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 .
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.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 4/10/26 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 4/10/26 have been fully considered.
Applicant's arguments, starting on page 7, with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections to claims 1 and 11 have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the prior art does not teach four features: (a) the first synchronization signal is a uniform periodic signal within a cell; (b) the second synchronization signal is determined between two adjacent transmission cycles of the first synchronization signal, and does not completely overlap with the preceding or succeeding cycle; (c) the first center frequency meets a requirement for a specified frequency set; (d) the second center frequency is different from the first center frequency, and the frequency set corresponding to the second center frequency is configured by the access network device.
Applicant argues that Sui does not disclose (b) and (d). Examiner respectfully disagrees. In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Claim 1 merely recites “the second transmission resource does not completely overlap with the first transmission resource before the second transmission resource, or, the second transmission resource does not completely overlap with the first transmission resource after the second transmission resource.” The first clause recites “the second transmission resource does not completely overlap with the first transmission resource before the second transmission resource.” One of ordinary skill in the art could reasonably interpreted this as meaning the second transmission resource must not overlap the first transmission resource before the second transmission resource at some point. The second clause recites “the second transmission resource does not completely overlap with the first transmission resource after the second transmission resource.” One of ordinary skill in the art could reasonably interpreted this as meaning the second transmission resource must not overlap the first transmission resource after the second transmission resource at some point. Furthermore, because this limitation has two clauses with an “or” between the two, and thus if either clause is satisfied it corresponds to the overall feature. Thus, in order for this feature not to be taught, the second transmission resource would have to completely overlap with the first transmission resource before the second transmission resource and overlap with the first transmission resource after the second transmission resource. This is clearly not the case in the cited teachings of Sui, and thus Sui does teach this feature of the instant claim.
Applicant’s remaining arguments are directed towards other prior art not teaching (b) and (d), but because Sui teaches (b) and (d) these arguments are moot.
Applicant has made no further arguments regarding (a) and (c), and thus Examiner reiterates that the cited portions of the prior art further in this action teach these features .
Applicant’s arguments regarding claim 11 are based on it’s similarity to claim 1 and are respectfully disagreed with for similar reasons.
Applicant’s arguments, starting on page 12, with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection to claims 4-6 and 14-16 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection to claims 4-6 and 14-16 has been withdrawn.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sui (US 20230007603 A1, wherein all cited portions are supported by provisional application 62945439) in view of Wu (US 20210282079 A1) and further in view of Tang (US 20200337008 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Sui discloses:
“A method for synchronization signal transmission, performed by an access network device and comprising: determining a plurality of first transmission resource for transmitting a first synchronization signal, wherein the first synchronization signal is a uniform synchronization signal sent by the access network device to each terminal in a cell;” ([para 0065]: “The method (400) may comprise transmitting (401) first synchronization signaling on first time and frequency resources.” ; [para 0043]: “The synchronization signaling may be transmitted periodically.” ; [para 0071]: “The method 400 may further comprise transmitting a first system information message on a broadcast channel. The first system information message may indicate time and frequency resources of a first resource set.”)
“determining, between two adjacent transmission resource among the plurality of first transmission resources, a second transmission resource for transmitting a second synchronization signal, wherein the second synchronization signal is a synchronization signal corresponding to a target service terminal,” ([para 0065]: “The method may further comprise transmitting (402) indication signaling on second time and frequency resources. The second time and frequency resources may be derived based on the first time and frequency resources.” ; [para 0052]: “The second time and frequency resources may be adjacent in time to the first time and frequency resources, e.g. in the OFDM symbols preceding or following the first time and frequency resources.” ; [para 0054]: “In one example the indication signaling may correspond to an SSS-L signal. The SSS-L signal may be transmitted by a network node near or within an SSB to indicate that the cell supports e.g. NR-light UEs.”)
“the second transmission resource does not completely overlap with the first transmission resource before the second transmission resource, or, the second transmission resource does not completely overlap with the first transmission resource after the second transmission resource wherein… wherein a second center frequency of the second synchronization signal is different from the first center frequency of the first synchronization signal,” ([para 0052]: “The second time and frequency resources may at least partially overlap in time with the first time and frequency resources, e.g. by both having at least a subset of the time and frequency resources allocated in the same one or more OFDM symbols. The second time and frequency resources may at least partially overlap in frequency with the first time and frequency resources, e.g. by both having at least a subset of the time and frequency resources allocated in the same one or more subcarriers and or RBs.”)
“a frequency set corresponding to a second center frequency of the second synchronization signal is configured by the access network device…” ([para 0065]: “The method may further comprise transmitting (402) indication signaling on second time and frequency resources. The second time and frequency resources may be derived based on the first time and frequency resources.”)
“…wherein the target service terminal is a mid-level NR (new radio)-Lite device of a Machine Type of Communication, the second synchronization signal is a synchronization signal corresponding to the mid-level NR (new radio)-Lite device of a Machine Type of Communication.” ([para 0068]: “The gNB may transmit the indication signaling (e.g. an SSS-L signaling), which may indicate to the wireless device that the cell supports NR-Light UEs.”)
Sui does not disclose “wherein a first center frequency of the first synchronization signal meets a requirement for a specified frequency set;” within the context that the first synchronization signal and second synchronization signal are partially overlapping.
However, Wu discloses the missing feature “wherein a first center frequency of the first synchronization signal meets a requirement for a specified frequency set;” ([para 0061]: “When a transmission opportunity is obtained, if the network device determines according to the SSB transmission period that the first SSB can be sent at the first SSB position, and determines that the second SSB can be sent at the second SSB position within the DRS window, then when the first SSB position and the second SSB position overlap, the network device needs to determine how to send the SSB at the overlapped SSB position.” ; [para 0063]: “It should be understood that, the first SSB position and the second SSB position overlap in the time domain described herein, which includes the first SSB position and the second SSB position overlap partially or overlap completely in the time domain.”; [para 0083-0084]: “Before the overlapped SSB position, the network device has not completed the sending of one round of SSBs. In this case, the network device still performs the sending of SSBs based on the candidate SSB positions within the DRS window, that is, the SSB #1 is sent at the SSB position of the subframe 4, the SSB #2 and the SSB #3 are sent in turn at the two SSB positions of the subframe 5, and the SSB #0 and the SSB #1 are sent in turn at the two SSB positions of the subframe 6.” See Fig. 5.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, having the teachings of Sui and Wu, to modify the technique as disclosed by Sui, such that the overlapping synchronization signals as disclosed by Sui have different center frequencies as disclosed by Wu. The motivation for doing so is that it increases system flexibility, thus allowing for improved reliability. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Sui with Wu to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim.
Sui does not explicitly disclose “a transmission mode of the second synchronization signal is a transmission mode predefined by a protocol; or, the method further comprising: sending a control signaling to a terminal, wherein the control signaling comprises an information field configured for indicating the transmission mode of the second synchronization signal.”
However, Tang discloses the missing features “a transmission mode of the second synchronization signal is a transmission mode predefined by a protocol; or, the method further comprising: sending a control signaling to a terminal, wherein the control signaling comprises an information field configured for indicating the transmission mode of the second synchronization signal.” ([para 0172-0174]: “In the embodiment of the present disclosure, in order to let the terminal device know the synchronization signal transmission mode on the first carrier, the network device may send first indication information to the terminal device on a second carrier, and the first indication information is used to determine that the synchronization signal transmission mode on the first carrier is the first transmission mode or the second transmission mode… For example, the network device indicates the first indication information by one bit on the second carrier.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, having the teachings of Sui and Tang, to modify the technique as disclosed by Sui, to have include an indication of a transmission mode as disclosed by Tang. The motivation for doing so is that it increases flexibility, thus allowing for improved optimization. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Sui with Wu and Tang to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim.
Claim 11 is substantially similar to claim 1, with the differences amounting to a difference in perspective, and thus claim 11 is rejected for similar reasons to claim 1.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-6 and 14-16 are 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 following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 4, of the closest prior arts Sui (US 20230007603 A1) in view of Wu (US 20210282079 A1) and further in view of Tang (US 20200337008 A1) discloses all the features of the parent claim. Sui further discloses “wherein the first synchronization signal comprises a first primary synchronization signal (PSS), a first secondary synchronization signal (SSS) and a first physical broadcast channel (PBCH); wherein the second synchronization signal comprises one of the following: (i) the first PSS only, without the first SSS and without the first PBCH; (ii) the first SSS only, without the first PSS and without the first PBCH; (iii) the first PSS and the first SSS, without the first PBCH; or (iv) a part of the first PBCH, wherein the part of the first PBCH is less than an entirety of the first PBCH” in paragraphs 301. However, Sui in view of Wu and Tang does not disclose “wherein a first resource mapping mode for transmitting the first synchronization signal is different from a second resource mapping mode for transmitting the second synchronization signal, the first resource mapping mode comprises a first resource mapping number of OFDM symbols for transmitting the first synchronization signal, the second resource mapping mode comprises a second resource mapping number of OFDM symbols for transmitting the second synchronization signal, the first resource mapping number is different from the second resource mapping number; wherein the first synchronization signal occupies four OFDM symbols in a time domain and is mapped to a first ordered set of OFDM symbol indices consisting of 3, 4, 5, and 6 in that order, the second synchronization signal occupies four OFDM symbols in the time domain and is mapped to a second ordered set of OFDM symbol indices consisting of 6, 3, 5, and 4 in that order.” The cited references fail to anticipate or render the above limitations in combination with all the recited limitations of claims 4 obvious, over any of the prior art of record, alone or in combination. Claim 14 is similar to claim 4 and contains allowable subject matter for similar reasons. Claims 5-6 and 15-16 depend on claims 4 and 14 and contain allowable subject matter based on their dependence.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAAD KHAWAR whose telephone number is (571)272-7948. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00am - 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, Charles Jiang can be reached on (571)-270-7191. 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.
/SAAD KHAWAR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2412
Prosecution Insights