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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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) 1-4 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Lin et al. (US Pub. 2021/0160879 B1).
In regards to claim 1, Lin teaches, a method for wireless communication performed by a wireless node, comprising: receiving downlink control information (DCI) indicating a repetition configuration, wherein the repetition configuration indicates a having a plurality of bits that each corresponds to a respective slot of a transmission period, wherein a value, of each bit of the plurality of bits (see figure 9, step 920; the UE receives GC-DCI; see paragraph 320; the GC-DCI format can include a bitmap of 10 bits corresponding to 10 UEs and the GC-DCI format can schedule only up to 4 UEs that are indicated by the bitmap, where for example a bitmap value of “1” indicates scheduling and a bitmap value of “0” indicates no scheduling for a corresponding UE. Then, the GC-DCI format includes 4 sets of UE-specific fields. This allows the UEs scheduled by the GC-DCI format to be dynamically selected based on the bitmap while avoiding a large size for the GC-DCI format by having a limit on the number of UEs that can be scheduled and having a corresponding limit to the number of sets of UE-specific fields; see paragraph 321; group scheduling for semi-persistently scheduled (SPS) PDSCH receptions is provided, wherein a UE monitors PDCCH for detection of a CGS-DCI format that indicates activation, deactivation, or retransmission of SPS PDSCH for a group of UEs ), indicates whether the respective slot is configured for a repetition transmission of broadcast information via a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH); identifying, based at least in part on the bitmap, a quantity of one or more slots as being configured to carry one or more repetition transmissions of the broadcast information via(see paragraph 321; group scheduling for semi-persistently scheduled (SPS) PDSCH receptions is provided, wherein a UE monitors PDCCH for detection of a CGS-DCI format that indicates activation, deactivation, or retransmission of SPS PDSCH for a group of UEs); and receiving the one or more repetition transmissions of the broadcast information via the quantity of one or more slots via the PDSCH (see figure 11, step 1140; see paragraph 242; The UE receives SPS PDSCH or transmits CG PUSCH in the determined resources and per determined parameters at step 1140).
In regards to claim 2, Lin teaches, wherein the quantity of the one or more slots is based at least in part on a modulation and coding scheme (MCS) or a group of wireless nodes including the wireless node (see paragraph 221; if a new format is used for the GC-DCI, then a size of the new format is aligned with one of the existing DCI formats to ensure no increase in UE blind decoding attempts. In one example, a GC-DCI used for UE-group release of DL SPS/UL CG configurations can include predetermined values for predetermined fields for validation of a GC-DCI as a UE-group release, such as one or more of: HARQ process number (HPN) set to all 0's, NDI=0, RV=00, MCS=all 1's, and FDRA=all 1's (if supported and/or applicable); see paragraph 220; a group-common DCI (GC-DCI) format (say DCI format 2_x e.g., 2_5, or e.g., same/similar to a GC-DCI for UE-group activation command as described in the embodiments for group activation of DL SPS/UL CG for one or multiple UEs via PDSCH above).
In regards to claim 3, Lin teaches, wherein the bitmap identifies the quantity of one or more slots as being within the transmission period of a first system information block (SIB 1) (see paragraph 194; Regarding which HARQ feedback scheme to use for a PDSCH carrying a UE-group activation command for DL SPS/UL CG: in one example, dedicated or broadcast configuration signaling (e.g., RRC or SIB) e.g., in DL SPS/UL CG configuration and/or in UE-group activation configuration (e.g., CORESET/search space configuration for GC-DCI).
In regards to claim 4, Lin teaches, receiving the SIB 1 in one or more of the quantity of one or more slots within the transmission period (see paragraph 165; the UE receives an indication (via RRC/SIB or DCI or MAC) for the HARQ feedback scheme (e.g., alternatives (1) or (2) or (3) of enhancements thereof) corresponding to the shared DL SPS).
In regards to claim 7, Lin teaches, wherein only a subset of the quantity of one or more slots are configured for the repetition transmissions (see paragraph 320; the GC-DCI format can include a bitmap of 10 bits corresponding to 10 UEs and the GC-DCI format can schedule only up to 4 UEs that are indicated by the bitmap, where for example a bitmap value of “1” indicates scheduling and a bitmap value of “0” indicates no scheduling for a corresponding UE).
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.
Claim(s) 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin as stated above further in view of Li et al. (US Pub. 2019/0159172 A9).
In regards to claim 6, Lin teaches all the limitations of the parent claims as stated above.
However, Lin fails to teach the bitmap being replicated to identify one or more additional quantities of one or more slots.
Li et al. (US Pub. 2019/0159172 A9) however teaches, bitmap being replicated to identify one or more additional quantities of one or more slots (see paragraph 210; A CE-PBCH repetition pattern or a repetitions pattern for a PDSCH conveying the CE-SIB can include a bitmap indicating frames with CE-PBCH transmission (or quadruples of frames as a CE-PBCH can be transmitted in four self-decodable segments over respective frames); the quadrupling reads on the replication/duplication).
Li and Jang both relate to uplink/downlink communication in a cellular/wireless environment.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present application to combine the duplication of the bitmap as taught by Li into the teachings of Lin. The motivation to do so would be to allow for predictable resource locations for broadcast information in a shared downlink channel where a mobile station changes location rapidly.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9-14, 16-17, 19-21, 23-24 and 26-32 are allowed.
The reasons for allowance have previously been indicated.
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 JAY P PATEL whose telephone number is (571)272-3086. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-6.
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, Faruk Hamza can be reached at 571-272-8786. 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.
/JAY P PATEL/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2466
Prosecution Insights