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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 2/24/2026 has been entered.
Claims 1, 4-6, 8, 10-12, 14, and 17-19 have been amended. Claims 1-20 are subject to examination.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: amended claim 1 recites the limitation “the RRC control information indicating indicates ...” in the last paragraph. For the sake of clarity, it is recommended that this be amended to read “the RRC control information indicating ...”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding Claims 1, 8, and 14, the claims each recite the limitation “the first PDCCH candidate is linked to a third PDCCH candidate of a third search space, and the third PDCCH candidate is counted for monitoring” however this limitation is not found or reasonably described in the specification and therefore constitutes new matter. There is no reference in the specification to either “the first PDCCH candidate is linked to a third PDCCH candidate of a third search space” or “the third PDCCH candidate is counted for monitoring”, and the only references to a PDDCH/control channel candidate being “counted for monitoring” refer to the “second control channel candidate”. For the purposes of examination, the “third PDCCH candidate” will be interpreted as “a PDCCH candidate other than the first PDCCH candidate”.
Regarding Claims 2-7, 9-13, and 15-20, the claims each depend on independent claims 1, 8, or 14, and therefore inherit the 35 U.S.C. 112 issues of the independent claims.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 8-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Regarding Claim 8, claim 8 recites the limitations “the first PDCCH candidate is monitored for a DCI format of a first size and the second PDCCH candidate is monitored for a DCI format of a second size,” and “the second PDCCH candidate is not counted for monitoring ... and the third PDCCH candidate is counted for monitoring,” which is unclear because it merely states functions of monitoring and counting PDCCH candidates (performed by the UE) without providing any indication about how these functions are performed by the base station. The recited functions do not follow from the structure recited in the claim, i.e., “A base station, comprising: a transmitter,” so it is unclear whether the functions require some other structure or are simply a result of operating the claimed system in a certain manner.
Regarding Claims 9-13, the claims each depend on claim 8, and therefore inherit the 35 U.S.C. 112 issues of the independent claim.
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, 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 1-4, 6-10, 12-17, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moon et al. (US 2021/0360667 A1, hereinafter “Moon”) in view of Khoshnevisan et al. (US 2022/0095357 A1, hereinafter “Khoshnevisan”).
Regarding Claim 1, Moon teaches a user equipment (UE), comprising: a receiver configured to receive radio resource control (RRC) control information indicating whether a first Physical Downlink Control Channel (PDCCH) candidate of a first search space set and a second PDCCH candidate of a second search space set are linked (Moon: The terminal may receive information on the association (or linking) of the search space sets or PDCCH candidates through signaling (e.g., RRC signaling, MAC CE signaling, and/or DCI signaling) from the base station, see paragraph [0143]),
wherein the first PDCCH candidate and the second PDCCH candidate occupy the same control channel elements (CCEs) and have identical scrambling and different indices (Moon: resources (e.g., a set of CCEs) of some PDCCH candidate(s) ... completely overlap resources (e.g., a set of CCEs) of other PDCCH candidate(s) (e.g., third PDCCH candidate) ... the same scrambling is applied to the some PDCCH candidate(s) and the third PDCCH candidate, see paragraph [0163]; some PDCCH candidates (e.g., PDCCH candidate #1 (or, PDCCH candidate having an index of 1) for the aggregation level 1 in the first search space set and PDCCH candidates #2 and #3 (or, PDCCH candidates having indexes 2 and 3) for the aggregation level 2 in the second search space set may not be associated, see paragraph [0152]),
wherein the UE is configured to monitor the first PDCCH candidate for a DCI format of a first size and monitor the second PDCCH candidate for a DCI format of a second size, wherein the first size and the second size are the same (Moon: DCI formats monitored in the some PDCCH candidate(s) and the third PDCCH candidate have the same size, see paragraph [0163]), and
wherein the first PDCCH candidate is linked to a third PDCCH candidate of a third search space, and the third PDCCH candidate is counted for monitoring (Moon: The number of blind decoding for two PDCCH candidates associated with each other belonging to the first and second search space sets may be counted a total of Y times. For example, Y may be fixed to 2 ... when the terminal monitors both the PDCCH candidates, the blind decoding may be counted twice in total, see paragraphs [0158]-[0159]).
While Moon teaches RRC control information indicating that the first PDCCH candidate is not linked to the second PDCCH candidate (Moon: The terminal may receive information on the association (or linking) of the search space sets or PDCCH candidates through signaling (e.g., RRC signaling, MAC CE signaling, and/or DCI signaling) from the base station, see paragraph [0143]), Moon does not explicitly teach, in response to (receiving) the RRC control information, the second PDCCH candidate is not counted for monitoring.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Khoshnevisan teaches, in response to (receiving) the RRC control information, the second PDCCH candidate is not counted for monitoring (Khoshnevisan: The base station 105 may configure the one or more search space sets for the UE 115 using an RRC message ... the PDCCH candidates may be configured as part of a respective search space set, see paragraph [0085]; a PDCCH candidate with index [2] ... using a set of CCEs in a CORESET p ... may not be counted for monitoring ... if there is a PDCCH candidate with index [1] and [1] < [2] in the CORESET p ... using a same set of CCEs, the PDCCH candidates have identical scrambling, and the corresponding DCI formats for the PDCCH candidates have a same size, see paragraph [0096]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Moon to include the features as taught by Khoshnevisan above in order to improve flexibility for DCI transmission (Khoshnevisan: see paragraph [0005]).
Regarding Claim 2, Moon-Khoshnevisan teaches the UE according to claim 1, wherein on a condition that the second PDCCH candidate is linked with the first PDCCH candidate, a Quasi-Colocation (QCL) of a reference signal of the second PDCCH candidate is different from a QCL of a reference signal of the first PDCCH candidate (Moon: PDCCH candidates through which PDCCHs constituting repetitive transmission are transmitted may be associated (or linked) with each other. In addition, search space sets corresponding to the PDCCH candidates may be associated (or linked) with each other, see paragraph [0140]; The first search space (e.g., the first search space set) may be associated with a first CORESET, and the second search space (e.g., the second search space set) may be associated with a second CORESET ... the TCI states and/or QCL sources of the first and second CORESETs may be different from each other, see paragraph [0142]).
Regarding Claim 3, Moon-Khoshnevisan teaches the UE according to claim 1, wherein an index of a control resource set (CORESET) of the first search space set and an index of a CORESET of the second search space set are the same (Moon: The first search space (e.g., the first search space set) may be associated with a first CORESET, and the second search space (e.g., the second search space set) may be associated with a second CORESET ... the first and second CORESETs may have the same CORESET ID, see paragraph [0142]), and
a carrier indicator of the DCI format of the first PDCCH candidate is the same as a carrier indicator of the DCI format of the second PDCCH candidate (Moon: when ... two DCIs successfully received are transmitted in the same PDCCH monitoring resource pool ...[or] when two DCIs successfully received have the same payload, the terminal may determine that the two DCIs are DCIs repeatedly transmitted, see paragraphs [0128]-[0129]; the DCIs may include fields (e.g., ... carrier indicator field (CIF) ...), see paragraph [0131]; The PDCCH monitoring resource pool may be composed of one or more CORESET(s) (or PDCCH candidate(s) belonging to one or more CORESET(s)), see paragraph [0134]).
Regarding Claim 4, Moon-Khoshnevisan teaches the UE according to claim 1, wherein the RRC control information indicates the first PDCCH candidate and the second PDCCH candidate (Moon: the terminal may receive information indicating to configure a specific search space set(s) (or PDCCH candidate(s) belonging to the specific search space set(s)) as a PDCCH monitoring resource pool from the base station, see paragraph [0134]; The terminal may receive information on the association (or linking) of the search space sets or PDCCH candidates through signaling (e.g., RRC signaling, MAC CE signaling, and/or DCI signaling) from the base station, see paragraph [0143]).
Regarding Claim 6, Moon-Khoshnevisan teaches the UE according to claim 1, wherein the RRC control information indicates that the second PDCCH candidate is linked to the third PDCCH candidate (Moon: the terminal may receive information indicating to configure a specific search space set(s) (or PDCCH candidate(s) belonging to the specific search space set(s)) as a PDCCH monitoring resource pool from the base station ... a plurality of PDCCH candidates belonging to the plurality of search space sets or the plurality of CORESETs may be linked (or associated) with each other, see paragraph [0134]; The terminal may receive information on the association (or linking) of the search space sets or PDCCH candidates through signaling (e.g., RRC signaling, MAC CE signaling, and/or DCI signaling) from the base station, see paragraph [0143]).
Regarding Claim 7, Moon-Khoshnevisan teaches the UE according to claim 1, wherein each CCE of the first PDCCH candidate and the second PDCCH candidate belongs to a target time window (Moon: A PDCCH monitoring resource pool may refer to ... a set of PDCCH candidate(s), see paragraph [0133]; a PDCCH monitoring resource pool may occupy a predetermined time period ... The predetermined time period may be referred to as a PDCCH monitoring window, see paragraph [0137]; One PDCCH candidate may be composed of one CCE or aggregated CCEs, see paragraph [0083]), and
a total number of monitoring times counted by the UE in the target time window is less than or equal to a first threshold, and the first threshold is based on a subcarrier spacing of subcarriers of the first PDCCH candidate (Moon: The maximum number of PDCCH blind decoding (hereinafter referred to as ‘NBD’) that the terminal can perform during each reference time (e.g., each slot, each span, and each Z consecutive slots) ... may be configured from the base station to the terminal ... The terminal may sequentially map search space sets (e.g., PDCCH candidates belonging to the search space sets) configured within the corresponding reference time until the total number of PDCCH candidates for each reference time described above does not exceed NBD, see paragraph [0156]; the length of the slot may be inversely proportional to the subcarrier spacing, see paragraph [0072]).
Regarding Claim 8, Moon teaches a base station, comprising: a transmitter configured to transmit a radio resource control (RRC) information element indicating whether a first Physical Downlink Control Channel (PDCCH) candidate of a first search space set and a second PDCCH candidate of a second search space set are linked (Moon: The terminal may receive information on the association (or linking) of the search space sets or PDCCH candidates through signaling (e.g., RRC signaling, MAC CE signaling, and/or DCI signaling) from the base station, see paragraph [0143]).
Regarding all other limitations, the limitations of claim 8 are substantially the same as the limitations of claim 1, and are therefore rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding Claims 9, 10, 12, and 13, the limitations are substantially the same as the limitations of claims 3, 4, 6, and 7, and claims 9, 10, 12, and 13 are therefore rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding Claims 14-17, 19, and 20, the limitations are substantially the same as the limitations of claims 1-4, 6, and 7, and claims 14-17, 19, and 20 are therefore rejected for the same reasons.
Claims 5, 11, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moon-Khoshnevisan in view of Grossmann et al. (US 2023/0125672 A1, hereinafter “Grossmann”).
Regarding Claim 5, Moon-Khoshnevisan teaches the UE according to claim 1, but does not explicitly teach the RRC control information is a SearchSpace information element (IE).
However, in the same field of endeavor, Grossmann teaches, the RRC control information is a SearchSpace information element (IE) (Grossmann: A search space set that the UE searches for PDCCH candidates on a CORESET are provided via the higher layer configuration of the search space (SS) set—the information element SearchSpace, see paragraph [0020]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Moon-Khoshnevisan to include the features as taught by Grossmann above in order to improve PDCCH performance (Grossmann: see paragraph [0096]).
Regarding Claim 11, Moon-Khoshnevisan teaches the base station according to claim 8, but does not explicitly teach the RRC control information is a SearchSpace information element (IE).
However, in the same field of endeavor, Grossmann teaches, the RRC control information is a SearchSpace information element (IE) (Grossmann: A search space set that the UE searches for PDCCH candidates on a CORESET are provided via the higher layer configuration of the search space (SS) set—the information element SearchSpace, see paragraph [0020]).
The rationale and motivation for adding the teaching of Grossmann is the same as the rationale and motivation for claim 5.
Regarding Claim 18, the limitations are substantially the same as the limitations of claim 5, and claim 18 is therefore rejected for the same reasons.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Liu et al. (US 2022/0345920 A1) teaches that two PDCCH candidates with same DCI size and identical scrambling using same set of CCEs would be counted as one monitored PDCCH candidate (see paragraph [0165]).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHILLIP J EGAN KEARNS whose telephone number is 571-272-4869. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 10-6 MST.
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, NOEL BEHARRY can be reached at 571-270-5630. 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.
/P.K./Examiner, Art Unit 2416
/SHARMIN CHOWDHURY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2416
Prosecution Insights