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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 1, 3-15 and 17-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by MolavianJazi et al PG PUB 2022/0397734.
Re Claims 1, 15, 29 and 30, MolavianJazi et al teaches in cross-carrier scheduling, a CIF value indicates one or more cells [0097], a UE receiving a DCI including the CIF value indicates/identifying one or more cells to schedule resources from a network node (a memory and processor), wherein the CIF value can be configured/mapped up to 8 schedule cells for CIF of 3 bits and communicating on the one or more cells based at least in part on mapping between the CIF values and the one or more cells.
Re Claims 3, 17, 31, MolavianJazi et al teaches in figure 10, the DCI scheduling data on self-scheduling (same cell) [0021].
Re Claims 4, 18, 32, MolavianJazi et al teaches teaches the CIF value can be 3 bits with encompasses a range 0 to at least 3.
Re Claims 5, 19, MolavianJazi et al teaches a non-zero CIF value can corresponds to a serving cell/scheduling cell [0162] otherwise when the CIF value is “0” (other) indicates a self-scheduling [0097] for the serving cell.
Re Claims 6, 20, MolavianJazi et al teaches monitoring a search space set for the DCI [0111] wherein CCE [0142] for a PDCCH associated with the DCI is based on the CIF value.
Re Claims 7, 8, 21, 22, MolavianJazi et al teaches the 3 bit CIF values have one or more to one mapped of scheduled cells [0097].
Re Claims 9, 23, MolavianJazi et al teaches the UE monitoring for a scheduling cell associated with the CIF value based on the CIF value =0 or CIF value = non-zero, the DCI format (different) indicates the scheduling format for single-cell/self-scheduling or multi-cell/cross-carrier scheduling.
Re Claims 10, 11, 24, 25, MolavianJazi et al teaches for cross-scheduling, CIF value maps can be configured to support both PUSCH and PDSCH (scheduled uplink and downlink) [0097].
Re Claims 12, 26, MolavianJazi et al teaches DCI format size can be associated number of CIF bits [0099].
Re Claims 13, 14, 27, 28, See claim 10, MolavianJazi et al teaches padding bits to align the DCI size [0410].
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 3-15 and 17-32 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.
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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-3130. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30AM-5PM 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, KASSIM KHALAD can be reached at 5712703770. 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.
/ANDREW LEE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2475
Prosecution Insights