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 .
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.
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 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Awadin et al. (2023/0163936) in view of Sun et al.(9,813,975).
For independent claim 1 , Awadin et al. (2023/0163936) discloses a method comprising
comprising: receiving, by a processor of a user equipment (UE) ( See box 1220 in Figure 22), a signaling from a network configuring one or more frequency-domain subband partitions per serving cell( See resources in Figure 6 box 605 and 612); and communicating, by the processor, with the network using resources in the one or more frequency-domain subband partitions, wherein each of the one or more frequency-domain subband partitions respectively comprises a set of uplink (UL) subbands and a set of downlink (DL) subbands, and wherein each subband of the set of UL subbands and the set of DL subbands respectively ( See resources in Figure 6 boxes 605 and 612 and boxes 606 and 609).
For independent claim 1, Awadin et al. discloses all the subject matter with the exception of a set of one or more contiguous resource blocks (RBs) in a communications network. Sun et al. from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches a provision of a set of one or more contiguous resource blocks (RBs) ( See paragraph 6 lines 1-6 and paragraph lines 1-3). Thus, it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the set of one or more contiguous resource blocks (RBs) ( See paragraph 6 lines 1-6 and paragraph lines 1-3) as taught by Sun et al. in the communications network of Awadin et al. for the purpose of using the contiguous resource blocks (RBs).
For independent claim 20 is rejected for the same reason as indicating in claim 1.
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 17-19 are under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
by Hu in view of Latheef et al. (2022/0038968).
For claims 17-19, Hu et al. (2022/0124799) discloses a method comprising 17. A
method, comprising: receiving, by a processor of a user equipment (UE), a signaling
from a network; and performing, by the processor(See paragraph 0049 lines 1-15), a
measurement outside a downlink (DL) subband while the UE is not allowed to receive
any signaling outside the DL subband ( See paragraph 0049 and 0129 lines 1-2),
wherein the signaling configures a resource in one or more partitioned slots or symbols
outside the DL subband, and wherein the performing of the measurement comprises
performing a UE- to-UE cross link interference (UE-UE CLI) measurement in the
configured resource (See paragraph 0097 lines 1-2), and
wherein the performing of the measurement comprises performing a channel state
information reference signal (CSI-RS) measurement ( See paragraph 0050 lines 1-9
and paragraph 0084 lines 1-8).
For claims 17 and 19, Hu et al. discloses all the subject matter of the claimed invention with the exception of physical downlink control channel (PDCCH), physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH), or channel status information reference signal (CSI-RS) outside the DL subband in a communications network. Latheef et al. from the same or similar fields of endeavor teach a provision of physical downlink control channel (PDCCH), physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH), or channel status information reference signal (CSI-RS) outside the DL subband ( See paragraph 0475 lines 7-26). Thus, it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use physical downlink control channel (PDCCH), physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH), or channel status information reference signal (CSI-RS) outside the DL subband as taught by Latheef et al. in the communications network of Hu et al. for the purpose of using physical downlink control channel (PDCCH), physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH), or channel status information reference signal (CSI-RS) outside the DL subband.
Claims 2-16 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANG T TON whose telephone number is (571)272-3171. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 5:30 AM to 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, Ayaz Sheikh can be reached at 571-272-3795. 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.
/DANG T TON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2476 /D.T.T/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2476