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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 5/15/2026 has been entered.
Claims 1-7, 9-11 have been cancelled.
Claims 8 and 12-15 have been amended.
Claims 8 and 12-15 remain pending in the application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claim 15 is 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 15; claim 15 recites the limitation "… transmits system information" in line 19. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
Claims 8 and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over R1-1908101 (3GPP TSG RAN WG1 Meeting #98); in view of Li et al. (WO 2018/228518).
Regarding claims 8 and 13; R1-1908101 discloses receiving system information (a UE receives SIB1 indicating channel bandwidth; see page 3); using, when a channel bandwidth indicated by the system information is not supported, a supported maximum bandwidth that is wider than a bandwidth of an initial Bandwidth Part (BWP) (when a UE does not support the channel bandwidth indicated in SIB1, the UE will continue the initial access procedure; in an example of {SS/PBCH, PDCCH} SCS of (30, 30) kHZ with CORESET #0 size of 48RBs; a supported maximum bandwidth is 51RB; the initial BWP can be any values in the range of [48, 51]; the supported maximum bandwidth is wider than the initial BWP when the initial BWP uses values in the range of [48, 50] RB; see response 4 of page 3, response 5 of page 4 and Table 1).
R1-1908101 discloses when a channel bandwidth indicated by the system information is not supported, the UE may continue the initial access procedure. A supported maximum bandwidth is wider than a bandwidth of an initial BWP.
R1-1908101 does not explicitly disclose applying the supported maximum bandwidth for uplink and downlink communication.
Li discloses wherein the processor applies, as a frequency bandwidth for performing uplink communication, the supported maximum bandwidth that is wider than a bandwidth of an initial Uplink BWP, and, as a frequency bandwidth for performing downlink communication, the supported maximum bandwidth that is wider than a bandwidth of an initial Downlink BWP (a network device configures the bandwidth of uplink and downlink bandwidth part (BP) for a terminal; the uplink and downlink BPs are equal to the maximum bandwidth capacity supported by the terminal; the uplink and downlink BPs are used for transmissions; the maximum bandwidth capacity supported by a UE is wider than bandwidth of an initial BWP; see paragraphs[0006], [0189] – [0191] and Fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of R1-1908101 and Li to apply the supported maximum bandwidth for uplink/downlink communication to effectively improve spectrum resource utilization (see paragraph [0009] of Li).
Specifically for claim 13; Li discloses a terminal (a terminal device; see paragraph [0344]) comprising: a receiver (sending module; see paragraph [0338] and Fig. 12); and a processor (processing module; see paragraph [0338] and Fig. 12).
Regarding claim 14; R1-1908101 discloses transmits system information (a UE receives SIB1 indicating channel bandwidth; see page 3); receives, when a channel bandwidth indicated by the system information is not supported, a signal on a supported maximum bandwidth (when a UE does not support the channel bandwidth indicated in SIB1, the UE will continue the initial access procedure; in an example of {SS/PBCH, PDCCH} SCS of (30, 30) kHZ with CORESET #0 size of 48RBs; a supported maximum bandwidth is 51RB; the initial BWP can be any values in the range of [48, 51]; the supported maximum bandwidth is wider than the initial BWP when the initial BWP uses values in the range of [48, 50] RB; see response 4 of page 3, response 5 of page 4 and Table 1).
R1-1908101 discloses when a channel bandwidth indicated by the system information is not supported, the UE may continue the initial access procedure. A supported maximum bandwidth is wider than a bandwidth of an initial BWP.
R1-1908101 does not explicitly disclose applying the supported maximum bandwidth for uplink and downlink communication.
Li discloses wherein the processor applies, as a frequency bandwidth for performing uplink communication, the supported maximum bandwidth that is wider than a bandwidth of an initial Uplink BWP, and, as a frequency bandwidth for performing downlink communication, the supported maximum bandwidth that is wider than a bandwidth of an initial Downlink BWP (a network device configures the bandwidth of uplink and downlink bandwidth part (BP) for a terminal; the uplink and downlink BPs are equal to the maximum bandwidth capacity supported by the terminal; the uplink and downlink BPs are used for transmissions; the maximum bandwidth capacity supported by a UE is wider than bandwidth of an initial BWP; see paragraphs[0006], [0189] – [0191] and Fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of R1-1908101 and Li to apply the supported maximum bandwidth for uplink/downlink communication to effectively improve spectrum resource utilization (see paragraph [0009] of Li).
Regarding claim 15; R1-1908101 discloses a terminal receives system information; and uses, when a channel bandwidth indicated by the system information is not supported, a supported maximum bandwidth that is wider than an initial bandwidth part (BWP) (when a UE does not support the channel bandwidth indicated in SIB1, the UE will continue the initial access procedure; in an example of {SS/PBCH, PDCCH} SCS of (30, 30) kHZ with CORESET #0 size of 48RBs; a supported maximum bandwidth is 51RB; the initial BWP can be any values in the range of [48, 51]; the supported maximum bandwidth is wider than the initial BWP when the initial BWP uses values in the range of [48, 50] RB; see response 4 of page 3, response 5 of page 4 and Table 1); a base station transmits system information (a UE receives SIB1 indicating channel bandwidth; see page 3).
R1-1908101 discloses when a channel bandwidth indicated by the system information is not supported, the UE may continue the initial access procedure. A supported maximum bandwidth is wider than a bandwidth of an initial BWP.
R1-1908101 does not explicitly disclose applying the supported maximum bandwidth for uplink and downlink communication.
Li discloses wherein the processor applies, as a frequency bandwidth for performing uplink communication, the supported maximum bandwidth that is wider than a bandwidth of an initial Uplink BWP, and, as a frequency bandwidth for performing downlink communication, the supported maximum bandwidth that is wider than a bandwidth of an initial Downlink BWP (a network device configures the bandwidth of uplink and downlink bandwidth part (BP) for a terminal; the uplink and downlink BPs are equal to the maximum bandwidth capacity supported by the terminal; the uplink and downlink BPs are used for transmissions; the maximum bandwidth capacity supported by a UE is wider than bandwidth of an initial BWP; see paragraphs [0006], [0189] – [0191] and Fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of R1-1908101 and Li to apply the supported maximum bandwidth for uplink/downlink communication to effectively improve spectrum resource utilization (see paragraph [0009] of Li).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 12 is 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.
The closest prior art on the record Li et al. (WO 2018/228518) discloses a network device configures/applies an uplink BWP that is equal to the maximum bandwidth capability supported and a downlink BWP that is equal to the maximum bandwidth capability supported for communication. The maximum bandwidth capability supported by a terminal is wider than initial UL/DL BWP (see paragraphs [0006], [0189] – [0191] and Fig. 3).
However, Li does not teach, when an RRC connection with a base station is not setup after receiving the system information, the processor uses, as the frequency bandwidth for performing uplink communication, the supported maximum bandwidth that is wider than the bandwidth of the initial Uplink BWP, and as the frequency bandwidth for performing the downlink communication, the supported maximum bandwidth that is wider than the bandwidth of the initial Downlink BWP.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 8 have been considered but are moot in view of a new reference Li et al. (WO 2018/228518) being used in the current rejection.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 NING LI whose telephone number is (571)270-0624. The examiner can normally be reached Monday, Tuesday, Thursday 8:30am - 5:00pm.
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, Jeffrey Rutkowski can be reached at (571) 270-1215. 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.
/MANSOUR OVEISSI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2415
/N.L/Examiner, Art Unit 2415
Prosecution Insights