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 § 102
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.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1,15,16,30,2-4,7-9,11-13,17-19,22-25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Publication No. 2023/0328751 A1 to Zhang et al.
As to claim 15, Zhang discloses A method of wireless communication performed by a first network node (Figs. 1-3: “ED 110x” and “TRPs 120”, teaching “first network node” and “second network node”, respectively), comprising:
receiving, from a second network node, a downlink control information (DCI) candidate indication (CI) (DCICI) message associated with a first search space (SS) and a first monitoring occasion (Figs. 5-8, paragraphs 1-86, 124-130, 156-157, 168-172, in particular paragraph 157, disclosing (A) the UE/ED receiving a first DCI in which there is information indicating the location of a second dCI, the first DCI teaching the recited DCICI, where the second dCI is situated in a PDCCH, and is associated with a “monitoring occasion for a UE” as well as a “PDCCH candidate index value to indicate a SS indexing”; further disclosing [paragraphs 123, 156 and 170] (B) that a UE may be configured via RRC signaling to “monitor PDCCH channel for possible DCI message(s) in a time instant/occasion” further in connection with a CORESET associated with “search spaces”, such RRC signaling further teaching DCICI), wherein the DCICI message is indicative of information for locating at least one physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) associated with the first SS and the first monitoring occasion (see discussion and citations above); and
decoding, based on successful decoding of the DCICI message, a first DCI message based on the information for locating the at least one PDCCH associated with the first SS and the first monitoring occasion, wherein the first DCI message is received via the at least one PDCCH associated with the first SS and the first monitoring occasion (see discussion and citations above, where in (A), the first DCI teaching this recited “first DCI message”; and in (B), the second DCI teaching the recited “first DCI message”).
As to claims 1, 16 and 30, see rejection for claim 15.
As to claim 2, Zhang discloses the node in parent claim 1.
Zhang further discloses wherein the information for locating the at least one PDCCH associated with the first SS and the first monitoring occasion comprises, for each respective PDCCH of the at least one PDCCH, a respective aggregation level (AL) associated with the respective PDCCH and at least one of a respective PDCCH candidate identifier (ID) associated with the respective PDCCH (paragraph 170 and Figs. 5-8) or a respective control channel element (CCE) index associated with the respective PDCCH.
As to claim 3, Zhang discloses the node in parent claim 1.
Zhang further discloses wherein the DCICI message comprises at least one of: an indication of a size of the first DCI message; or an indication of a component carrier (CC) associated with the at least one PDCCH (paragraphs 139-140: “time-frequency resource of the second PUCCH” that contains the second DCI).
As to claim 4, Zhang discloses the node in parent claim 1.
Zhang further discloses wherein the information for locating the at least one PDCCH associated with the first SS and the first monitoring occasion is the DCICI message, information included in the DCICI message, or a combination thereof. (Figs. 5-8, paragraphs 1-86, 124-130, 156-157, 168-172, in particular paragraph 157, disclosing (A) the UE/ED receiving a first DCI in which there is information indicating the location of a second dCI, the first DCI teaching the recited DCICI, where the second dCI is situated in a PDCCH, and is associated with a “monitoring occasion for a UE” as well as a “PDCCH candidate index value to indicate a SS indexing”; further disclosing [paragraphs 156 and 170] (B) that a UE may be configured via RRC signaling to “monitor PDCCH channel for possible DCI message(s) in a time instant/occasion” further in connection with a CORESET associated with “search spaces”, such RRC signaling further teaching DCICI)
As to claim 7, Zhang discloses the node in parent claim 1.
Zhang further discloses wherein the DCICI message is associated with a DCICI configuration comprising: an aggregation level (AL) associated with a PDCCH associated with the DCICI message (DCICI PDCCH) (paragraph 170 and Fig. 8), and at least one of a PDCCH candidate identifier (ID) associated with the DCICI PDCCH (paragraph 170 and Fig. 8) or a control channel element (CCE) index associated with the DCICI PDCCH, wherein the at least one processor is configured to: receive, from the second network node, information indicative of the DCICI configuration via at least one of radio resource control (RRC) signaling, a second DCI message, or a medium access control (MAC) – control element (CE) (MAC-CE); and decode the DCICI message based on the DCICI configuration (Figs. 5-8, paragraphs 1-86, 124-130, 156-157, 168-172, in particular paragraph 157, disclosing (A) the UE/ED receiving a first DCI in which there is information indicating the location of a second dCI, the first DCI teaching the recited DCICI, where the second dCI is situated in a PDCCH, and is associated with a “monitoring occasion for a UE” as well as a “PDCCH candidate index value to indicate a SS indexing”; further disclosing [paragraphs 123, 156 and 170] (B) that a UE may be configured via RRC signaling to “monitor PDCCH channel for possible DCI message(s) in a time instant/occasion” further in connection with a CORESET associated with “search spaces”, such RRC signaling further teaching DCICI, wherein (B) discloses/teaches this limitation).
As to claim 8, Zhang discloses the node in parent claim 7.
Zhang further discloses wherein the at least one PDCCH and the DCICI PDCCH are associated with different CCE indexes. (paragraph 3)
As to claim 9, Zhang discloses the node in parent claim 1.
Zhang further discloses wherein the at least one processor is configured to: perform, based on unsuccessful decoding of the DCICI message, blind decoding of one or more PDCCH candidates associated with the first SS and the first monitoring occasion. (paragraphs 3 and 130, 170-172, disclosing procedure of blind decoding until success)
As to claim 11, Zhang discloses the node in parent claim 1.
Zhang further discloses wherein the first monitoring occasion corresponds to a first PDCCH monitoring occasion. (paragraphs 3 and 130, 170-172, disclosing procedure of blind decoding until success; Figs. 5-8, paragraphs 1-86, 124-130, 156-157, 168-172, in particular paragraph 157, disclosing (A) the UE/ED receiving a first DCI in which there is information indicating the location of a second dCI, the first DCI teaching the recited DCICI, where the second dCI is situated in a PDCCH, and is associated with a “monitoring occasion for a UE” as well as a “PDCCH candidate index value to indicate a SS indexing”; further disclosing [paragraphs 123, 156 and 170] (B) that a UE may be configured via RRC signaling to “monitor PDCCH channel for possible DCI message(s) in a time instant/occasion”, both (A) and (B) disclosing/teaching first PDCCH monitoring occasion)
As to claim 12, Zhang discloses the node in parent claim 1.
Zhang further discloses wherein, to receive the DCICI message, the at least one processor is configured to receive the DCICI message via the first SS at the first monitoring occasion. (paragraphs 3 and 130, 170-172, disclosing procedure of blind decoding until success; Figs. 5-8, paragraphs 1-86, 124-130, 156-157, 168-172, in particular paragraph 157, disclosing (A) the UE/ED receiving a first DCI in which there is information indicating the location of a second dCI, the first DCI teaching the recited DCICI, where the second dCI is situated in a PDCCH, and is associated with a “monitoring occasion for a UE” as well as a “PDCCH candidate index value to indicate a SS indexing”; further disclosing [paragraphs 123, 156 and 170] (B) that a UE may be configured via RRC signaling to “monitor PDCCH channel for possible DCI message(s) in a time instant/occasion”, both (A) and (B) disclosing/teaching first PDCCH monitoring occasion)
As to claim 13, Zhang discloses the node in parent claim 1.
Zhang further discloses wherein, to receive the DCICI message, the at least one processor is configured to receive, via the first SS or an SS different from the first SS, the DCICI message at a second monitoring occasion prior to the first monitoring occasion. (paragraphs 176-180, Fig. 11)
As to claims 17-19, see rejections for claims 2-4, in the same order.
As to claims 22-23, see rejections for claims 7,8, in the same order.
As to claims 24,25, see rejections for claims 11,12, in the same order.
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 (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.
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.
Claim(s) 5,6,10,20,21,26,27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication No. 2023/0328751 A1 to Zhang et al., in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2012/0122508 A1 to Nakayama et al.
As to claim 5, Zhang discloses the node as in the parent claim 1.
Zhang further discloses PDCCH associated with the first SS (paragraphs 128, 156-157).
Zhang does not appear to explicitly disclose wherein the DCICI message includes information relating to a second DCI message associated with the PDCCH and the first monitoring occasion, and wherein the second DCI message is for a third network node, wherein the first network node is a first user equipment (UE) and the third network node is a second UE.
Nakayama discloses wherein the DCICI message includes information relating to a second DCI message associated with the PDCCH and the first monitoring occasion, and wherein the second DCI message is for a third network node, wherein the first network node is a first user equipment (UE) and the third network node is a second UE (paragraphs 48-54: “PDCCH of single TTI … can store DCI corresponding to a plurality of radio terminals”)
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the teachings as disclosed in Nakayama, in conjunction with the method as disclosed and taught by Zhang, to reject the limitations of this claim. In particular, it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA that the PDCCH featured in Nakayama’s teachings above may be further characterized as being associated with the first SS, as taught in Zhang, so that Nakayama’s teaching discussed above may be modified by and incorporated with Zhang’s teaching of a PDCCH associated with the first SS, to reject “wherein the DCICI message includes information relating to a second DCI message associated with the first SS and the first monitoring occasion, and wherein the second DCI message is for a third network node, wherein the first network node is a first user equipment (UE) and the third network node is a second UE”, since both Nakayama and Zhang’s teachings pertain to DCI and control signaling.
The cited references are in the field of endeavor relating to the management of control signaling for wireless/logical/physical channels. The suggestion/motivation would have been to optimize and improve methods for managing control signaling such as PDCCH and DcI. (Nakayama, paragraphs 1-18; Zhang, paragraphs 1-8). Furthermore, please note that the features of the limitations above have been shown to be known or disclosed in the cited references, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date.
As to claim 6, Zhang discloses the node as in the parent claim 1.
Zhang does not appear to explicitly disclose wherein the DCICI message is associated with a special radio network temporary identifier (RNTI), and the special RNTI is different from an RNTI associated with the first DCI message.
Nakayama discloses wherein the DCICI message is associated with a special radio network temporary identifier (RNTI), and the special RNTI is different from an RNTI associated with the first DCI message.(paragraphs 47-54, in particular, paragraph 54, disclosing different RNTI in DCI)
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the teachings as disclosed in Nakayama, in conjunction with the method as disclosed and taught by Zhang, to reject the limitations of this claim, since a phosita would have found it obvious to imbue the DCI disclosed in Zhang with the DCI features disclosed in Nakayama discussed above.
The cited references are in the field of endeavor relating to the management of control signaling for wireless/logical/physical channels. The suggestion/motivation would have been to optimize and improve methods for managing control signaling such as PDCCH and DcI. (Nakayama, paragraphs 1-18; Zhang, paragraphs 1-8). Furthermore, please note that the features of the limitations above have been shown to be known or disclosed in the cited references, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date.
As to claim 10, Zhang discloses the node as in the parent claim 1.
Zhang does not appear to explicitly disclose wherein the at least one processor is configured to: transmit, to the second network node, an indication of a capability of the first network node to adjust a PDCCH decoding timeline.
Nakayama discloses wherein the at least one processor is configured to: transmit, to the second network node, an indication of a capability of the first network node to adjust a PDCCH decoding timeline. (paragraphs 92-107 and Fig. 7, disclosing BS receiving from UE/radio-terminal “measured W-CQI”, which is then used to determine and/or adjust the “aggregation level” AL, which is a broadest-reasonable-interpretation embodiment of PDCCH decoding timeline, teaching this limitation)
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the teachings as disclosed in Nakayama, in conjunction with the method as disclosed and taught by Zhang, to reject the limitations of this claim, since a phosita would have found it obvious to modify and/or incorporate in Zhang’s disclosed system the feature of sending UE capability as disclosed in Nakayama, in order to further improve or manage the communication of PDCCH.
The cited references are in the field of endeavor relating to the management of control signaling for wireless/logical/physical channels. The suggestion/motivation would have been to optimize and improve methods for managing control signaling such as PDCCH and DcI. (Nakayama, paragraphs 1-18; Zhang, paragraphs 1-8). Furthermore, please note that the features of the limitations above have been shown to be known or disclosed in the cited references, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date.
As to claims 20-21, see rejections for claims 5,6, in the same order.
As to claim 26, see rejections for claim 10.
As to claim 27, Zhang and Nakayama teach the node as in the parent claim 10.
Zhang discloses wherein, to transmit the DCICI message, the at least one processor is configured to transmit the DCICI message to the second network node via the first SS at the first monitoring occasion based on an indication. (see, e.g., Figs. 5-8, paragraphs 1-86, 124-130, 156-157, 168-172, disclosing sending a first DCI indicating location information for a second dCI if this two-stage DCI communication is configured/indicated)
Zhang does not appear to explicitly disclose wherein, to transmit the message, the at least one processor is configured to transmit the message based on the indication of the capability of the second network node to adjust the PDCCH decoding timeline, wherein the indication indicates that the second network node is capable of adjusting the PDCCH decoding timeline.
Nakayama discloses wherein, to transmit the message, the at least one processor is configured to transmit the message based on the indication of the capability of the second network node to adjust the PDCCH decoding timeline, wherein the indication indicates that the second network node is capable of adjusting the PDCCH decoding timeline.
(paragraphs 92-107 and Fig. 7, disclosing BS receiving from UE/radio-terminal “measured W-CQI”, which is then used to determine and/or adjust the “aggregation level” AL, which is a broadest-reasonable-interpretation embodiment of PDCCH decoding timeline, and when the adjustment results in a satisfactory outcome, “assign PDCCH based on AL”, i.e., transmitting the message)
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the teachings as disclosed in Nakayama, in conjunction with the method as disclosed and taught by Zhang, to reject the limitations of this claim, since a phosita would have found it obvious to modify to include in, and/or incorporate in, Zhang’s disclosed system the feature of sending UE capability as disclosed in Nakayama, in order to further improve or manage the communication of PDCCH, to reject “wherein, to transmit the DCICI message, the at least one processor is configured to transmit the DCICI message to the second network node via the first SS at the first monitoring occasion based on the indication of the capability of the second network node to adjust the PDCCH decoding timeline, wherein the indication indicates that the second network node is capable of adjusting the PDCCH decoding timeline”.
The cited references are in the field of endeavor relating to the management of control signaling for wireless/logical/physical channels. The suggestion/motivation would have been to optimize and improve methods for managing control signaling such as PDCCH and DcI. (Nakayama, paragraphs 1-18; Zhang, paragraphs 1-8). Furthermore, please note that the features of the limitations above have been shown to be known or disclosed in the cited references, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date.
Claim(s) 14,29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication No. 2023/0328751 A1 to Zhang et al., in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2022/0150827 A1 to Kim et al.
As to claim 14, Zhang discloses the node as in the parent claim 1.
Zhang further discloses PDCCH associated with the first SS (paragraphs 128, 156-157).
Zhang does not appear to explicitly disclose wherein a number of one or more PDCCH candidates associated with the PDCCH is greater than a threshold
Kim discloses wherein a number of one or more PDCCH candidates associated with the PDCCH is greater than a threshold (paragraph 248,278, number of PDCCH candidates exceeding a “predetermined threshold”)
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the teachings as disclosed in Kim, in conjunction with the method as disclosed and taught by Zhang, to reject the limitations of this claim. In particular, it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA that the PDCCH featured in Kim’s teachings above may be further characterized as being associated with the first SS, as taught in Zhang, so that Kim’s teaching discussed above may be modified by and incorporated with Zhang’s teaching of a PDCCH associated with the first SS, to reject “wherein a number of one or more PDCCH candidates associated with the first SS is greater than a threshold”, since both Kim and Zhang’s teachings pertain to DCI and control signaling.
The cited references are in the field of endeavor relating to the management of control signaling for wireless/logical/physical channels. The suggestion/motivation would have been to optimize and improve methods for managing control signaling such as PDCCH and DcI. (Nakayama, paragraphs 1-18; Kim, paragraphs 1-13; Zhang, paragraphs 1-8). Furthermore, please note that the features of the limitations above have been shown to be known or disclosed in the cited references, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date.
As to claim 29, Zhang discloses the node as in the parent claim 1.
Zhang further discloses PDCCH associated with the first SS and the first monitoring occasion (paragraphs 128, 156-157);
wherein, to transmit the DCICI message, the at least one processor is configured to transmit the DCICI message to the second network node based on a determination (see, e.g., Figs. 5-8, paragraphs 1-86, 124-130, 156-157, 168-172, disclosing sending a first DCI indicating location information for a second dCI if this two-stage DCI communication is configured).
Zhang does not appear to explicitly disclose determine that a number of one or more PDCCH candidates associated with the PDCCH is greater than a threshold; performing an action based on the determination.
Kim discloses determine that a number of one or more PDCCH candidates associated with the PDCCH is greater than a threshold; performing an action based on the determination (paragraph 248,278, number of PDCCH candidates exceeding a “predetermined threshold”)
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the teachings as disclosed in Kim, in conjunction with the method as disclosed and taught by Zhang, to reject the limitations of this claim. In particular, it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA that the PDCCH featured in Kim’s teachings above may be further characterized as being associated with the first SS, as taught in Zhang, so that Kim’s teaching discussed above may be modified by and incorporated with Zhang’s teaching of a PDCCH associated with the first SS, to reject “wherein the at least one processor is configured to: determine that a number of one or more PDCCH candidates associated with the first SS and the first monitoring occasion is greater than a threshold”, since both Kim and Zhang’s teachings pertain to DCI and control signaling. Furthermore, it would have been obvious for a phosita to condition Zhang’s transmission of DCICI with the results of the “determination” disclosed in Kim, to reject “wherein, to transmit the DCICI message, the at least one processor is configured to transmit the DCICI message to the second network node based on the determination.”
The cited references are in the field of endeavor relating to the management of control signaling for wireless/logical/physical channels. The suggestion/motivation would have been to optimize and improve methods for managing control signaling such as PDCCH and DcI. (Nakayama, paragraphs 1-18; Kim, paragraphs 1-13; Zhang, paragraphs 1-8). Furthermore, please note that the features of the limitations above have been shown to be known or disclosed in the cited references, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 28 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHI TANG P CHENG whose telephone number is (571)272-9021. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9:30AM - 6PM.
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 M Nawaz can be reached at (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.
/CHI TANG P CHENG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2463