DETAILED ACTION
In response to communications filed 08/26/2025.
Claims 21-40 are pending for 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 .
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 21-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwak et al. (US 2019/0116594 A1) in view of Hong (US 2014/0044085 A1) hereinafter “Kwak” and “Hong” respectively.
Regarding Claim 21, Kwak teaches A method (Kwak: paragraphs 0440-0444 & Figs. 4D-4E, method for configuring downlink resource allocation information) comprising:
receiving, at a user equipment (Kwak: paragraph 0440 & Figs. 4D-4E, i.e. first type terminal), at least one message indicating a resource allocation for downlink (Kwak: paragraph 0444, receive the downlink control information and discover a resource), wherein the at least one message includes information comprising a resource indication value (Kwak: paragraphs 0395 & 0428, i.e. resource indication value (RIV)) indicating an index of a starting resource of the resource allocation (Kwak: paragraphs 0395, 0428, downlink resource allocation type 2 notifies of a start location RBstart of the allocated VRB), and a number of contiguously allocated resources following the starting resource (Kwak: paragraph 0428, the successive allocated VRBs in the unit), wherein a first resource allocation granularity is different from a second resource allocation granularity (Kwak: paragraphs 0427-0430 & 0439, resource allocation type 2 (instead of type 0), therefore allocating resources different from a second allocation scheme or granularity), and
communicating, by the user equipment, data in accordance with the starting resource and an ending resource (Kwak: paragraph 0430, terminal can receive downlink data from the allocated VRB using the discovered downlink resource allocation information), wherein the ending resource of the resource allocation is determined based at least on the information in the at least one message (Kwak: paragraph 0430, said discovered downlink resource allocation information).
Kwak fails to explicit teach the starting resource is based on the index and the offset value related to the first resource allocation granularity and the ending resource is further determined based on the second resource granularity. However, Hong from an analogous art similarly teaches an index and offset of start points on resource blocks and a number of adjacent resource blocks for type 2 resource allocation (Hong: paragraphs 0087-0091, 0094 & Fig. 4) and further teaches the end point of the resource allocation region is determined by the size of a resource block group (Hong: paragraphs 0080, 0172-0174 & 0281) therefore teaching the end resource is based on second resource allocation scheme or granularity.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious before the effective filing of the invention to have incorporated the teachings of Hong with the reference of Kwak. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings of offsetting a set of resources as suggested in Hong with the resource allocation procedures of Kwak so as to increase the efficiency of the schemes for resource allocation.
Regarding Claim 22, Kwak-Hong teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further suggests wherein each of the contiguously allocated resources have a size in accordance with the second resource allocation granularity (Kwak: paragraph 0416, size of RBG used in resource allocation).
Regarding Claim 23, Kwak-Hong teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further suggests wherein the starting resource is determined based on a size of the starting resource which has been decided based on the first resource allocation granularity (Kwak: paragraph 0416, the size of RBG used in the resource allocation type 0 for the first type terminal corresponds to the number of RBs included in one RBG), the index and the determined size of the starting resource (Kwak: paragraph 0428, downlink resource allocation notifies of a start location RBstart of the allocated VRB).
Regarding Claim 24, Kwak-Hong teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further suggests wherein the ending resource is determined based on the determined starting resource (Hong: paragraph 0088, offset of start points of all of the resource blocks and the number of adjacent resource block) and the number and the size of the contiguously allocated resources (Hong: paragraph 0174, size of a resource block group). Examiner recites same reasoning to combine as presented in rejected claim 21.
Regarding Claim 25, Kwak-Hong teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further suggests wherein the starting resource of the resource allocation is determined based on a size of the starting resource which has determined based on the second resource allocation granularity (Hong: paragraph 0174, size of a resource block group), wherein the starting resource is based on the index of the starting resource, the size of the starting resource, and the offset value (Hong: paragraph 0088, offset of start points of all of the resource blocks and the number of adjacent resource block). Examiner recites same reasoning to combine as presented in rejected claim 21.
Regarding Claim 26, Kwak-Hong teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further suggests wherein the first resource allocation granularity corresponds to a first resource block group size (Hong: paragraph 0174 & Fig. 7, resource block group size); and
the second resource allocation granularity corresponds to a second resource block group size that is larger than the first resource group size (Hong: paragraph 0174 & Fig. 7, resource block group of various sizes). Examiner recites same reasoning to combine as presented in rejected claim 21.
Regarding Claim 27, Kwak-Hong teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further suggests wherein the at least one message comprises at least one of a downlink control information message and a radio resource control message (Kwak: paragraph 0367, transmitting resource allocation or scheduling information through downlink control information).
Regarding Claim 28, Kwak teaches An apparatus (Kwak: paragraphs 0009, 0440-0444 & Figs. 4D-4E, apparatus in which a base station transmits configuration information to a terminal) comprising:
at least one processor (Kwak: paragraphs 0239, 0486 & Figs. 2L & 4L, terminal processor); and
at least one non-transitory memory including computer program code, the at least one memory and the computer program code (Kwak: paragraph 0239 & Fig. 2L, storage unit storing data) configured to, with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to perform at least:
receiving at least one message indicating a resource allocation for downlink (Kwak: paragraph 0444, receive the downlink control information and discover a resource), wherein the at least one message includes information comprising a resource indication value (Kwak: paragraphs 0395 & 0428, i.e. resource indication value (RIV)) indicating an index of a starting resource of the resource allocation (Kwak: paragraphs 0395 0428, downlink resource allocation type 2 notifies of a start location RBstart of the allocated VRB), and a number of contiguously allocated resources following the starting resource (Kwak: paragraph 0428, the successive allocated VRBs in the unit), wherein a first resource allocation granularity is different from a second resource allocation granularity (Kwak: paragraphs 0427-0430 & 0439, resource allocation type 2 (instead of type 0), therefore allocating resources different from a second allocation scheme or granularity), and
communicating data in accordance with the starting resource and an ending resource (Kwak: paragraph 0430, terminal can receive downlink data from the allocated VRB using the discovered downlink resource allocation information), wherein the ending resource of the resource allocation is determined based at least on the information in the at least one message (Kwak: paragraph 0430, said discovered downlink resource allocation information).
Kwak fails to explicit teach the starting resource is based on the index and the an offset value related to the first resource allocation granularity and the ending resource is further determined based on the second resource granularity. However, Hong from an analogous art similarly teaches an index and offset of start points on resource blocks and a number of adjacent resource blocks for type 2 resource allocation (Hong: paragraphs 0087-0091, 0094 & Fig. 4) and further teaches the end point of the resource allocation region is determined by the size of a resource block group (Hong: paragraphs 0080, 0172-0174 & 0281) therefore teaching the end resource is based on second resource allocation scheme or granularity.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious before the effective filing of the invention to have incorporated the teachings of Hong with the reference of Kwak. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings of offsetting a set of resources as suggested in Hong with the resource allocation procedures of Kwak so as to increase the efficiency of the schemes for resource allocation.
Regarding Claim 29, Kwak-Hong teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further suggests wherein each of the contiguously allocated resources have a size in accordance with the second resource allocation granularity (Kwak: paragraph 0416, size of RBG used in resource allocation).
Regarding Claim 30, Kwak-Hong teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further suggests wherein the starting resource is determined based on a size of the starting resource which has been determined based on the first resource allocation granularity (Kwak: paragraph 0416, the size of RBG used in the resource allocation type 0 for the first type terminal corresponds to the number of RBs included in one RBG), the index and the determined size of the starting resource (Kwak: paragraph 0428, downlink resource allocation notifies of a start location RBstart of the allocated VRB).
Regarding Claim 31, Kwak-Hong teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further suggests wherein the ending resource is determined based on the determined starting resource (Hong: paragraph 0088, offset of start points of all of the resource blocks and the number of adjacent resource block) and the number and the size of the contiguously allocated resources (Hong: paragraph 0174, size of a resource block group). Examiner recites same reasoning to combine as presented in rejected claim 28.
Regarding Claim 32, Kwak-Hong teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further suggests wherein the starting resource of the resource allocation is determined based on a size of the starting resource which has determined based on the second resource allocation granularity (Hong: paragraph 0174, size of a resource block group), wherein the starting resource is based on the index of the starting resource , the size of the starting resource, and the offset value (Hong: paragraph 0088, offset of start points of all of the resource blocks and the number of adjacent resource block). Examiner recites same reasoning to combine as presented in rejected claim 28.
Regarding Claim 33, Kwak teaches A non-transitory computer readable medium comprising program instructions that when executed by an apparatus, cause the apparatus (Kwak: paragraphs 0009, 0440-0444 & Figs. 4D-4E, apparatus in which a base station transmits configuration information to a terminal) to perform at least the following:
receiving at least one message indicating a resource allocation for downlink (Kwak: paragraph 0444, receive the downlink control information and discover a resource), wherein the at least one message includes information comprising a resource indication value (Kwak: paragraphs 0395 & 0428, i.e. resource indication value (RIV)) indicating an index of a starting resource of the resource allocation (Kwak: paragraphs 0395 0428, downlink resource allocation type 2 notifies of a start location RBstart of the allocated VRB), and a number of contiguously allocated resources following the starting resource (Kwak: paragraph 0428, the successive allocated VRBs in the unit), and
communicating data in accordance with the starting resource and an ending resource (Kwak: paragraph 0430, terminal can receive downlink data from the allocated VRB using the discovered downlink resource allocation information), wherein the ending resource of the resource allocation is determined based at least on the information in the at least one message (Kwak: paragraph 0430, said discovered downlink resource allocation information), wherein a first resource allocation granularity is different from a second resource allocation granularity (Kwak: paragraphs 0427-0430 & 0439, resource allocation type 2 (instead of type 0), therefore allocating resources different from a second allocation scheme or granularity).
Kwak fails to explicit teach the starting resource is based on the index and an offset value related to the first resource allocation granularity and the ending resource is further determined based on the second resource granularity. However, Hong from an analogous art similarly teaches an index and offset of start points on resource blocks and a number of adjacent resource blocks for type 2 resource allocation (Hong: paragraphs 0087-0091, 0094 & Fig. 4) and further teaches the end point of the resource allocation region is determined by the size of a resource block group (Hong: paragraphs 0080, 0172-0174 & 0281) therefore teaching the end resource is based on second resource allocation scheme or granularity.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious before the effective filing of the invention to have incorporated the teachings of Hong with the reference of Kwak. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings of offsetting a set of resources as suggested in Hong with the resource allocation procedures of Kwak so as to increase the efficiency of the schemes for resource allocation.
Regarding Claim 34, Kwak-Hong teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further suggests wherein each of the contiguously allocated resources have a size in accordance with the second resource allocation granularity (Kwak: paragraph 0416, size of RBG used in resource allocation).
Regarding Claim 35, Kwak-Hong teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further suggests wherein the starting resource is determined based on a size of the starting resource which has been determined based on the first resource allocation granularity (Kwak: paragraph 0416, the size of RBG used in the resource allocation type 0 for the first type terminal corresponds to the number of RBs included in one RBG), the index and the determined size of the starting resource (Kwak: paragraph 0428, downlink resource allocation notifies of a start location RBstart of the allocated VRB).
Regarding Claim 36, Kwak-Hong teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further suggests wherein the ending resource is determined based on the determined starting resource (Kwak: paragraph 0430, terminal can discover the start point and the length of the allocated VRB group allocated, thus discovering the ending resource); and the number and the size of the contiguously allocated resources (Kwak: paragraph 0428, successive allocated VRBs).
Regarding Claim 37, Kwak-Hong teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further suggests wherein the starting resource of the resource allocation is determined based on a size of the starting resource which has determined based on the second resource allocation granularity (Hong: paragraph 0174, size of a resource block group), wherein the starting resource is based on the index of the starting resource , the size of the starting resource, and the offset value (Hong: paragraph 0088, offset of start points of all of the resource blocks and the number of adjacent resource block). Examiner recites same reasoning to combine as presented in rejected claim 33.
Regarding Claim 38, Kwak-Hong teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further suggests wherein the first resource allocation granularity corresponds to a first resource block group size (Hong: paragraph 0174 & Fig. 7, resource block group size); and
the second resource allocation granularity corresponds to a second resource block group size that is larger than the first resource block group size (Hong: paragraph 0174 & Fig. 7, resource block group of various sizes). Examiner recites same reasoning to combine as presented in rejected claim 28.
Regarding Claim 39, Kwak-Hong teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further suggests wherein the at least one message comprises at least one of a downlink control information message and a radio resource control message (Kwak: paragraph 0367, transmitting resource allocation or scheduling information through downlink control information).
Regarding Claim 40, Kwak-Hong teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further suggests wherein the first resource allocation granularity is based on a first number of resource blocks (Kwak: paragraphs 0368-0370 & 0391, number of resource blocks for resource allocation scheme), and the second resource allocation granularity is based on a second number of resource blocks (Kwak: paragraphs 0368-0370 & 0391, number of resource blocks for resource allocation scheme), the starting resource and ending resource are based on resource blocks, and the first number and second number of resource blocks are different (Kwak: paragraph 0397, sets of resource blocks).
Response to Arguments
Applicant arguments:
a) Kwak-Hong alone or in combination fails to teach or suggest the resource indication value (RIV) indicates a starting point of the resource since the RIV of Kwak only indicates the number of LCRB of allocated VRB groups (remarks, page 3).
b) Kwak-Hong alone or in combination fails to teach or suggest the start location of the VRB is notified to the UE via a message as the start point and length of Kwak uses an equation and is not communicated via a message (remarks, pages 3-5).
c) Kwak-Hong alone or in combination fails to teach or suggest the offset value and the ending resource since Hong does not disclose that the offset value is related to the first resource allocation granularity that is different from the second resource allocation granularity and the citations referenced (paragraphs 0172-0174 & 0281) are non-existent in Hong (remarks, page 6).
Examiner's response:
Applicant's arguments filed 08/26/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding argument a), Examiner respectfully disagrees with the interpretation that the RIV of Kwak only indicates the length of the allocated resources blocks or number of LCRB of allocated VBR groups as argued. As previously presented, the downlink resource allocation type 2 notifies of a start location RBstart of the allocated VRB and further teaches the RIV value is defined as RIV=NRBDL(LCRBs−1)+RBstart (Kwak: paragraph 0395). Examiner notes since the defined Resource Indication Value includes both a length (LCRB) component and starting physical resource block (PRB) position (RBStart) component, Kwak similarly teaches the resource indication value represents both the starting physical resource block position (RBStart) and the length of an allocated contiguous block of resource blocks (LCRB).
Regarding argument b), Examiner first notes paragraphs 0454 & 0459 referenced in the remarks to argue that the start point and length uses an equation and is therefore not communicated via a message teaches an alternative embodiment that is not referenced in the current rejection and/or is relied upon to teach the limitation(s) in question. As previously presented Kwak teaches a first type terminal receives the downlink control information and discovers a resource on which data is actually transmitted through discrimination of the resource allocation type (Kwak: paragraphs 0440-0444) therefore similarly teaching a user equipment receiving allocation information for downlink in at least one embodiment.
Regarding argument c), Examiner believes arguments in the remarks may be in reference to a prior art (also referred to as Hong) used in a previous rejection (US 2014/0307692 A1). Examiner notes paragraphs 0172-0174 & 0281 do exist in Hong and the cited passages of Hong referenced in the current office action are valid. That being stated, as previously presented, Hong teaches an index and offset of start points on resource blocks and a number of adjacent resource blocks for type 2 resource allocation (Hong: paragraphs 0087-0091 & Fig. 4) and further teaches the end point of the resource allocation region is determined by the size of a resource block group (Hong: paragraphs 0080, 0172-0174 & 0281). Since Hong teaches the offset, start and/or end of a resource between a first resource allocation scheme and a second resource allocation scheme (type 2), Hong similarly teaches the end resource is based on second resource allocation scheme or granularity.
Therefore the rejection of claims 21, 28 and 33 and respective dependent claims is maintained.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NAJEEB ANSARI whose telephone number is (571)270-5446. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10am to 2pm.
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, ASAD NAWAZ can be reached on (571) 272-3988. 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.
/NAJEEB ANSARI/Examiner, Art Unit 2468
/SYED ALI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2463