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 .
Applicant’s RCE filed 8/12/25 is acknowledged.
Claim 1, 4, 6, 9, and 15 are amended.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to independent claims 1, 2, 5, 9, and 15 (pages 1-3) in a reply filed 8/12/2025 have been considered but are moot because the arguments are based on newly changed limitations in the amendment and new ground of rejections using newly introduced references or a newly introduced portion of an existing reference are applied in the current rejection.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 8/12/25 has been entered.
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) 1, 3, 4, 6, 9-13, 15-18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Perlman et al. US 20210328633 (hereinafter “Perlman”) in view of Marupaduga US 20220046554 (hereinafter “Marupaduga”)
As to claim 1:
Perlman discloses:
A system for utilizing unused frequency division duplex (FDD) uplink for time division duplex (TDD) operation in a wireless telecommunication network, the system comprising: an antenna array comprising one or more antenna elements (“many TDD BTS antennas and adjacent sub-band FDD BTS antennas would be distributed throughout a large coverage area (e.g. a city, a region, a country or a continent).”, Perlman [0184]); one or more processors; and computer memory storing computer-usable instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, perform operations comprising: (“Such electronic devices store and communicate (internally and/or with other electronic devices over a network) code and data using computer machine-readable media, such as non-transitory computer machine-readable storage media”, Perlman [0191])
identifying at least a portion of an available FDD uplink corresponding to the at least one FDD carrier; (“This is illustrated in FIG. 12 where FDD LTE 1210 only has one subframe in use for UL and one for DL and the remainder are idle. There are two TDD LTE networks 1220 and 1230 each respectively using the FDD LTE 1210 UL and DL channels, resulting the three networks sharing the two channels as show in FDD+TDD LTE 1240. The same flexibilities and constraints apply as described previously, and there can be a single controller of all 3 networks or multiple controllers. The two TDD networks can be operated independently, or by using Carrier Aggregation techniques.”, Perlman [0137]) and assigning at least the portion of the available FDD uplink identified for a TDD operation corresponding to the at least one TDD carrier; and based on assigning the at least the portion of the available FDD uplink to the at least one TDD carrier, receiving a transmission, from a user device that is utilizing the at least one TDD carrier, over at least the portion of the available FDD uplink. (“One solution to overcome many of the above prior art limitations is to have user devices concurrently operate in TDD mode in the same spectrum as currently used UL or DL FDD spectrum, such that the TDD spectrum usage is coordinated so as to not conflict with current FDD spectrum usage. Particularly in the FDD UL channel, there is increasingly more unused spectrum, and TDD devices could use that spectrum without impacting the throughput of the existing FDD network. The also enables TDD usage highly propagation-efficient UHF spectrum which, in many regions of the world is almost entirely allocated to FDD, relegating TDD to far less propagation-efficient microwave bands.”, Perlman [0062])
Perlman as described above does not explicitly teach:
providing a coverage area, via the antenna array, on at least one TDD carrier and at least one FDD carrier;
However, Marupaduga further teaches providing coverage area via antenna array on TDD and FDD carrier which includes:
providing a coverage area, via the antenna array, on at least one TDD carrier and at least one FDD carrier; (“Each access node could have a respective antenna structure, perhaps an antenna array or a portion of shared antenna array, that is configured to transmit and receive electromagnetic signals in a region defined by an antenna pattern or radiation pattern. Further, each access node could be configured to provide coverage on at least one respective carrier according to a respective RAT, with each carrier being FDD or TDD as noted above. Namely, the 4G eNB 12 could provide 4G coverage on one or more carriers 16, and the 5G eNB 14 could provide 5G coverage on one or more carriers 18.”, Marupaduga [0045])
Perlman and Marupaduga are analogous because they pertain to nodes with TDD and FDD carrier.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include providing coverage area via antenna array on TDD and FDD carrier as described in Marupaduga into Perlman. By modifying the method to include providing coverage area via antenna array on TDD and FDD carrier as taught by Marupaduga, the benefits of improved coverage (Marupaduga [0045] and Perlman [0137]) are achieved.
As to claim 3:
Perlman discloses:
The system according to claim 1, wherein the transmission from the user device includes uplink control information, wherein a TDD uplink corresponding to the at least one TDD carrier is utilizing at least the portion of the available FDD uplink. (“One solution to overcome many of the above prior art limitations is to have user devices concurrently operate in TDD mode in the same spectrum as currently used UL or DL FDD spectrum, such that the TDD spectrum usage is coordinated so as to not conflict with current FDD spectrum usage. Particularly in the FDD UL channel, there is increasingly more unused spectrum, and TDD devices could use that spectrum without impacting the throughput of the existing FDD network. The also enables TDD usage highly propagation-efficient UHF spectrum which, in many regions of the world is almost entirely allocated to FDD, relegating TDD to far less propagation-efficient microwave bands.”, Perlman [0062]) (FIG. 9 shows TDD carrier utilizing a portion of the available FDD uplink, Perlman)
As to claim 4:
Perlman discloses:
The system according to claim 3, wherein the TDD uplink corresponds to a primary carrier. (“Most early LTE networks deployed worldwide used FDD mode (e.g., Verizon, AT&T), but increasingly TDD mode is being used, both in markets with extensive FDD coverage, such as the U.S. (where Sprint is deploying TDD) and in markets that do not yet have extensive LTE coverage, such as China (where China Mobile is deploying TDD). In many cases, a single operator is deploying both FDD and TDD at different frequencies (e.g. Sprint operates both FDD LTE and TDD LTE in different frequencies in the U.S.), and may offer LTE devices which can operate in both modes, depending on which band is used.”, Perlman [0039]) (“Toward this end, as there are fewer and fewer FDD devices remaining in operation, the operator may decide to use both the UL and DL bands for TDD operation. This is illustrated in FIG. 12 where FDD LTE 1210 only has one subframe in use for UL and one for DL and the remainder are idle. There are two TDD LTE networks 1220 and 1230 each respectively using the FDD LTE 1210 UL and DL channels, resulting the three networks sharing the two channels as show in FDD+TDD LTE 1240. The same flexibilities and constraints apply as described previously, and there can be a single controller of all 3 networks or multiple controllers. The two TDD networks can be operated independently, or by using Carrier Aggregation techniques.”, Perlman [0137])
As to claim 6:
Perlman discloses:
The system according to claim 5, wherein the TDD uplink corresponds to a secondary carrier. (“Toward this end, as there are fewer and fewer FDD devices remaining in operation, the operator may decide to use both the UL and DL bands for TDD operation. This is illustrated in FIG. 12 where FDD LTE 1210 only has one subframe in use for UL and one for DL and the remainder are idle. There are two TDD LTE networks 1220 and 1230 each respectively using the FDD LTE 1210 UL and DL channels, resulting the three networks sharing the two channels as show in FDD+TDD LTE 1240. The same flexibilities and constraints apply as described previously, and there can be a single controller of all 3 networks or multiple controllers. The two TDD networks can be operated independently, or by using Carrier Aggregation techniques.”, Perlman [0137])
As to claim 9:
Perlman discloses:
A method for utilizing unused frequency division duplex (FDD) uplink for time division duplex (TDD) operation in a wireless telecommunication network, the method comprising: identifying at least a portion of an available FDD uplink corresponding to an FDD carrier and a wireless telecommunication network associated with a coverage area; (“This is illustrated in FIG. 12 where FDD LTE 1210 only has one subframe in use for UL and one for DL and the remainder are idle. There are two TDD LTE networks 1220 and 1230 each respectively using the FDD LTE 1210 UL and DL channels, resulting the three networks sharing the two channels as show in FDD+TDD LTE 1240. The same flexibilities and constraints apply as described previously, and there can be a single controller of all 3 networks or multiple controllers. The two TDD networks can be operated independently, or by using Carrier Aggregation techniques.”, Perlman [0137])
allocating at least the portion of the available FDD uplink identified to a TDD uplink; and receiving, via at least the portion of the available FDD uplink allocated to the TDD uplink, a transmission from a user device within the coverage area. (“One solution to overcome many of the above prior art limitations is to have user devices concurrently operate in TDD mode in the same spectrum as currently used UL or DL FDD spectrum, such that the TDD spectrum usage is coordinated so as to not conflict with current FDD spectrum usage. Particularly in the FDD UL channel, there is increasingly more unused spectrum, and TDD devices could use that spectrum without impacting the throughput of the existing FDD network. The also enables TDD usage highly propagation-efficient UHF spectrum which, in many regions of the world is almost entirely allocated to FDD, relegating TDD to far less propagation-efficient microwave bands.”, Perlman [0062])
Perlman as described above does not explicitly teach:
operating an antenna array comprising one or more antenna elements to provide a coverage area on at least a TDD carrier and at least a FDD carrier;
However, Marupaduga further teaches providing coverage area via antenna array on TDD and FDD carrier which includes:
operating an antenna array comprising one or more antenna elements to provide a coverage area on at least a TDD carrier and at least a FDD carrier; (“Each access node could have a respective antenna structure, perhaps an antenna array or a portion of shared antenna array, that is configured to transmit and receive electromagnetic signals in a region defined by an antenna pattern or radiation pattern. Further, each access node could be configured to provide coverage on at least one respective carrier according to a respective RAT, with each carrier being FDD or TDD as noted above. Namely, the 4G eNB 12 could provide 4G coverage on one or more carriers 16, and the 5G eNB 14 could provide 5G coverage on one or more carriers 18.”, Marupaduga [0045])
Perlman and Marupaduga are analogous because they pertain to nodes with TDD and FDD carrier.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include providing coverage area via antenna array on TDD and FDD carrier as described in Marupaduga into Perlman. By modifying the method to include providing coverage area via antenna array on TDD and FDD carrier as taught by Marupaduga, the benefits of improved coverage (Marupaduga [0045] and Perlman [0137]) are achieved.
As to claim 10:
Perlman discloses:
The method according to claim 9, further comprising: identifying a second portion of the available FDD uplink; and assigning the second portion, of the available FDD uplink identified, to a TDD downlink. (“once a mobile operator begins to offer TDD devices compatible with its FDD spectrum, the mobile operator will likely find these devices to be using spectrum more efficiently than FDD devices and, as such, may discontinue sales of FDD devices. As old FDD devices gradually are replaced and an increasing percentage of devices are TDD, the operator may wish to allocate increasingly more of its spectrum to TDD devices, but still maintain compatibility with the remaining FDD devices in the market.”, Perlman [0136]) (“Toward this end, as there are fewer and fewer FDD devices remaining in operation, the operator may decide to use both the UL and DL bands for TDD operation. This is illustrated in FIG. 12 where FDD LTE 1210 only has one subframe in use for UL and one for DL and the remainder are idle. There are two TDD LTE networks 1220 and 1230 each respectively using the FDD LTE 1210 UL and DL channels, resulting the three networks sharing the two channels as show in FDD+TDD LTE 1240. The same flexibilities and constraints apply as described previously, and there can be a single controller of all 3 networks or multiple controllers. The two TDD networks can be operated independently, or by using Carrier Aggregation techniques.”, Perlman [0137])
As to claim 11:
Perlman discloses:
The method according to claim 10, further comprising transmitting the TDD downlink assigned the second portion of the available FDD uplink to the user device. (“once a mobile operator begins to offer TDD devices compatible with its FDD spectrum, the mobile operator will likely find these devices to be using spectrum more efficiently than FDD devices and, as such, may discontinue sales of FDD devices. As old FDD devices gradually are replaced and an increasing percentage of devices are TDD, the operator may wish to allocate increasingly more of its spectrum to TDD devices, but still maintain compatibility with the remaining FDD devices in the market.”, Perlman [0136]) (“Toward this end, as there are fewer and fewer FDD devices remaining in operation, the operator may decide to use both the UL and DL bands for TDD operation. This is illustrated in FIG. 12 where FDD LTE 1210 only has one subframe in use for UL and one for DL and the remainder are idle. There are two TDD LTE networks 1220 and 1230 each respectively using the FDD LTE 1210 UL and DL channels, resulting the three networks sharing the two channels as show in FDD+TDD LTE 1240. The same flexibilities and constraints apply as described previously, and there can be a single controller of all 3 networks or multiple controllers. The two TDD networks can be operated independently, or by using Carrier Aggregation techniques.”, Perlman [0137])
As to claim 12:
Perlman discloses:
The method according to claim 10, wherein both the TDD uplink utilizing at least the portion of the available FDD uplink and the TDD downlink assigned the second portion of the available FDD uplink correspond to a TDD carrier. (“once a mobile operator begins to offer TDD devices compatible with its FDD spectrum, the mobile operator will likely find these devices to be using spectrum more efficiently than FDD devices and, as such, may discontinue sales of FDD devices. As old FDD devices gradually are replaced and an increasing percentage of devices are TDD, the operator may wish to allocate increasingly more of its spectrum to TDD devices, but still maintain compatibility with the remaining FDD devices in the market.”, Perlman [0136]) (“Toward this end, as there are fewer and fewer FDD devices remaining in operation, the operator may decide to use both the UL and DL bands for TDD operation. This is illustrated in FIG. 12 where FDD LTE 1210 only has one subframe in use for UL and one for DL and the remainder are idle. There are two TDD LTE networks 1220 and 1230 each respectively using the FDD LTE 1210 UL and DL channels, resulting the three networks sharing the two channels as show in FDD+TDD LTE 1240. The same flexibilities and constraints apply as described previously, and there can be a single controller of all 3 networks or multiple controllers. The two TDD networks can be operated independently, or by using Carrier Aggregation techniques.”, Perlman [0137])
As to claim 13:
Perlman discloses:
The method according to claim 12, wherein the TDD carrier is a secondary carrier of the user device. (“Toward this end, as there are fewer and fewer FDD devices remaining in operation, the operator may decide to use both the UL and DL bands for TDD operation. This is illustrated in FIG. 12 where FDD LTE 1210 only has one subframe in use for UL and one for DL and the remainder are idle. There are two TDD LTE networks 1220 and 1230 each respectively using the FDD LTE 1210 UL and DL channels, resulting the three networks sharing the two channels as show in FDD+TDD LTE 1240. The same flexibilities and constraints apply as described previously, and there can be a single controller of all 3 networks or multiple controllers. The two TDD networks can be operated independently, or by using Carrier Aggregation techniques.”, Perlman [0137])
As to claim 15:
Perlman discloses:
A method for utilizing unused frequency division duplex (FDD) uplink for time division duplex (TDD) operation in a wireless telecommunication network, the method comprising:(“This is illustrated in FIG. 12 where FDD LTE 1210 only has one subframe in use for UL and one for DL and the remainder are idle. There are two TDD LTE networks 1220 and 1230 each respectively using the FDD LTE 1210 UL and DL channels, resulting the three networks sharing the two channels as show in FDD+TDD LTE 1240. The same flexibilities and constraints apply as described previously, and there can be a single controller of all 3 networks or multiple controllers. The two TDD networks can be operated independently, or by using Carrier Aggregation techniques.”, Perlman [0137])
assigning at least the portion of the available FDD uplink identified for a TDD downlink; and transmitting the TDD downlink assigned at least the portion of the available FDD uplink to a user device within the coverage area, causing the user device to utilize the portion of the available FDD uplink assigned during a TDD uplink operation. (“One solution to overcome many of the above prior art limitations is to have user devices concurrently operate in TDD mode in the same spectrum as currently used UL or DL FDD spectrum, such that the TDD spectrum usage is coordinated so as to not conflict with current FDD spectrum usage. Particularly in the FDD UL channel, there is increasingly more unused spectrum, and TDD devices could use that spectrum without impacting the throughput of the existing FDD network. The also enables TDD usage highly propagation-efficient UHF spectrum which, in many regions of the world is almost entirely allocated to FDD, relegating TDD to far less propagation-efficient microwave bands.”, Perlman [0062])
Perlman as described above does not explicitly teach:
operating an antenna array comprising one or more antenna elements to provide a coverage area on at least a TDD carrier and at least a FDD carrier
However, Marupaduga further teaches providing coverage area via antenna array on TDD and FDD carrier which includes:
operating an antenna array comprising one or more antenna elements to provide a coverage area on at least a TDD carrier and at least a FDD carrier (“Each access node could have a respective antenna structure, perhaps an antenna array or a portion of shared antenna array, that is configured to transmit and receive electromagnetic signals in a region defined by an antenna pattern or radiation pattern. Further, each access node could be configured to provide coverage on at least one respective carrier according to a respective RAT, with each carrier being FDD or TDD as noted above. Namely, the 4G eNB 12 could provide 4G coverage on one or more carriers 16, and the 5G eNB 14 could provide 5G coverage on one or more carriers 18.”, Marupaduga [0045])
Perlman and Marupaduga are analogous because they pertain to nodes with TDD and FDD carrier.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include providing coverage area via antenna array on TDD and FDD carrier as described in Marupaduga into Perlman. By modifying the method to include providing coverage area via antenna array on TDD and FDD carrier as taught by Marupaduga, the benefits of improved coverage (Marupaduga [0045] and Perlman [0137]) are achieved.
As to claim 16:
Perlman discloses:
The method of claim 15, further comprising allocating one or more resource elements to carry downlink information, via the TDD downlink assigned at least the portion of the available FDD uplink, to the user device. (“once a mobile operator begins to offer TDD devices compatible with its FDD spectrum, the mobile operator will likely find these devices to be using spectrum more efficiently than FDD devices and, as such, may discontinue sales of FDD devices. As old FDD devices gradually are replaced and an increasing percentage of devices are TDD, the operator may wish to allocate increasingly more of its spectrum to TDD devices, but still maintain compatibility with the remaining FDD devices in the market.”, Perlman [0136]) (“Toward this end, as there are fewer and fewer FDD devices remaining in operation, the operator may decide to use both the UL and DL bands for TDD operation. This is illustrated in FIG. 12 where FDD LTE 1210 only has one subframe in use for UL and one for DL and the remainder are idle. There are two TDD LTE networks 1220 and 1230 each respectively using the FDD LTE 1210 UL and DL channels, resulting the three networks sharing the two channels as show in FDD+TDD LTE 1240. The same flexibilities and constraints apply as described previously, and there can be a single controller of all 3 networks or multiple controllers. The two TDD networks can be operated independently, or by using Carrier Aggregation techniques.”, Perlman [0137])
As to claim 17:
Perlman discloses:
The method of claim 15, further comprising: assigning a second portion of the available FDD uplink identified for a TDD uplink; and receiving, via the TDD uplink utilizing the second portion of the available FDD uplink, a transmission from the user device within the coverage area. (“once a mobile operator begins to offer TDD devices compatible with its FDD spectrum, the mobile operator will likely find these devices to be using spectrum more efficiently than FDD devices and, as such, may discontinue sales of FDD devices. As old FDD devices gradually are replaced and an increasing percentage of devices are TDD, the operator may wish to allocate increasingly more of its spectrum to TDD devices, but still maintain compatibility with the remaining FDD devices in the market.”, Perlman [0136]) (“Toward this end, as there are fewer and fewer FDD devices remaining in operation, the operator may decide to use both the UL and DL bands for TDD operation. This is illustrated in FIG. 12 where FDD LTE 1210 only has one subframe in use for UL and one for DL and the remainder are idle. There are two TDD LTE networks 1220 and 1230 each respectively using the FDD LTE 1210 UL and DL channels, resulting the three networks sharing the two channels as show in FDD+TDD LTE 1240. The same flexibilities and constraints apply as described previously, and there can be a single controller of all 3 networks or multiple controllers. The two TDD networks can be operated independently, or by using Carrier Aggregation techniques.”, Perlman [0137])
As to claim 18:
Perlman discloses:
The method of claim 15, further comprising transmitting scheduling information to the user device via the TDD downlink assigned at least the portion of the available FDD uplink. (“For FDD LTE 910 and TDD LTE 920 networks to concurrently use the same spectrum, their operation must be coordinated by either one eNodeB that is set up to operate two spectrum sharing networks concurrently, or by the coordination of an eNodeB operating the existing TDD LTE 920 network and a second network controller that could be a second eNodeB or another system compatible with LTE timing and frame structure, such as the Distributed-Input Distributed-Output Distributed antenna MU-MAS C-RAN system disclosed in Sections 1 and 2 above and in the Related Patents and Applications. In any of these cases, both the frames of the FDD LTE 910 and TDD LTE 920 systems have to be synchronized, not only in terms of timing, but in terms of subframe resource allocations. For example, in the case of FIG. 9, the system controlling the FDD LTE 910 system will need to be aware of which subframes are TDD UL subframes that are available to be used for UL (e.g. will not conflict with TDD DL control signals sent over subframes #0 and #5 for time and frequency synchronization at the UE), and use one of those subframes for its FDD UL subframe 912. If the same system is also controlling the TDD LTE 920 system, it will also have to be sure not to schedule an UL from a TDD device during that subframe 912, and if it is not controlling the TDD LTE 920 system, it will have to notify whatever system is controlling the TDD LTE 920 system to not schedule an UL from a TDD device during that subframe 912.”, Perlman [0129]) (“As such, establishing appropriate scheduling priorities and paradigms to balance the UL subframe resources between the FDD LTE 910 and TDD LTE 920 networks may result in the best overall network performance and user (and/or UE) experience.”, Perlman [0129])
As to claim 20:
Perlman discloses:
The method of claim 15, wherein a TDD carrier, associated with the TDD downlink assigned at least the portion of the available FDD uplink, is a primary carrier of the user device. (“Most early LTE networks deployed worldwide used FDD mode (e.g., Verizon, AT&T), but increasingly TDD mode is being used, both in markets with extensive FDD coverage, such as the U.S. (where Sprint is deploying TDD) and in markets that do not yet have extensive LTE coverage, such as China (where China Mobile is deploying TDD). In many cases, a single operator is deploying both FDD and TDD at different frequencies (e.g. Sprint operates both FDD LTE and TDD LTE in different frequencies in the U.S.), and may offer LTE devices which can operate in both modes, depending on which band is used.”, Perlman [0039]) (“Toward this end, as there are fewer and fewer FDD devices remaining in operation, the operator may decide to use both the UL and DL bands for TDD operation. This is illustrated in FIG. 12 where FDD LTE 1210 only has one subframe in use for UL and one for DL and the remainder are idle. There are two TDD LTE networks 1220 and 1230 each respectively using the FDD LTE 1210 UL and DL channels, resulting the three networks sharing the two channels as show in FDD+TDD LTE 1240. The same flexibilities and constraints apply as described previously, and there can be a single controller of all 3 networks or multiple controllers. The two TDD networks can be operated independently, or by using Carrier Aggregation techniques.”, Perlman [0137])
Claim(s) 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Perlman in view of Marupaduga, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Cheng et al. US 20160249340 (hereinafter “Cheng”)
As to claim 5:
Perlman discloses:
The system according to claim 1, (FIG. 9 shows TDD uplink data being transmitted using a portion of the available FDD uplink via TDD carrier, Perlman).
Perlman as described above does not explicitly teach:
wherein the operations further comprise receiving a feedback message, from the user device within the coverage area, via a TDD uplink corresponding to the at least one TDD carrier
However, Cheng further teaches UE sending HARQ-ACK via TDD uplink corresponding to a TDD carrier which includes:
wherein the operations further comprise receiving a feedback message, from the user device within the coverage area, via a TDD uplink corresponding to the at least one TDD carrier, (“In this embodiment of the present invention, for example, in an example shown in FIG. 2, when a primary carrier is a TDD carrier, for the FDD carrier and the TDD carrier, the HARQ-ACK may be fed back according to existing timing of the FDD carrier, that is, if the UE receives the control channel in the downlink subframe N, the UE feeds back an HARQ-ACK of the FDD carrier and/or the TDD carrier in the uplink subframe N+4; if the uplink subframe N+4 exactly corresponds to the uplink subframe of TDD, the HARQ-ACK is fed back by using the TDD carrier”, Cheng [0171])
Perlman, Marupaduga, and Cheng are analogous because they pertain to nodes with TDD and FDD carrier.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include UE sending HARQ-ACK via TDD uplink corresponding to a TDD carrier as described in Cheng into Perlman as modified by Marupaduga. By modifying the method to include UE sending HARQ-ACK via TDD uplink corresponding to a TDD carrier as taught by Cheng, the benefits of improved coverage (Cheng [0171], Marupaduga [0045], and Perlman [0137]) are achieved.
Claim(s) 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Perlman in view of Marupaduga, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Gormley US 20080151788 (hereinafter “Gormley”)
As to claim 2:
Perlman as described above does not explicitly teach:
The system according to claim 1, wherein the available FDD uplink identified corresponds to a half-duplex FDD mode of operation.
However, Gormley further teaches half-duplex FDD which includes:
The system according to claim 1, wherein the available FDD uplink identified corresponds to a half-duplex FDD (“Half-Duplex Frequency Division Duplexing (H-FDD) equipment”, Gormley [0007]) mode of operation. (“The method can include migrating the remaining users of the FDD equipment to the TDD equipment or to the H-FDD equipment operating in H-FDD mode and configuring the H-FDD equipment operating in H-FDD mode to operate in TDD mode.”, Gormley [0010]) (“Deployment process 100 phases out (110) FDD equipment completely and the H-FDD equipment can be re-configured to operate in TDD mode as shown in FIG. 6 as deployment 80. More particularly, at the base station, the operator can independently select the frequencies required for the uplink and the downlink. For H-FDD mode of operation of the H-FDD equipment, different frequencies are chosen. For TDD mode of operation of the H-FDD equipment, the same frequency is chosen for uplink and downlink.”, Gormley [0053])
Perlman, Marupaduga, and Gormley are analogous because they pertain to nodes with TDD and FDD radio.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include half-duplex FDD as described in Gormley into Perlman as modified by Marupaduga. By modifying the method to include half-duplex FDD as taught by Gormley, the benefits of improved coverage (Perlman [0062], Marupaduga [0045], and Gormley [0053]) are achieved.
Claim(s) 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Perlman in view of Marupaduga, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ashworth et al. US 20200084013 (hereinafter “Ashworth”)
As to claim 7:
Perlman as described above does not explicitly teach:
The system according to claim 1, wherein the available FDD uplink identified corresponds to LTE band 1.
However, Ashworth further teaches LTE band 1 which includes:
The system according to claim 1, wherein the available FDD uplink identified corresponds to LTE band 1. (“Uplink (UL) operating band”, “FDD”, and “LTE Operating Band 1”, Ashworth [Table 1])
Perlman, Marupaduga, and Ashworth are analogous because they both pertain to carrier aggregation techniques.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include LTE band 1 as described in Ashworth into Perlman as modified by Marupaduga. By modifying the method to include LTE band 1 as taught by Ashworth, the benefits of improved efficiency (Perlman [0062]), Marupaduga [0045], and improved quality (Ashworth [0018]) are achieved.
Claim(s) 8, 14, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Perlman in view of Marupaduga, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Lim et al. US 20240276400 (hereinafter “Lim”)
As to claim 8:
Perlman as described above does not explicitly teach:
The system according to claim 1, wherein the available FDD uplink identified corresponds to a frequency band of 1900 MHz.
However, Lim further teaches FDD frequency band 1900 MHz which includes:
The system according to claim 1, wherein the available FDD uplink identified corresponds to a frequency band of 1900 MHz. (“Uplink Operating Band”, “FDD”, and “1850 MHz – 1910 MHz”, Lim [Table 5])
Perlman, Marupaduga, and Lim are analogous because they both pertain to carrier aggregation techniques.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include FDD frequency band 1900 MHz as described in Lim into Perlman as modified by Marupaduga. By modifying the method to include FDD frequency band 1900 MHz as taught by Lim, the benefits of improved efficiency (Perlman [0062], Marupaduga [0045], and Lim [0016]) are achieved.
As to claim 14:
Perlman discloses:
The method according to claim 9, wherein the transmission, from the user device received via the TDD uplink utilizing at least the portion of the available FDD uplink, comprises channel state information, and wherein the user device is configured for FDD and TDD carrier aggregation, and (“Toward this end, as there are fewer and fewer FDD devices remaining in operation, the operator may decide to use both the UL and DL bands for TDD operation. This is illustrated in FIG. 12 where FDD LTE 1210 only has one subframe in use for UL and one for DL and the remainder are idle. There are two TDD LTE networks 1220 and 1230 each respectively using the FDD LTE 1210 UL and DL channels, resulting the three networks sharing the two channels as show in FDD+TDD LTE 1240. The same flexibilities and constraints apply as described previously, and there can be a single controller of all 3 networks or multiple controllers. The two TDD networks can be operated independently, or by using Carrier Aggregation techniques.”, Perlman [0137]) (“DIDO operates more efficiently in TDD than FDD networks because the UL and DL are in the same channel and, as a result, training transmission received in the UL channel can be used to derive channel state information for the DL channel by exploiting channel reciprocity. Also, as described above, TDD mode inherently better suits the asymmetry of mobile data, allowing for more efficient spectrum utilization.”, Perlman [0146])
Perlman as described above does not explicitly teach:
wherein the wireless telecommunication network provides a 5G network.
However, Lim further teaches FDD and TDD carrier aggregation for 5G network which includes:
wherein the wireless telecommunication network provides a 5G network. (“The 5G usage scenarios shown in FIG. 1 are only exemplary, and the technical features of the present disclosure can be applied to other 5G usage scenarios which are not shown in FIG. 1.”, Lim [0050])
Perlman, Marupaduga, and Lim are analogous because they both pertain to carrier aggregation techniques.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include FDD and TDD carrier aggregation for 5G network as described in Lim into Perlman as modified by Marupaduga. By modifying the method to include FDD and TDD carrier aggregation for 5G network as taught by Lim, the benefits of improved efficiency (Perlman [0062], Marupaduga [0045], and Lim [0016]) are achieved.
As to claim 19:
Perlman as described above does not explicitly teach:
The method of claim 15, wherein the available FDD uplink identified corresponds to a frequency band of 1900 MHz
However, Lim further teaches FDD and TDD carrier aggregation for 5G network which includes:
The method of claim 15, wherein the available FDD uplink identified corresponds to a frequency band of 1900 MHz. (“Uplink Operating Band”, “FDD”, and “1850 MHz – 1910 MHz”, Lim [Table 5])
Perlman, Marupaduga, and Lim are analogous because they both pertain to carrier aggregation techniques.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include FDD frequency band 1900 MHz as described in Lim into Perlman as modified by Marupaduga. By modifying the method to include FDD frequency band 1900 MHz as taught by Lim, the benefits of improved efficiency (Perlman [0062], Marupaduga [0045]¸and Lim [0016]) are achieved.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW C KIM whose telephone number is (703)756-5607. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9AM - 5PM (PST).
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, Sujoy K Kundu can be reached at (571) 272-8586. 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.
/A.C.K./
Examiner
Art Unit 2471
/MOHAMMAD S ADHAMI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2471