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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 01/12/2026 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.
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.
Claims 1, 5, 9, 12, 20, and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. (2019/0215095), hereinafter Park in view of Yeo et al. (2022/0095083), hereinafter Yeo.
Re. Claims 1, 5, 20 and 29, Park teaches a non-transitory computer readable medium storing instructions executable by processing circuitry of a User Equipment, UE, comprising: one or more transmitters; one or more receivers; and processing circuitry associated with the one or more transmitters and the one or more receivers (Fig. 9), the processing circuitry configured to cause the UE to; receive, from a network node, information for configuring the UE to monitor a Physical Downlink Control Channel, PDCCH (¶0150 - each CORESET may be composed of one or more search spaces configured by one or more PDCCH candidates for monitoring the PDCCH by a UE), for a serving cell (¶0154 - one or more BWPs may be configured through one serving cell configured from a UE perspective); receive, from the network node, information for configuring the UE with a plurality of higher-layer parameters associated with the two non-fallback DCI formats (¶0194 - in the case of a UE-specific DCI (e.g., DL allocation DCI or UL grant DCI) transmitted through a common search space (CSS) or a fallback DCI format, a base station may configure an MCS index based on a default MCS table) and indicating an enabling of a 1024-constellation Quadrature Amplitude Modulation, 1024-QAM, Modulation and Coding Scheme, MCS, table for the serving cell (¶0165 - it is possible to configure an MCS table having an MCS index based on a higher order modulation scheme such as 64QAM, 256QAM, or 1024QAM); detect a DCI format scheduling a Physical Downlink Shared Channel, PDSCH, for the serving cell, wherein the DCI format comprises an MCS index (¶0174 - As another method for selecting the MCS table through scheduling DCI on the PDSCH or the PUSCH, corresponding information may be implicitly signaled through the scheduling DCI. & ¶0158 - based on an MCS table or a TBS table, a modulation order and a transport block size (TBS) index are mapped according to the MCS indication information, i.e., MCS index information, indicated through the DCI); determine a transport block size, TBS, corresponding to the PDSCH using the MCS index and the 1024-QAM MCS table (¶0158 - based on an MCS table or a TBS table, a modulation order and a transport block size (TBS) index are mapped according to the MCS indication information, i.e., MCS index information, indicated through the DCI, and a TBS is mapped based on the TBS index and the number of allocated TBSs); receive the PDSCH on a Downlink, DL, Bandwidth Part, BWP (¶0154 - one or more BWPs may be configured through one serving cell configured from a UE perspective. The corresponding UE may transmit/receive UP/DL data by activating one DL BWP and one UP BWP in the serving cell); and decode the PDSCH based on the determined TBS and the determined reference block size for LBRM (¶0227 - The UE decodes the physical downlink shard channel (PDSCH) based on the specific MCS information. Examiner interprets the MCS information stated here to include the determined TBS and reference block size for LBRM).
Yet, Park does not expressly teach a first parameter of the plurality of higher-layer parameters is associated with a first non- fallback DCI format of the two non-fallback DCI formats and a second parameter of the plurality of higher-layer parameters is associated with a second non-fallback DCI format of the two non-fallback DCI formats; and receiving according to two non-fallback Downlink Control Information, DCI, formats; (for claim 20) monitoring the PDCCH for the serving cell based on the at least one non- fallback DCI format; and determining a reference block size for Limited Buffer Rate Matching, LBRM, for a transport block on the PDSCH based on a reference modulation order based on the plurality of higher-layer parameters associated with the two non-fallback DCI formats.
However, Yeo explicitly teaches a first parameter of the plurality of higher-layer parameters is associated with a first non- fallback DCI format of the two non-fallback DCI formats (¶0075 - A DCI format 0_1 may be used for the non-fallback DCI that schedules the PUSCH, in which case the CRC may be scrambled with a C-RNTI); and a second parameter of the plurality of higher-layer parameters is associated with a second non-fallback DCI format of the two non-fallback DCI formats (¶0077 - A DCI format 1_1 may be used for the non-fallback DCI that schedules the PDSCH, in which case the CRC may be scrambled with a C-RNTI, Examiner’s note: Yeo implicitly identifies exemplary embodiments of both DCI formats (as well as other’s) in Table’s 7-10. Each table is indicative of the information found in the C-RNTI that is being used for each DCI and includes different information than the other formats, which leads Examiner to conclude that the C-RNTI of ¶0075 used for DCI format 0_1 cannot be used for ¶0077’s DCI format 1_1 which performs a separate task under separate parameters), and according to two non-fallback Downlink Control Information, DCI, formats (¶0075 - A DCI format 0_1 may be used for the non-fallback DCI that schedules the PUSCH. A DCI format 1_1 may be used for the non-fallback DCI that schedules the PDSCH. & ¶0188 DL allocation DCI format or UL grant DCI format and an MCS table to be applied may be separately defined); detect a DCI format of the two non-fallback DCI formats (¶0071 - scheduling information for uplink data (or, physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH)) or downlink data (or, physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH)) is transmitted from the base station to the UE through the DCI. The UE may monitor a fallback DCI format and a non-fallback DCI format for the PUSCH or PDSCH. The fallback DCI format may include fixed fields predefined between the base station and the UE, and the non-fallback DCI format may include configurable fields) monitor the PDCCH for the serving cell based on the at least one non- fallback DCI format (¶0071 - The UE may monitor a fallback DCI format and a non-fallback DCI format for the PUSCH or PDSCH); determine a reference block size for Limited Buffer Rate Matching, LBRM, for a transport block on the PDSCH based on a reference modulation order based on the plurality of higher-layer parameters associated with the two non-fallback DCI formats (Abstract - identifying a transport block size (TBS) for limited buffer rate matching (LBRM) based on the configuration information. Examiner interprets that this configuration information includes the higher-layer parameters associated with the non-fallback DCI formats.);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Yeo to the teaching of Park. The motivation for such would be as Yeo provides context for the non-fallback DCI formatting (Yeo, ¶0071-¶0075) and a means for determining the block size for the LBRM (Yeo, Abstract). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements, as claimed by known methods, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Re. Claims 9 and 12, Park teaches a non-transitory computer readable medium storing instructions executable by processing circuitry of a User Equipment, UE, comprising: one or more transmitters; one or more receivers; and processing circuitry associated with the one or more transmitters and the one or more receivers (Fig. 9), the processing circuitry configured to cause the UE to; receive, from a network node, information for configuring the UE to monitor a Physical Downlink Control Channel, PDCCH (¶0150 - each CORESET may be composed of one or more search spaces configured by one or more PDCCH candidates for monitoring the PDCCH by a UE), for a serving cell (¶0154 - one or more BWPs may be configured through one serving cell configured from a UE perspective); receive, from the network node, information for configuring the UE with a plurality of higher-layer parameters (¶0194 - in the case of a UE-specific DCI (e.g., DL allocation DCI or UL grant DCI) transmitted through a common search space (CSS) or a fallback DCI format, a base station may configure an MCS index based on a default MCS table) and indicating an enabling of a 256-constellation Quadrature Amplitude Modulation, 256-QAM, Modulation and Coding Scheme, MCS, table for the serving cell (¶0165 - it is possible to configure an MCS table having an MCS index based on a higher order modulation scheme such as 64QAM, 256QAM, or 1024QAM); detect a DCI format of the two non-fallback DCI formats scheduling a Physical Downlink Shared Channel, PDSCH, for the serving cell, wherein the DCI format comprises an MCS index (¶0174 - As another method for selecting the MCS table through scheduling DCI on the PDSCH or the PUSCH, corresponding information may be implicitly signaled through the scheduling DCI. Examiner interprets this to be taken in tandem with the above stated non-fallback DCI formats); determine a transport block size, TBS, corresponding to the PDSCH using the MCS index and the 256-QAM MCS table (¶0158 - based on an MCS table or a TBS table, a modulation order and a transport block size (TBS) index are mapped according to the MCS indication information, i.e., MCS index information, indicated through the DCI, and a TBS is mapped based on the TBS index and the number of allocated TBSs); receive the PDSCH on a Downlink, DL, Bandwidth Part, BWP (¶0154 - one or more BWPs may be configured through one serving cell configured from a UE perspective. The corresponding UE may transmit/receive UP/DL data by activating one DL BWP and one UP BWP in the serving cell); and decode the PDSCH based on the determined TBS and the determined reference block size for LBRM (¶0227 - The UE decodes the physical downlink shard channel (PDSCH) based on the specific MCS information. Examiner interprets the MCS information stated here to include the determined TBS and reference block size for LBRM).
Yet, Park does not expressly teach a first parameter of the plurality of higher-layer parameters is associated with a first non- fallback DCI format of the two non-fallback DCI formats and a second parameter of the plurality of higher-layer parameters is associated with a second non-fallback DCI format of the two non-fallback DCI formats; and receiving according to two non-fallback Downlink Control Information, DCI, formats; (for claim 20) monitoring the PDCCH for the serving cell based on the at least one non- fallback DCI format; and determining a reference block size for Limited Buffer Rate Matching, LBRM, for a transport block on the PDSCH based on a reference modulation order based on the plurality of higher-layer parameters associated with the two non-fallback DCI formats.
However, Yeo explicitly teaches a first parameter of the plurality of higher-layer parameters is associated with a first non- fallback DCI format of the two non-fallback DCI formats (¶0075 - A DCI format 0_1 may be used for the non-fallback DCI that schedules the PUSCH, in which case the CRC may be scrambled with a C-RNTI); and a second parameter of the plurality of higher-layer parameters is associated with a second non-fallback DCI format of the two non-fallback DCI formats (¶0077 - A DCI format 1_1 may be used for the non-fallback DCI that schedules the PDSCH, in which case the CRC may be scrambled with a C-RNTI, Examiner’s note: Yeo implicitly identifies exemplary embodiments of both DCI formats (as well as other’s) in Table’s 7-10. Each table is indicative of the information found in the C-RNTI that is being used for each DCI and includes different information than the other formats, which leads Examiner to conclude that the C-RNTI of ¶0075 used for DCI format 0_1 cannot be used for ¶0077’s DCI format 1_1 which performs a separate task under separate parameters) according to two non-fallback Downlink Control Information, DCI, formats (¶0075 - A DCI format 0_1 may be used for the non-fallback DCI that schedules the PUSCH. A DCI format 1_1 may be used for the non-fallback DCI that schedules the PDSCH. Examiner interprets this language to state that there are two possible non-fallback DCI formats, which are represented here in 0_1 and 1_1); determine a reference block size for Limited Buffer Rate Matching, LBRM, for a transport block on the PDSCH based on a reference modulation order based on the plurality of higher-layer parameters associated with the two non-fallback DCI formats (Abstract - identifying a transport block size (TBS) for limited buffer rate matching (LBRM) based on the configuration information. Examiner interprets that this configuration information includes the higher-layer parameters associated with the non-fallback DCI formats.);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Yeo to the teaching of Park. The motivation for such would be as Yeo provides context for the non-fallback DCI formatting (Yeo, ¶0071-¶0075) and a means for determining the block size for the LBRM (Yeo, Abstract). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements, as claimed by known methods, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Claims 3 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park in view of Yeo and Chen et al (WO 2019237944 A1), hereinafter Chen.
Re. Claims 3 and 25, Park and Yeo teach Claims 2 and 24.
Yet, Park and Yeo do not expressly teach wherein the first parameter and the second parameter are carried in a PDSCH-Config Information Element, IE.
However, Chen explicitly teaches wherein the first parameter and the second parameter are carried in a PDSCH-Config Information Element, IE (¶0007 - configuration parameters for the MCG or SCG are provided in the cell group-specific IE).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Chen to the teaching of Park and Yeo. The motivation for such would be as Chen provides that the parameters are found in an IE (Chen, ¶0007). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements, as claimed by known methods, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Claims 4, and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park in view of Yeo and Yao et al. (2023/0344549) hereinafter Yao.
Re. Claims 4 and 26, Park and Yeo teach Claims 2 and 24.
Additionally, Park further teaches wherein the plurality of higher-layer parameters comprises an mcs-Table 1024qam parameter (¶0165 - it is possible to configure an MCS table having an MCS index based on a higher order modulation scheme such as 64QAM, 256QAM, or 1024QAM).
Yet, neither Park nor Yeo teach an mcs-Table 1024qam-DCI-1-2 parameter.
However, Yao explicitly teaches an mcs-Table 1024qam-DCI-1-2 parameter (¶0144 - the foregoing MCS tables including the MCS levels corresponding to the modulation scheme with a modulation order of 10, namely, the foregoing MCS tables 4-11, may apply to PDSCH scheduled by PDCCH of a DCI format 1_1 for which CRC is scrambled by C-RNTI or CS-RNTI; and/or apply to PDSCH scheduled by PDCCH of a DCI format 1_2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Yao to the teaching of Park and Yeo. The motivation for such would be as Yao provides an mcs Table using a DCI format 1-2 parameter (Yeo, ¶0144). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements, as claimed by known methods, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Claims 11 and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park in view of Yeo and Cao et al. (2023/0412231), hereinafter Cao.
Re. Claims 11 and 28, Park and Yeo teach Claims 10 and 27.
Additionally, Park further teaches wherein the plurality of higher-layer parameters comprises an mcs-Table parameter (¶0165 - it is possible to configure an MCS table having an MCS index based on a higher order modulation scheme such as 64QAM, 256QAM, or 1024QAM)
Yet, neither Park nor Yeo teach a mcs-TableForDCI-Formatl-2-r16 parameter.
However, Cao explicitly teaches a mcs-TableForDCI-Formatl-2-r16 parameter (¶0069 - FIG. 5 illustrates a DCI format that may be used to specify a TCI state, such as DCI format 1_1 or 1_2 specified by 3GPP R16).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Cao to the teaching of Park and Yeo. The motivation for such would be as Cao provides an mcs Table using a DCI format 1-2-R16 parameter (Cao, ¶0069). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements, as claimed by known methods, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 01/12/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the disclosure of Yeo does not adequately differentiate that there are two distinct non-fallback DCI formats. Examiner provided an advisory action on 01/28/2026 saying he understood that DCI’s of different formats functioned as distinct from one another and would fulfill the role of separate DCI’s for the function of the claimed language. In this consideration, Examiner respectfully disagrees that the citation provided in Yeo ¶0075 and ¶0077 fails to disclose two DCI formats, as both paragraphs disclose a unique format that is used for a separate purpose. Examiner further points to the associated table that is printed alongside each DCI format paragraph (¶0074-0077), labelled respectively as Table’s 7-10, each of which contain different identifiers, bit allocations and other signifiers regarding how the C-RNTI is to scramble the CRC scheduled by the DCI. In their arguments, Applicant argues that the C-RNTI’s are not unique to each DCI format, however, Examiner interprets that, due to the context provided by the explanatory tables, the C-RNTI’s are unique to each DCI format provided. As such, Examiner respectfully disagrees with the Applicant’s presented argument.
In filing for this RCE, Applicant provided no further argument against the advisory action response and as such, Examiner has upheld his understanding and incorporated it into the above stated rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103 in view of references Park, Yeo, Chen, Yao and Cao.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Park et al. (2023/0337216) - ¶0010-0019
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NOAH JAMES SUGDEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7406. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 9:00-6:00 ET, Fri 9:00-1:00 ET.
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, Khaled Kassim can be reached at (571) 270-3770. 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.
/N.J.S./Examiner, Art Unit 2475
/KHALED M KASSIM/supervisory patent examiner, Art Unit 2475