DETAILED ACTION
RCE
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 03/13/2026 has been entered.
Response to Remark
This communication is considered fully responsive to the amendment filed on 03/13/26.
a. Independent claims have been amended.
b. Claims 51-52, 59-60, and 65-66 have been canceled.
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 of this title, 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.
Claims 50, 53-58, 61-64, and 67-69 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu et al. (US 2021/0258999, “Xu”; Provisional 62/976,065 includes the same Figs.1-12 of Xu and the related paragraphs) in view of Park et al. (US 2021/0298050, “Park”).
Regarding claim 50, Xu discloses a method of receiving scheduling information at a radio device from a network node of a radio access network (RAN) in radio communication with the radio device through at least two cells (See Fig.5), the method comprising:
- receiving configuration information from the network node (See 505 Fig.5 and ¶.66, the base station may transmit, to the UE, a TDRA configuration for multiple cells; See ¶.66, the TDRA configuration may be included in a configuration message such as RRC), the configuration information being indicative of a table in which each of a plurality of indices are mapped to a plurality of table references (See Fig.3,
PNG
media_image1.png
230
726
media_image1.png
Greyscale
See Fig.7,
PNG
media_image2.png
421
715
media_image2.png
Greyscale
See Fig.9,
PNG
media_image3.png
462
706
media_image3.png
Greyscale
),
each table reference indicating scheduling information for a respective one of the at least two cells (See Fig.5-10 and ¶.67, each TDRA, of the multiple TDRAs, may correspond to a different scheduled communication; See ¶.97, the single DCI message includes multiple TDRA index values in corresponding multiple TDRA fields. In this case, each TDRA index value may correspond to a different cell of multiple cells scheduled by the single DCI message); and
- receiving, from the network node (See 510 Fig.5, Fig.6-10, and ¶.67, UE receives a single DCI message that schedules communications on multiple cells), control information comprising an index into the table to indicate the scheduling information for each of the at least two cells (See Fig.5 and ¶.68,
PNG
media_image4.png
284
624
media_image4.png
Greyscale
),
Xu does not explicitly disclose newly added limitations “wherein the plurality of table references refer to entries in respective tables indicating, as the scheduling information or as part of the scheduling information, at least two different states or values of: a rate matching indicator; and/or a zero power channel state information reference signal (ZP CSI-RS) trigger.”
However, Park discloses “wherein the plurality of table references refer to entries in respective tables indicating, as the scheduling information or as part of the scheduling information, at least two different states or values of: a rate matching indicator; and/or a zero power channel state information reference signal (ZP CSI-RS) trigger” (Park, See ¶.32, the plurality of scheduling modes related to the rate matching of PDSCHs may include scheduling modes which differ in a manner of allocating signals for performing rate matching to resources when the terminal receives PDSCHs. For example, signals performing rate matching may include at least one of a phase tracking reference signal (PTRS) and an aperiodic zero power channel status information-reference signal (ZP CSI-RS); See ¶.42, the first and second cells may perform scheduling such that the overlapping area does not include resources corresponding to PTRS or aperiodic ZP CSI-RS included in the first PDSCH PDSCH_1 and resources corresponding to PTRS or aperiodic ZP CSI-RS included in the second PDSCH PDSCH_2; See ¶.73, Referring to FIGS.1 and 8A, the first and second cells may operate in a first scheduling mode such that a resource element allocated with data and a resource element allocated with ZP CSI-RS do not overlap each other in the first and second PDSCHs PDSCH_1 and PDSCH_2. Hereinafter, the first and second cells operating in the first scheduling mode will be described).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to apply the method of “the plurality of table references referring to entries in respective tables indicating, as the scheduling information or as part of the scheduling information, at least two different states or values of: a rate matching indicator; and/or a zero power channel state information reference signal (ZP CSI-RS) trigger” as taught by Park into the system of Xu, so that it provides a way of selecting a plurality of scheduling modes related to rate matching of PDSCHs (Park, See ¶.36) and preventing the first PDSCH is allocated to not overlap the second PDSCH (Park, See ¶.74).
Regarding claim 53, Xu discloses “the table comprises a first column comprising a first reference indicative of the scheduling information of a first cell of the at least two cells and a second column comprising a second reference indicative of the scheduling information of a second cell of the at least two cells (See Fig.5-10 and ¶.97, the single DCI message includes multiple TDRA index values in corresponding multiple TDRA fields. In this case, each TDRA index value may correspond to a different cell of multiple cells scheduled by the single DCI message. The example single DCI message of FIG. 8 includes multiple fields (e.g., two fields) dedicated to carrying bits of respective TDRA index values. By using multiple TDRA fields and corresponding multiple TDRA index values, scheduling flexibility may be increased; Specially See Fig.8,
PNG
media_image5.png
357
647
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s Note: Applicant’s specification defines that “¶.[0014] whenever referring to a column and/or a row of a table, the expressions column and row may be interchanged. Therefore, Cell 0 and Cell 1 in the DCI are considered as a first column and a second column. The table format is seen as an obvious design choice, since it appears another format would work equally well, wherein the particular format does not affect the patentable operability of the invention).”
Regarding claim 54, Xu discloses “the plurality of table references comprises a first reference to a first table and a second reference to a second table; a first table comprising comprises scheduling information of a first cell of the at least two cells and a second table comprises scheduling information of a second cell of the at least two cells, (See 925 Fig.9, PUSCH mapping type; See 1010 Fig.10, ‘TDRA table for reference cell’; See ¶.53, the row index may correspond to a set of TDRA parameters (sometimes referred to as scheduling parameters or scheduling information)).”
Regarding claim 55, Xu discloses “at least one of the table references refers to a resource allocation list; and/or the scheduling information comprise alternatives of a resource allocation; and/or the control information comprises a time domain resource assignment (TDRA) field that is indicative of the index (See Fig.5-10, TDRA field and each TDRA table; See ¶.21, FIGS. 5-10 are diagrams illustrating examples of time domain resource assignment for multiple cells scheduled by a single DCI message, in accordance with the present disclosure).”
Regarding claim 56, Xu discloses “the configuration information is, or is received in, one or more radio resource control (RRC) messages (¶.66, the TDRA configuration may be included in a configuration message, such as a radio resource control (RRC) message (e.g., an RRC configuration message)).”
Regarding claim 57, Xu discloses “the control information is, or is received in, one or more downlink control information (DCI) messages; and/or the control information is received on a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) of the radio communication (See 510 Fig.5 and ¶.67, UE receives a single DCI message that schedules communications on multiple cells).”
Regarding claim 58, Xu discloses “the scheduling information for each of the at least two cells is or comprises a resource allocation for each of the at least two cells (See Fig.5-10, TDRA for two cells).”
Regarding claim 61, Xu discloses “the configuration information or the control information or a further control message from the network node comprises an indicator for selectively enabling and disabling cross-carrier scheduling for the at least two cells or an indicator for selectively enabling and disabling multi-cell scheduling for the at least two cells (See ¶.58, DCI that schedules a communication for a cell via which the DCI is transmitted may be referred to as self-carrier (or self-cell) scheduling DCI. In some cases, DCI that schedules a communication for a cell via which the DCI is transmitted may be referred to as cross-carrier (or cross-cell) scheduling DCI. In some aspects, the DCI may be cross-carrier scheduling DCI, and may or may not be self-carrier scheduling DCI).”
Regarding claim 64, Xu discloses “the control information is received on a first layer of a protocol stack of the radio communication and the configuration information is received on a second layer of the protocol stack of the radio communication, the second layer being above the first layer in the protocol stack (See ¶.66, RRC, which is a higher layer, configuration message; See ¶.52, DCI transmitted in PDCCH, which is a physical layer).”
Regarding claim 67, it is a method claim at implemented at RAN side corresponding to the method claim 50 at a radio device and is therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of the claim.
Regarding claim 68, it is a radio device claim corresponding to the method claim 50, except the limitation “a memory and processing circuitry (See Fig.2)” and is therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of the claim.
Regarding claim 69, it is a network node claim corresponding to the method claim 67, except the limitation “a memory and processing circuitry (See Fig.2)” and is therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of the claim.
Claims 62 and 63 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu in view of Nguyen et al. (US 2016/0374082, “Nguyen”).
Regarding claim 62, Xu discloses “the radio device applies index in the control information to the table for determining the scheduling information of each of the at least two cells if the indicator is indicative of enabling cross-carrier scheduling for the at least two cells or if the indicator is indicative of enabling multi-cell scheduling for the at least two cells (Xu, See Fig.5-10),” but does not explicitly disclose the limitation “enabling cross-carrier scheduling.”
However, Nguyen discloses “enabling cross-carrier scheduling (Nguyen, See ¶.33, if cross-carrier scheduling is enabled).” Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to apply the method of “enabling cross-carrier scheduling” as taught by Nguyen into the system of Xu, so that it provides a way of enabling the PDSCH and PUSCH resource on one carrier component to be scheduled by PDCCH (Nguyen, See ¶.6 and ¶.33).
Regarding claim 63, Xu discloses the multiple cells, but does not explicitly disclose what Nguyen discloses “the at least two cells comprise at least one secondary cell (SCell) and further comprise one primary cell (PCell) or one primary secondary cell (PSCell) or one special cell (spCell), wherein the configuration information and the control information are received in the PCell or the PSCell or the spCell (Nguyen, See Fig.4 and ¶.24, SCell and PCell).”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to apply “the at least two cells comprise at least one secondary cell (SCell) and further comprise one primary cell (PCell) or one primary secondary cell (PSCell) or one special cell (spCell), wherein the configuration information and the control information are received in the PCell or the PSCell or the spCell” as taught by Nguyen into the system of Xu, so that it provides a way of performing scheduling for data transmission on the aggregated SCell and/or PCell (Nguyen, See ¶.20-21).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed have been considered. But, in view of the applicant’s amendment to the claims, examiner has clarified and totally remapped the rejection to the argued claim limitations, using the prior art of record in the current prosecution of the claims and a new prior art by Park for the amended claim limitations. The previous 102 rejection by Xu has been replaced with a new 103 rejection over Xu in view of Park.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jung H Park whose telephone number is 571-272-8565. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 7:00 AM-3:00 PM.
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, Derrick Ferris can be reached on 571-272-3123. 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.
/JUNG H PARK/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2411
Prosecution Insights