an IE UE-EUTRA-Capability, the IE UE-EUTRA-Capability including an eDRX and a PSM (power saving mode)… the communication device indicates its power saving modes by transmitting the UE Capability Information message to the base station). Although Chuang teaches the at least one signal, Chuang does not explicitly disclose transmit, to the UE via the transceiver, a message in response to the at least one signal, the message indicating for the UE to report measurement of DL-PRS (downlink PRS) of only one type of the first signal type or the second signal type, or indicating for the UE to transmit UL-PRS of only one type of the first signal type or the second signal type, or a combination thereof. In a related field of endeavor, Wang discloses transmit, to the UE via the transceiver, a message in response to the at least one signal (Figure 9: 902 “WTRU” (UE), 904 “MME” (network), 912 “TAU Request”, 914 “TAU Accept” & 916 “WTRU continues to use PSM”), the message indicating for the UE to report measurement of DL-PRS (downlink PRS) of only one type of the first signal type or the second signal type, or indicating for the UE to transmit UL-PRS of only one type of the first signal type or the second signal type, or a combination thereof. It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chuang’s signal to include a message as in Wang. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so to reduce power consumption, Paragraph 2.
Regarding claims 2, 5, 8 & 11,the combination of Chuang and Wang discloses the network entity of claim 1. In addition, Wang discloses wherein the indication of the power-saving mode of the UE comprises a request for the UE to operate in the power-saving mode (Figure 9: 902 “WTRU”, 904 “MME”, 912 “TAU Request”, 914 “TAU Accept” & 916 “WTRU continues to use PSM”).
Conclusion
10. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to SHAWKAT M. ALI whose telephone number is (571) 270-1639. The Examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday 8:30AM-3:30PM ET.
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 AIR at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the Examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner’s Supervisor, SAM K. AHN can be reached on (571) 272-3044. 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.
/SHAWKAT M ALI/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2633
Prosecution Insights