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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendments filed 09/23/2025 have been entered. Claims 15, 21, 23, 25, 27, 29, 31, and 33 have been amended.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 09/23/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The examiner respectfully disagrees with the argument that Zhou et al. (US 2021/0385056), hereinafter Zhou does not involve identifying multiple target serving cells, and only identifies beams. Zhou teaches: “The component carriers may include a primary component carrier and one or more secondary component carriers. A primary component carrier may be referred to as a primary cell (PCell) and a secondary component carrier may be referred to as a secondary cell (SCell)” (Zhou ¶ 0041) which shows the multiple cells that are connected to and identified by beams identified by Zhou’s DCI in “a DCI may schedule transmission on multiple component carriers (CCs), where the scheduling DCI is sent from a first CC (e.g., Pcell) while the communication may be scheduled on a second CC (e.g., Scell) for downlink communication, uplink communication, or contemporaneous downlink and uplink multi-beam full-duplex communication” (0030). Thus Zhou teaches an identification of multiple target serving cells. These serving cells are indicated via beam identification information including codepoints used to indicate the component carriers including the multiple target SCells: “the assignment of Tx and Rx beams from a plurality of candidate beams may be signaled to the UE 104 via a single TCI codepoint that is included in the DCI. Particularly, a combination of downlink TCI state(s) and uplink TCI state(s) may be mapped to a single TCI codepoint which is transmitted to the UE in the DCI. Based on the TCI codepoint information included in the DCI, the UE 104 may decode the DCI and identify one or more Tx and Rx beams from a plurality of candidate beams to be used for the multi-beam full-duplex communication by the UE 104” (Zhou ¶ 0054). Thus, Zhou teaches the claimed subject matter.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 15, 23, and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Zhou et al. (US 2021/0385056), hereinafter Zhou.
Regarding Claim 15, Zhou teaches: A method for processing downlink control information, applied to a network device and comprising: determining multiple target serving cells scheduled by downlink control information (DCI): “In some examples, the base station (or second UE for sidelink communication) may utilize the DCI for cross carrier scheduling of multi-beam full duplex communication. For example, a DCI may schedule transmission on multiple component carriers (CCs), where the scheduling DCI is sent from a first CC (e.g., Pcell) while the communication may be scheduled on a second CC (e.g., Scell) for downlink communication” (Zhou ¶ 0030); in response to the multiple target serving cells being scheduled, configuring codepoint information corresponding to a target bitfield of the DCI, wherein the codepoint information is used to indicate scheduling information of each cell within the multiple target serving cells: “The indication of the beam assignments for multi-beam full-duplex communication may be communicated to the UE via one or more techniques identified above with respect to the DCI (e.g., each downlink/uplink beam is indicated by TCI state ID, a single TCI codepoint, or a separate uplink TCI codepoint and downlink TCI codepoint)” (Zhou ¶ 0030); sending the DCI to a user equipment (UE): “In other examples, the assignment of Tx and Rx beams from a plurality of candidate beams may be signaled to the UE via a single TCI codepoint that is included in the DCI. Particularly, a combination of downlink TCI state(s) and uplink TCI state(s) may be mapped to a single TCI codepoint which is transmitted to the UE in the DCI. Based on the TCI codepoint information included in the DCI, the UE may decode the DCI and identify one or more Tx and Rx beams from a plurality of candidate beams to be used for the multi-beam full-duplex communication by the UE” (Zhou ¶ 0029).
Regarding Claim 23, Zhou teaches: A network device, comprising: at least one processor and a memory; wherein the memory is configured to store a computer-executable instruction; and the at least one processor is configured to execute the computer-executable instruction stored in the memory to cause the at least one processor: “The apparatus may include a memory having instructions and a processor configured to the instructions to select, at a first device, one or more beams from a plurality of candidate beams to be used for the multi-beam full-duplex communication by a second device that is capable of conducting full-duplex communication. The processor may further be configured to execute the instructions to generate, at the first device, a DCI to include information identifying the one or more beams selected for the second device for multi-beam full-duplex communication” (Zhou ¶ 0011) to: determine the multiple target serving cells scheduled by downlink control information (DCI): “In some examples, the base station (or second UE for sidelink communication) may utilize the DCI for cross carrier scheduling of multi-beam full duplex communication. For example, a DCI may schedule transmission on multiple component carriers (CCs), where the scheduling DCI is sent from a first CC (e.g., Pcell) while the communication may be scheduled on a second CC (e.g., Scell) for downlink communication” (Zhou ¶ 0030); in response to multiple target serving cells being scheduled, configure codepoint information corresponding to a target bitfield of the DCI, wherein the codepoint information is used to indicate scheduling information of each cell within the multiple target serving cells: “The indication of the beam assignments for multi-beam full-duplex communication may be communicated to the UE via one or more techniques identified above with respect to the DCI (e.g., each downlink/uplink beam is indicated by TCI state ID, a single TCI codepoint, or a separate uplink TCI codepoint and downlink TCI codepoint)” (Zhou ¶ 0030); send the DCI to a user equipment (UE): “In other examples, the assignment of Tx and Rx beams from a plurality of candidate beams may be signaled to the UE via a single TCI codepoint that is included in the DCI. Particularly, a combination of downlink TCI state(s) and uplink TCI state(s) may be mapped to a single TCI codepoint which is transmitted to the UE in the DCI. Based on the TCI codepoint information included in the DCI, the UE may decode the DCI and identify one or more Tx and Rx beams from a plurality of candidate beams to be used for the multi-beam full-duplex communication by the UE” (Zhou ¶ 0029).
Regarding Claim 29, Zhou teaches: A non-transitory computer readable storage medium, storing a computer-executable instruction, wherein at least one processor, when executing the computer-executable instruction: “The apparatus may include a memory having instructions and a processor configured to the instructions to select, at a first device, one or more beams from a plurality of candidate beams to be used for the multi-beam full-duplex communication by a second device that is capable of conducting full-duplex communication. The processor may further be configured to execute the instructions to generate, at the first device, a DCI to include information identifying the one or more beams selected for the second device for multi-beam full-duplex communication” (Zhou ¶ 0011), is configured to: determine multiple target serving cells scheduled by downlink control information (DCI); in response to multiple target serving cells being scheduled, configure codepoint information corresponding to a target bitfield of the DCI, wherein the codepoint information is used to indicate scheduling information of each cell within the multiple target serving cells: “The indication of the beam assignments for multi-beam full-duplex communication may be communicated to the UE via one or more techniques identified above with respect to the DCI (e.g., each downlink/uplink beam is indicated by TCI state ID, a single TCI codepoint, or a separate uplink TCI codepoint and downlink TCI codepoint)” (Zhou ¶ 0030); send the DCI to a user equipment (UE): “In other examples, the assignment of Tx and Rx beams from a plurality of candidate beams may be signaled to the UE via a single TCI codepoint that is included in the DCI. Particularly, a combination of downlink TCI state(s) and uplink TCI state(s) may be mapped to a single TCI codepoint which is transmitted to the UE in the DCI. Based on the TCI codepoint information included in the DCI, the UE may decode the DCI and identify one or more Tx and Rx beams from a plurality of candidate beams to be used for the multi-beam full-duplex communication by the UE” (Zhou ¶ 0029).
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 16-17, 19-20, 24-26, and 30-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou as applied to claims 15, 23, and 29 above, and further in view of Hariharan et al. (US 2013/0064190), hereinafter Hariharan.
Regarding Claim 16, Zhou teaches: The method according to claim 15.
Zhou does not teach: configuring the codepoint information corresponding to the target bitfield of the DCI comprises: obtaining a schematic table of a scheduling relationship between the codepoint information and the multiple target serving cells; determining index of the codepoint information based on the schematic table of the scheduling relationship.
Regarding Claim 16, Hariharan teaches: configuring the codepoint information corresponding to the target bitfield of the DCI comprises: obtaining a schematic table of a scheduling relationship between the codepoint information and the multiple target serving cells: Hariharan’s Table 8 (continued) below shows the scheduling relationship table between codepoints and component carriers (CCs) which are noted as being equivalent to serving cells in applicant’s specification ¶ 0052: “In a communication system in which carrier aggregation is introduced, the aggregated carrier is referred to as a component carrier (CC), also referred to as a serving cell”; determining index of the codepoint information based on the schematic table of the scheduling relationship: “For example, and somewhat similar to the example described with respect to Table 7 and Table 8 above, one could assume that there are some (e.g. two) high bandwidth component carriers (e.g. 15 MHz or 20 MHz) that serve as "anchor carriers" and that are used to signal the PDCCHs (including the DCI) for cross-scheduling user equipments on the other downlink component carriers. E.g. the two anchor component carriers could be component carriers A and B, while the remaining downlink component carriers are indexed/labelled C, D and E’” (Hariharan ¶ 0214).
PNG
media_image1.png
150
362
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the disclosure of Zhou with Hariharan to achieve the predictable result of improving the utilization of resources. According to Hariharan: “In other words, the invention according to this aspect of the invention is providing a new definition or re-definition of the codepoints that can be signaled in a carrier indicator field, so as to indicate the two types of information outlined above. In this way, a degradation of downlink system throughput can be avoided in cross-carrier scheduling scenarios, and HARQ buffer corruption due to an incorrect utilization of resources can be avoided without additional downlink resource overhead” (Hariharan ¶ 0119).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the disclosure of Zhou with Hariharan to achieve the predictable result of improving the utilization of resources. According to Hariharan: “In other words, the invention according to this aspect of the invention is providing a new definition or re-definition of the codepoints that can be signaled in a carrier indicator field, so as to indicate the two types of information outlined above. In this way, a degradation of downlink system throughput can be avoided in cross-carrier scheduling scenarios, and HARQ buffer corruption due to an incorrect utilization of resources can be avoided without additional downlink resource overhead” (Hariharan ¶ 0119).
Regarding Claim 17, Zhou teaches: The method according to claim 16.
Zhou does not teach: an index of the codepoint information is used to indicate that the scheduling information of each target serving cells are different.
Regarding Claim 17, Hariharan teaches: an index of the codepoint information is used to indicate that the scheduling information of each target serving cells are different: “In a further embodiment of the invention, the PCFICH value for the individual component carriers may be different for the different codepoints of each subset of CIF codepoints” (Hariharan ¶ 0201).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the disclosure of Zhou with Hariharan to achieve the predictable result of improving the utilization of resources. According to Hariharan: “In other words, the invention according to this aspect of the invention is providing a new definition or re-definition of the codepoints that can be signaled in a carrier indicator field, so as to indicate the two types of information outlined above. In this way, a degradation of downlink system throughput can be avoided in cross-carrier scheduling scenarios, and HARQ buffer corruption due to an incorrect utilization of resources can be avoided without additional downlink resource overhead” (Hariharan ¶ 0119).
Regarding Claim 19, Zhou teaches: The method according to claim 16.
Zhou does not teach: another index of the codepoint information is used to indicate that the scheduling information of each target serving cells are same
Regarding Claim 19, Hariharan teaches: another index of the codepoint information is used to indicate that the scheduling information of each target serving cells are same: “Furthermore, in several of the examples above, the codepoints of a given subset of the CIF codepoints have been mapped to the same PCFICH value. Essentially, this means that there is a "common mapping" to PCFICH values for the different component carriers” (Hariharan ¶ 0201).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the disclosure of Zhou with Hariharan to achieve the predictable result of improving the utilization of resources. According to Hariharan: “In other words, the invention according to this aspect of the invention is providing a new definition or re-definition of the codepoints that can be signaled in a carrier indicator field, so as to indicate the two types of information outlined above. In this way, a degradation of downlink system throughput can be avoided in cross-carrier scheduling scenarios, and HARQ buffer corruption due to an incorrect utilization of resources can be avoided without additional downlink resource overhead” (Hariharan ¶ 0119).
Regarding Claim 20, Zhou teaches: The method according to claim 19.
Zhou does not teach: the index of the codepoint information is 1 and the DCI comprises the scheduling information of cell 0 and cell 1.
Regarding Claim 20, Hariharan teaches: the index of the codepoint information is 1 and the DCI comprises the scheduling information of cell 0 and cell 1: “Furthermore, in several of the examples above, the codepoints of a given subset of the CIF codepoints have been mapped to the same PCFICH value. Essentially, this means that there is a "common mapping" to PCFICH values for the different component carriers” (Hariharan ¶ 0201) wherein the first mapping of table 11 maps the CIF scheduling information to carrier 1 and 2 simultaneously.
PNG
media_image2.png
84
349
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the disclosure of Zhou with Hariharan to achieve the predictable result of improving the utilization of resources. According to Hariharan: “In other words, the invention according to this aspect of the invention is providing a new definition or re-definition of the codepoints that can be signaled in a carrier indicator field, so as to indicate the two types of information outlined above. In this way, a degradation of downlink system throughput can be avoided in cross-carrier scheduling scenarios, and HARQ buffer corruption due to an incorrect utilization of resources can be avoided without additional downlink resource overhead” (Hariharan ¶ 0119).
Regarding Claim 24, Zhang teaches: The network device according to claim 23.
Zhang does not teach: the at least one processor is configured to execute the computer-executable instruction stored in the memory to cause the at least one processor to: obtain a schematic table of a scheduling relationship between the codepoint information and the multiple target serving cells; determine index of the codepoint information based on the schematic table of the scheduling relationship.
Regarding Claim 24, Hariharan teaches: the at least one processor is configured to execute the computer-executable instruction stored in the memory to cause the at least one processor to: obtain a schematic table of a scheduling relationship between the codepoint information and the multiple target serving cells: Hariharan’s Table 8 (continued) above shows the scheduling relationship table between codepoints and component carriers (CCs) which are noted as being equivalent to serving cells in applicant’s specification ¶ 0052: “In a communication system in which carrier aggregation is introduced, the aggregated carrier is referred to as a component carrier (CC), also referred to as a serving cell”; determine index of the codepoint information based on the schematic table of the scheduling relationship: “For example, and somewhat similar to the example described with respect to Table 7 and Table 8 above, one could assume that there are some (e.g. two) high bandwidth component carriers (e.g. 15 MHz or 20 MHz) that serve as "anchor carriers" and that are used to signal the PDCCHs (including the DCI) for cross-scheduling user equipments on the other downlink component carriers. E.g. the two anchor component carriers could be component carriers A and B, while the remaining downlink component carriers are indexed/labelled C, D and E’” (Hariharan ¶ 0214).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the disclosure of Zhou with Hariharan to achieve the predictable result of improving the utilization of resources. According to Hariharan: “In other words, the invention according to this aspect of the invention is providing a new definition or re-definition of the codepoints that can be signaled in a carrier indicator field, so as to indicate the two types of information outlined above. In this way, a degradation of downlink system throughput can be avoided in cross-carrier scheduling scenarios, and HARQ buffer corruption due to an incorrect utilization of resources can be avoided without additional downlink resource overhead” (Hariharan ¶ 0119).
Regarding Claim 25, Zhang teaches: The network device according to claim 24.
Zhang does not teach: wherein an index of the codepoint information is used to indicate that the scheduling information of each target serving cells are different.
Regarding Claim 25, Hariharan teaches: wherein an index of the codepoint information is used to indicate that the scheduling information of each target serving cells are different: “In a further embodiment of the invention, the PCFICH value for the individual component carriers may be different for the different codepoints of each subset of CIF codepoints” (Hariharan ¶ 0201).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the disclosure of Zhou with Hariharan to achieve the predictable result of improving the utilization of resources. According to Hariharan: “In other words, the invention according to this aspect of the invention is providing a new definition or re-definition of the codepoints that can be signaled in a carrier indicator field, so as to indicate the two types of information outlined above. In this way, a degradation of downlink system throughput can be avoided in cross-carrier scheduling scenarios, and HARQ buffer corruption due to an incorrect utilization of resources can be avoided without additional downlink resource overhead” (Hariharan ¶ 0119).
Regarding Claim 26, Zhang teaches: The network device according to claim 24.
Zhang does not teach: another index of the codepoint information is used to indicate that the scheduling information of each target serving cells are same; wherein the index of the codepoint information is 1 and the DCI comprises the scheduling information of cell 0 and cell 1.
Regarding Claim 26, Hariharan teaches: another index of the codepoint information is used to indicate that the scheduling information of each target serving cells are same: “Furthermore, in several of the examples above, the codepoints of a given subset of the CIF codepoints have been mapped to the same PCFICH value. Essentially, this means that there is a "common mapping" to PCFICH values for the different component carriers” (Hariharan ¶ 0201); wherein the index of the codepoint information is 1 and the DCI comprises the scheduling information of cell 0 and cell 1: “Furthermore, in several of the examples above, the codepoints of a given subset of the CIF codepoints have been mapped to the same PCFICH value. Essentially, this means that there is a "common mapping" to PCFICH values for the different component carriers” (Hariharan ¶ 0201) wherein the first mapping of table 11 maps the CIF scheduling information to carrier 1 and 2 simultaneously.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the disclosure of Zhou with Hariharan to achieve the predictable result of improving the utilization of resources. According to Hariharan: “In other words, the invention according to this aspect of the invention is providing a new definition or re-definition of the codepoints that can be signaled in a carrier indicator field, so as to indicate the two types of information outlined above. In this way, a degradation of downlink system throughput can be avoided in cross-carrier scheduling scenarios, and HARQ buffer corruption due to an incorrect utilization of resources can be avoided without additional downlink resource overhead” (Hariharan ¶ 0119).
Regarding Claim 30, Zhang teaches: The non-transitory computer readable storage medium according to claim 29.
Zhang does not teach: the at least one processor is configured to: obtain a schematic table of a scheduling relationship between the codepoint information and the multiple target serving cells; determine index of the codepoint information based on the schematic table of the scheduling relationship.
Regarding Claim 30, Hariharan teaches: the at least one processor is configured to: obtain a schematic table of a scheduling relationship between the codepoint information and the multiple target serving cells: Hariharan’s Table 8 (continued) above shows the scheduling relationship table between codepoints and component carriers (CCs) which are noted as being equivalent to serving cells in applicant’s specification ¶ 0052: “In a communication system in which carrier aggregation is introduced, the aggregated carrier is referred to as a component carrier (CC), also referred to as a serving cell”; determine index of the codepoint information based on the schematic table of the scheduling relationship: “For example, and somewhat similar to the example described with respect to Table 7 and Table 8 above, one could assume that there are some (e.g. two) high bandwidth component carriers (e.g. 15 MHz or 20 MHz) that serve as "anchor carriers" and that are used to signal the PDCCHs (including the DCI) for cross-scheduling user equipments on the other downlink component carriers. E.g. the two anchor component carriers could be component carriers A and B, while the remaining downlink component carriers are indexed/labelled C, D and E’” (Hariharan ¶ 0214).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the disclosure of Zhou with Hariharan to achieve the predictable result of improving the utilization of resources. According to Hariharan: “In other words, the invention according to this aspect of the invention is providing a new definition or re-definition of the codepoints that can be signaled in a carrier indicator field, so as to indicate the two types of information outlined above. In this way, a degradation of downlink system throughput can be avoided in cross-carrier scheduling scenarios, and HARQ buffer corruption due to an incorrect utilization of resources can be avoided without additional downlink resource overhead” (Hariharan ¶ 0119).
Regarding Claim 31, Zhang teaches: The non-transitory computer readable storage medium according to claim 30.
Zhang does not teach: an index of the codepoint information is used to indicate that the scheduling information of each target serving cells are different.
Regarding Claim 31, Hariharan teaches: an index of the codepoint information is used to indicate that the scheduling information of each target serving cells are different: “In a further embodiment of the invention, the PCFICH value for the individual component carriers may be different for the different codepoints of each subset of CIF codepoints” (Hariharan ¶ 0201).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the disclosure of Zhou with Hariharan to achieve the predictable result of improving the utilization of resources. According to Hariharan: “In other words, the invention according to this aspect of the invention is providing a new definition or re-definition of the codepoints that can be signaled in a carrier indicator field, so as to indicate the two types of information outlined above. In this way, a degradation of downlink system throughput can be avoided in cross-carrier scheduling scenarios, and HARQ buffer corruption due to an incorrect utilization of resources can be avoided without additional downlink resource overhead” (Hariharan ¶ 0119).
Regarding Claim 32, Zhang teaches: The non-transitory computer readable storage medium according to claim 30.
Zhang does not teach: another index of the codepoint information is used to indicate that the scheduling information of each target serving cells are same; wherein the index of the codepoint information is 1 and the DCI comprises the scheduling information of cell 0 and cell 1.
Regarding Claim 32, Hariharan teaches: another index of the codepoint information is used to indicate that the scheduling information of each target serving cells are same: “Furthermore, in several of the examples above, the codepoints of a given subset of the CIF codepoints have been mapped to the same PCFICH value. Essentially, this means that there is a "common mapping" to PCFICH values for the different component carriers” (Hariharan ¶ 0201); wherein the index of the codepoint information is 1 and the DCI comprises the scheduling information of cell 0 and cell 1: “Furthermore, in several of the examples above, the codepoints of a given subset of the CIF codepoints have been mapped to the same PCFICH value. Essentially, this means that there is a "common mapping" to PCFICH values for the different component carriers” (Hariharan ¶ 0201) wherein the first mapping of table 11 maps the CIF scheduling information to carrier 1 and 2 simultaneously.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the disclosure of Zhou with Hariharan to achieve the predictable result of improving the utilization of resources. According to Hariharan: “In other words, the invention according to this aspect of the invention is providing a new definition or re-definition of the codepoints that can be signaled in a carrier indicator field, so as to indicate the two types of information outlined above. In this way, a degradation of downlink system throughput can be avoided in cross-carrier scheduling scenarios, and HARQ buffer corruption due to an incorrect utilization of resources can be avoided without additional downlink resource overhead” (Hariharan ¶ 0119).
Claims 21, 27, and 33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou as applied to claims 15, 23, and 29 above, and further in view of Azarian Yazdi et al. (US 11,005,621), hereinafter Azarian Yazdi.
Regarding Claim 21, Zhou teaches: The method according to claim 15.
Zhou does not teach: the codepoint information comprises first indication information and second indication information, the number of the target serving cells whose scheduling information is indicated by the first indication information and the number of target serving cells whose scheduling information is indicated by the second indication information are different.
Regarding Claim 21, Azarian Yazdi teaches: the codepoint information comprises first indication information and second indication information, the number of the target serving cells whose scheduling information is indicated by the first indication information and the number of target serving cells whose scheduling information is indicated by the second indication information are different: “the scheduling grant indicates a second set of one or more links with the base station over which to receive the next instance of the HARQ communication, wherein the second set of one or more links includes a different number of component carriers than the first set of one or more link” (Azarian Yazdi Claim 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the disclosure of Zhou with Azarian Yazdi to achieve the predictable result of improving HARQ reliability. According to Azarian Yazdi: “Described herein are various aspects related to providing hybrid automatic repeat/request (HARQ) with improved reliability for low latency wireless communications (e.g., high reliability low latency (HRLL) communications for supporting mission critical or other high priority applications)” (Azarian Yazdi Col 4 Lines 15-21).
Regarding Claim 27, Zhou teaches: The network device according to claim 23.
Zhou does not teach: the codepoint information comprises first indication information and second indication information, the number of the target serving cells whose scheduling information is indicated by the first indication information and the number of target serving cells whose scheduling information is indicated by the second indication information are different.
Regarding Claim 27, Azarian Yazdi teaches: the codepoint information comprises first indication information and second indication information, the number of the target serving cells whose scheduling information is indicated by the first indication information and the number of target serving cells whose scheduling information is indicated by the second indication information are different: “the scheduling grant indicates a second set of one or more links with the base station over which to receive the next instance of the HARQ communication, wherein the second set of one or more links includes a different number of component carriers than the first set of one or more link” (Azarian Yazdi Claim 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the disclosure of Zhou with Azarian Yazdi to achieve the predictable result of improving HARQ reliability. According to Azarian Yazdi: “Described herein are various aspects related to providing hybrid automatic repeat/request (HARQ) with improved reliability for low latency wireless communications (e.g., high reliability low latency (HRLL) communications for supporting mission critical or other high priority applications)” (Azarian Yazdi Col 4 Lines 15-21).
Regarding Claim 33, Zhou teaches: The non-transitory computer readable storage medium according to claim 29.
Zhou does not teach: the codepoint information comprises first indication information and second indication information, the number of the target serving cells whose scheduling information is indicated by the first indication information and the number of target serving cells whose scheduling information is indicated by the second indication information are different.
Regarding Claim 33, Azarian Yazdi teaches: the codepoint information comprises first indication information and second indication information, the number of the target serving cells whose scheduling information is indicated by the first indication information and the number of target serving cells whose scheduling information is indicated by the second indication information are different: “the scheduling grant indicates a second set of one or more links with the base station over which to receive the next instance of the HARQ communication, wherein the second set of one or more links includes a different number of component carriers than the first set of one or more link” (Azarian Yazdi Claim 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the disclosure of Zhou with Azarian Yazdi to achieve the predictable result of improving HARQ reliability. According to Azarian Yazdi: “Described herein are various aspects related to providing hybrid automatic repeat/request (HARQ) with improved reliability for low latency wireless communications (e.g., high reliability low latency (HRLL) communications for supporting mission critical or other high priority applications)” (Azarian Yazdi Col 4 Lines 15-21).
Claims 22, 28, and 34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou as applied to claims 15, 23, and 29 above, and further in view of Chung et al. (US 2012/0182950), hereinafter Chung.
Regarding Claim 22, Zhou teaches: The method according to claim 15.
Zhou does not teach: a length of the DCI for scheduling one serving cell is the same as a length of the DCI for scheduling two serving cells.
Regarding Claim 22, Chung teaches: a length of the DCI for scheduling one serving cell is the same as a length of the DCI for scheduling two serving cells: “Here, dynamic mode adaptation may be represented as dynamic antenna mode fallback on the basis of characteristics of MIMO transmission modes using DCI formats having the same payload length. For example, a downlink closed-loop single-cell SU-MIMO transmission mode, a downlink closed-loop single-cell MU-MIMO transmission mode and a downlink closed-loop multi-cell MU-MIMO transmission mode can use DCI formats having the same payload length” (Chung ¶ 0133).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the disclosure of Zhou with Chung to achieve the predictable result of reducing signaling complexity. According to Chung: “An object of the present invention is to provide a method and apparatus for efficiently signaling scheduling while reducing signaling overhead and complexity of a transceiver when a transmission mode is applied to each carrier” (Chung ¶ 0005).
Regarding Claim 28, Zhou teaches: The network device according to claim 23.
Zhou does not teach: a length of the DCI for scheduling one serving cell is the same as a length of the DCI for scheduling two serving cells.
Regarding Claim 28, Chung teaches: a length of the DCI for scheduling one serving cell is the same as a length of the DCI for scheduling two serving cells: “Here, dynamic mode adaptation may be represented as dynamic antenna mode fallback on the basis of characteristics of MIMO transmission modes using DCI formats having the same payload length. For example, a downlink closed-loop single-cell SU-MIMO transmission mode, a downlink closed-loop single-cell MU-MIMO transmission mode and a downlink closed-loop multi-cell MU-MIMO transmission mode can use DCI formats having the same payload length” (Chung ¶ 0133).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the disclosure of Zhou with Chung to achieve the predictable result of reducing signaling complexity. According to Chung: “An object of the present invention is to provide a method and apparatus for efficiently signaling scheduling while reducing signaling overhead and complexity of a transceiver when a transmission mode is applied to each carrier” (Chung ¶ 0005).
Regarding Claim 34, Zhou teaches: The non-transitory computer readable storage medium according to claim 29.
Zhou does not teach: a length of the DCI for scheduling one serving cell is the same as a length of the DCI for scheduling two serving cells.
Regarding Claim 34, Chung teaches: a length of the DCI for scheduling one serving cell is the same as a length of the DCI for scheduling two serving cells: “Here, dynamic mode adaptation may be represented as dynamic antenna mode fallback on the basis of characteristics of MIMO transmission modes using DCI formats having the same payload length. For example, a downlink closed-loop single-cell SU-MIMO transmission mode, a downlink closed-loop single-cell MU-MIMO transmission mode and a downlink closed-loop multi-cell MU-MIMO transmission mode can use DCI formats having the same payload length” (Chung ¶ 0133).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the disclosure of Zhou with Chung to achieve the predictable result of reducing signaling complexity. According to Chung: “An object of the present invention is to provide a method and apparatus for efficiently signaling scheduling while reducing signaling overhead and complexity of a transceiver when a transmission mode is applied to each carrier” (Chung ¶ 0005).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRADLEY DAVIS LYTLE whose telephone number is (703)756-4593. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 AM - 4:00 PM EST.
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, Kwang bin Yao can be reached at 571-272-3182. 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.
/BRADLEY D LYTLE JR./Examiner, Art Unit 2473
/KWANG B YAO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2473