DETAILED ACTION
Response to Remark
This communication is considered fully responsive to the amendment filed on 10/31/25.
Independent claims have been amended.
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 1, 2, 4-9, 11-15, and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chou et al. (US 2018/0183551, “Chou”) in view of Lyu et al. (WO 2018/171729, “Lyu”, attached the English translation version) and further in view of Wang et al. (US 2021/0153188, “Wang”).
Regarding claim 1, Chou discloses a method of transmitting information, comprising:
- dividing, by a base station (BS), a set of parameters for a user equipment (UE) into a plurality of parameter groups (See Fig.3, Fig.9A, Fig.13A, Fig.14A, and Fig.15
PNG
media_image1.png
320
622
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
293
704
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
350
529
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
435
582
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
462
711
media_image5.png
Greyscale
As illustrated above, Chou discloses the method of dividing, by a BS, a set of parameters for a UE into a plurality of parameter groups. For example, in Fig.15, DCI#1 includes {CC#1, RB1, BWP index#2} and DCI#2 includes {CC#2, RB2, BWP index#4}),
- configuring, by the BS, an association relationship between at least one parameter group from the plurality of parameter groups with multiple component carriers (CCs) configured for the UE (See Fig.9A and Fig.15
PNG
media_image6.png
231
716
media_image6.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image7.png
237
601
media_image7.png
Greyscale
As illustrated above, DCI#1 is associated with CC#1 and DCI#2 is associated with CC#2);
- transmitting, by the BS, information of the at least one parameter group to the UE (As illustrated above).
Chou discloses the method of “establishing, by the BS, for the at least one parameter group (as illustrated above), but Chou does not explicitly the claim limitations “wherein the at least on parameter group is associated with an ACK/NACK to be fed back on a corresponding CC of the multiple CCs; and establishing a correspondence between a group index on the multiple CCs associated with a control resource set (CORESET) of the at least one parameter group and a scrambling identifier of a plurality of scrambling identifiers configured by higher layer signaling.”
However, Lyu and Wang disclose the limitations,
- wherein the at least on parameter group is associated with an ACK/NACK to be fed back on a corresponding CC of the multiple CCs (Lyu, Examiner’s Note: WIPO/PCI provides the English translation, but does not provide pages, so the examiner provides screen shots of the translated texts below:
PNG
media_image8.png
161
851
media_image8.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image9.png
229
856
media_image9.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image10.png
100
842
media_image10.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image11.png
133
852
media_image11.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image12.png
108
843
media_image12.png
Greyscale
);
and a scrambling identifier of a plurality of scrambling identifiers configured by higher layer signaling (Lyu, in the implicit indication method, the network device may indicate the group index #1 and the index #1 to the terminal device #1 by scrambling or transmitting the control information #1 at a specific time-frequency position. For example, the scrambling code sequence is calculated at least by index #1 and group index #1; for example, by transmitting control information #1 in a certain control resource set to indicate group index #1, the first CCE is transmitted at a certain position of the set or REG indicates index #1; or conversely, the control resource set in which the first CCE or REG is located indicates group index #1, and index #1 is indicated by the first CCE or REG in the starting position in the control resource set. The specific implementation details are similar to the above method of explicitly or implicitly indicating index #1, and the description is concise and will not be described herein. In a possible implementation manner, the network device configures a maximum value of the first group of indexes by using the high layer signaling, or the network device is configured by the high layer signaling to indicate the number of bits or valid bits included in the field corresponding to the first group of indexes. Number; In a possible implementation, the network device configures the maximum value of the first index by using the high layer signaling, or the network device is configured by the high layer signaling to indicate the number of bits or the number of valid bits included in the field corresponding to the first index. For example, as an example and not limitation, the number of binary bits used to represent index #1 may be 2 bits, 3 bits, 4 bits, etc., which are configured by the network device through higher layer signaling, or may be predefined. For example, the network device configures the terminal device to indicate the binary bit of the index #1 through RRC signaling; the predefined may be pre-agreed by the communication standard, or the terminal device/network device is pre-defined at the factory. It can be understood that the number of binary bits used to indicate index #1 can also be expressed as the maximum number of terminal devices that the network device simultaneously schedules/supports/serves during the validity period of the index #1 (ie, the first time period). For example, the maximum number of terminal devices is 8, which is equivalent to indicating (representing) the index #1 by three binary bits. Therefore, the above-mentioned high-level signaling configuration or the predefined index #1 may also be configured through high-level signaling or The maximum number of predefined terminal devices. It should be noted that the maximum number of terminal devices that the network device simultaneously schedules/supports/serves may be the number of terminal devices that are scheduled/supported/served by one cell at the same time, or may be a group of terminal devices served by the network device. The maximum number of terminal devices in the group; Optionally, the second physical layer control information is scrambled by the first scrambling code sequence, and the first scrambling code sequence is calculated by at least the first group index or the cell ID); and
- establishing a correspondence between a group index on the multiple CCs associated with a control resource set (CORESET) of the at least one parameter group (Wang, See ¶.87, the CORESET group may be indicated in two manners: (a) A parameter of each CORESET group includes a control resource set group identifier (CORESET group ID). (b) The CORESET group ID is indicated in the PDCCH-config. Certainly, an indication manner of the CORESET group is not limited to the foregoing two manners; See ¶.97, RRC signaling indicates a CORESET group ID associated with each PUCCH configuration; See ¶.122, in specific implementation, the RRC signaling indicates PUCCH resource set group IDs associated with the two PDCCH-configs/two CORESET groups/two search space groups/two PDSCH-configs/two DMRS port groups/two TBs).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to apply the method of “wherein the at least on parameter group is associated with an ACK/NACK to be fed back on a corresponding CC of the multiple CCs; and a scrambling identifier of a plurality of scrambling identifiers configured by higher layer signaling” as taught by Lyu and the method of “establishing a correspondence between a group index on the multiple CCs associated with a control resource set (CORESET) of the at least one parameter group” as taught by Wang into the system of Chou, so that it provides a way for the network device to indicate the group index and the index to the terminal device by scrambling or transmitting the control information at a specific time-frequency position (Lyu, See the cited paragraphs above and below:
PNG
media_image13.png
185
850
media_image13.png
Greyscale
).
Regarding claim 2, Chou discloses “adding, by the BS, a group index to at least one parameter group for the UE, wherein parameters in the group correspond the group index having the association relationship (See fig.6, ¶.62-54, RAN profile indexing and BWP index; See further ¶.67 for CORESET configuration of the indicated BWP configuration; See ¶.103, Index 0 may correspond to a sub-carrier spacing #1, a multiplexing #1, a channel coding scheme #2, a TTI #1, a CP #1, and a modulation scheme #1; See fig.7, for bitmap indexing formation for signaling RAN profile indexing; See ¶.108, a cell may include a network element specifying the payload lengths of all RAN profile indexing formats, and append the bitmap for each associated index).”
Regarding claim 4, Chou discloses “allocating, by the BS, at least one of a search space or an uplink transmission, for the at least one parameter group corresponding to different time units (See ¶.48 and ¶.52, each BWP configuration may comprise a PHY composition, which may include at least one of the following: Control-Resource Set (CORESET) configurations, which may include control search space configuration for UE to monitor and decode control signals).”
Regarding claim 5, Chou and Lyu do not explicitly disclose what Wang discloses “the uplink transmission is used for feeding back uplink control information (UCI) (Wang, ¶.5, when the multi-TRPs perform non-coherent joint transmission, the terminal device may send uplink control information (uplink control information, UCI) to the multi-TRPs by using a plurality of physical uplink control channels (physical uplink control channel, PUCCH).
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 uplink transmission is used for feeding back uplink control information (UCI)” as taught by Wang into the system of Chou and Lyu, so that it provides a way for PUCCH to deliver UCI after receiving DCI via PDCCH (Wang, ¶.5).
Regarding claim 6, Chou discloses “the at least one parameter group associated with the multiple component carriers further comprise configuration parameters of a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH), the PDCCH associated with an indication of a control resource set (CORESET) (See ¶.111, the UE receives the CORESET to receive further control information (PDCCHs) in the CORESET).”
Regarding claim 7, Chou discloses “the parameters in the at least one parameter group correspond to different media access control (MAC) control elements (See ¶.110, the indication of RAN profile indexing may be transmitted via an RRC message. In some implementations, the indication of RAN profile indexing may be transmitted via a MAC Control Element (CE)).”
Regarding claim 8, it is a method of receiving claim at UE side corresponding to the method claim 1 by BS and is therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of the claim.
Regarding claims 9 and 11-13, they are claims corresponding to claims 2, 4, 5 & 7, respectively and are therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of the claims.
Regarding claim 14, it is an apparatus claim corresponding to the method claim 1, except the limitation “at least one processor (See 1840 fig.18, a processor)” and is therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of the claim.
Regarding claims 15 and 17, they are claims corresponding to claims 2 & 4, respectively and are therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of the claims.
Regarding claim 18, it is an apparatus claim corresponding to the method claim 8, except the limitation “at least one processor (See 1840 fig.18, a processor)” and is therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of the claim.
Regarding claim 19, it is a claim corresponding to the claim 2 and is therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of the claim.
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. Therefore, the examiner respectfully disagrees.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 date of this final action.
.
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