DETAILED ACTION
Acknowledgements
This a Non-Final Office Action addressing U.S. Application No. 18/244,894. Based upon a review of the instant application, the actual filing date of the instant application is September 11, 2023. Since the instant application was filed after September 16, 2012, the statutory provisions of the America Invents Act ("AIA ") will govern this proceeding.
The instant application is a continuation of PCT/CN2022/080144 filed March 10, 2022. The instant application also claims foreign priority to CN 202110266058.0, however the Examiner is unable to locate copies of the priority documents.
Abstract
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it recites “This application discloses,” at line 1 of the Abstract. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-9,12, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bagheri et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0222400 hereinafter “Bagheri”).
Referring to claim 1, Bagheri teaches a method for determining channel transmission behavior, performed by a terminal, the method comprising:
receiving a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) (see ¶ 59); and
determining that the PDCCH is non-repetition transmission or repetition transmission (see ¶ 59).
Referring to claim 2, Bagheri teaches the method according to claim 1 (as shown above), and Bagheri further teaches the determining that the PDCCH is non-repetition transmission or repetition transmission comprises:
determining, according to a scrambling mode of the PDCCH, that the PDCCH is non-repetition transmission or repetition transmission (see ¶ 60).
Referring to claim 3, Bagheri teaches The method according to claim 2 (as shown above), and Bagheri further teaches the determining, according to a scrambling mode of the PDCCH, that the PDCCH is repetition transmission comprises: when the scrambling mode is any of the following, determining that the PDCCH is repetition transmission:
scrambling at least one of cyclic redundancy check (CRC) bits by using a first identifier, wherein the first identifier is a unique identifier for scrambling a channel for repetition transmission (see ¶ 101);
scrambling at least one bit in a first bit group by using the second identifier, the first bit group is other bits in the CRC bits except a second bit group, the second bit group are bits used by the terminal to determine different downlink control information (DCI) formats, the second identifier is a unique identifier used to scramble the channel for repetition transmission, and the number of bits in the second identifier is not greater than the number of bits in the first bit group (note Bagheri teaches at the first option as shown above); or
scrambling a third bit group by using a third identifier, wherein the third bit group is obtained by shifting the second bit group (note Bagheri teaches at the first option as shown above).
Referring to claim 4, Bagheri teaches the method according to claim 3, wherein the first identifier is obtained by any of the following methods: high-layer signaling configuration; or determined based on a fourth identifier (see ¶ 74).
Referring to claim 5, Bagheri teaches the method according to claim 3 (as shown above), and Bagheri further teaches wherein the first identifier or the second identifier is associated with a first search space (SS) for repetition transmission (see ¶¶ 53 and 66).
Referring to claim 6, Bagheri teaches the method according to claim 3 (as shown above). The limitation of the second identifier is obtained by any of the following methods: high-layer signaling configuration; or protocol agreement is part of the second option in claim 3 and Bagheri teaches at least the first option satisfying the claim requirements. (See MPEP 2111.04(II)).
Referring to claim 7, Bagheri teaches the method according to claim 3 (as shown above), and Bagheri further teaches the first identifier or the third identifier comprises a radio network temporary identifier (RNTI) (see ¶ 74).
Referring to claim 8, Bagheri teaches the method according to claim 1 (as shown above), and Bagheri further teaches wherein the determining that the PDCCH is non-repetition transmission or repetition transmission comprises: determining that the PDCCH is non-repetition transmission or repetition transmission according to predetermined information carried in the PDCCH, wherein the predetermined information is used to indicate that the PDCCH belongs to repetition transmission or non-repetition transmission (see ¶ 60).
Referring to claim 9, Bagheri teaches the method according to claim 1 (as shown above), and Bagheri further teaches wherein the determining that the PDCCH is non-repetition transmission or repetition transmission comprises when time-frequency resources of a PDCCH candidate used for single transmission and a PDCCH candidate used for repetition transmission overlap, defaulting that the PDCCH is a designated channel transmission behavior, wherein the designated channel transmission behavior is repetition transmission or non-repetition transmission (see ¶¶ 61-62).
Referring to claim 12, Bagheri teaches the method according to claim 1 (as shown above), and Bagheri further teaches the determining that the PDCCH is non-repetition transmission or repetition transmission comprises:
when the PDCCH is successfully received based on a first aggregation level, determining that the PDCCH is repetition transmission (see ¶ 53); and
when the PDCCH is successfully received based on a second aggregation level, determining that the PDCCH is non-repetition transmission, wherein the first aggregation level and the second aggregation level are different (See ¶ 53).
Referring to claim 18, Bagheri teaches a terminal (see remote unit 103 in figure 2), comprising:
a memory (see item 204 in figure 2) storing a computer program (see ¶ 41); and
a processor (see item 202 in figure 2) coupled to the memory and configured to execute the computer program (see ¶ 40), wherein the computer program, when executed by the processor, causes the processor to perform operations comprising:
receiving a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) (see ¶ 59); and
determining that the PDCCH is non-repetition transmission or repetition transmission (see ¶ 59).
Referring to claim 19, Bagheri teaches the terminal according to claim 18 (as shown above), and Bagheri further teaches the determining that the PDCCH is non-repetition transmission or repetition transmission comprises:
determining, according to a scrambling mode of the PDCCH, that the PDCCH is non-repetition transmission or repetition transmission (see ¶ 60).
Referring to claim 20, Bagheri teaches a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, storing a computer program (see item 204 in figure 2 and ¶ 41), when the computer program is executed by a processor, causes the processor to perform operations comprising:
receiving a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) (see ¶ 59); and
determining that the PDCCH is non-repetition transmission or repetition transmission (see ¶ 59).
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.
Claim(s) 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bagheri in view of Liu et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2022/0038210 heereinafter “Liu”).
Referring to claim 10, Bagheri teaches the method according to claim 1 (as shown above), however Bagheri fails to teach the determining that the PDCCH is non-repetition transmission or repetition transmission comprises: determining that the PDCCH is non-repetition transmission or repetition transmission according to a specified identifier on a monitoring occasion corresponding to the PDCCH, wherein the specified identifier comprises an SS identifier or a control resource set identifier.
Liu teaches, in an analogous system, determining that the PDCCH is non-repetition transmission or repetition transmission comprises: determining that the PDCCH is non-repetition transmission or repetition transmission according to a specified identifier on a monitoring occasion corresponding to the PDCCH, wherein the specified identifier comprises an SS identifier or a control resource set identifier (see ¶¶ 174-175).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the Applicant’s invention to modify the teachings of Bagheri with the above teachings of Liu. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to make such modification to allow for flexible PDCCH repetition thereby improving reception/transmission reliability and coverage as suggested by Liu (see ¶ 4).
Claim(s) 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bagheri in view of Cheng et al. (WO 2022/080501 hereinafter “Cheng”).
Referring to claim 17, Bagheri teaches the method according to claim 1 (as shown above), and however Bagheri fails to explicitly disclose after determining that the PDCCH is non-repetition transmission or repetition transmission, the method further comprises:
when the PDCCH is repetition transmission, determining that an SS to which the PDCCH belongs is a first SS; and
when the PDCCH is non-repetition transmission, determining that an SS to which the PDCCH belongs is a second SS, wherein the first SS is used for repetition transmission, and the second SS is used for non-repetition transmission.
Lee teaches, in an analogous system, when the PDCCH is repetition transmission, determining that an SS to which the PDCCH belongs is a first SS (see ¶¶ 81-82); and
when the PDCCH is non-repetition transmission, determining that an SS to which the PDCCH belongs is a second SS, wherein the first SS is used for repetition transmission, and the second SS is used for non-repetition transmission (see ¶¶ 81-82).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the Applicant’s invention to modify the teachings of Bagheri with the above teachings of Lee. One of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the Applicant’s invention would have been motivated to make such modification because Lee suggests such a configuration allows for PDCCH coverage enhancement (see ¶ 73).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11 and 13-16 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The following references are cited to further show the state of the art as it pertains to the Applicant’s invention:
WO2022/031892 to Lee et al. discloses a method for PDCCH converage enhancement.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERON J SORRELL whose telephone number is (571)272-4160. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9AM-6PM 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, Michael Fuelling can be reached at 571-270-1367. 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.
Signed:
/ERON J SORRELL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3992