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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because figures 8 and 9 show a terminal 10 and base station 20, which does not match with the specification. They should be changed to terminal 20 and base station 10. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 5 and 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The limitations: “wherein in a case of using a certain SCS, the control unit performs the monitoring in a range of a limit value: that is same as a limit value corresponding to an SCS that is less than the certain SCS; or that is less than the limit value” recited in claims 5 and 7-9 are unclear. It is confusing what is meant by a range of a limit value.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Tsai et al (hereinafter “Tsai”), US Pub. 2023/0371039 A1.
Regarding claims 1, 3 and 6, Tsai discloses methods, systems, and devices may assist in operation of downlink control channel for 5G from 52.6 GHz and above, comprising: a control unit (fig. 19F, processor 118) configured to perform monitoring of a control channel in an area in which, in a case where a certain SCS is used, a number of symbols is greater than a number of symbols corresponding to another SCS that is less than the certain SCS (fig. 8, SCS= 960 KHz with X=112, Y=56 symbols greater than SCS=480 KHz with X=56, Y=28 symbols); and a reception unit configured to receive control information via the control channel (fig. 19F, transceiver 120 configured to receive control information).
Regarding claim 2, Tsai discloses wherein the control unit performs the monitoring in a central part of a slot (fig. 8-9, 10B, 10C, 11-12), or in a border part between two slots (fig. 1, 3, 6-7, and 15-17: CORESET).
Regarding claim 4, Tsai discloses: a control unit (fig. 19F, processor 118) configured to perform monitoring of a control channel in a case of using a second SCS that is greater than a first SCS, by using: a span of a number of symbols that is greater than a number of symbols of a span corresponding to the first SCS (fig. 8, SCS= 960 KHz with X=112, Y=56 symbols greater than SCS=480 KHz with X=56, Y=28 symbols); and a span gap of a number of symbols that is greater than a number of symbols of a span gap corresponding to the first SCS (fig. 8, SCS= 960 KHz has a span gap with 4 slots that is greater than SCS=480 KHz has a span gap with 2 slots); and a reception unit configured to receive control information via the control channel (fig. 19F, transceiver 120 configured to receive control information).
Regarding claims 5 and 7-9, as best understood, Tsai discloses in a case of using a certain SCS, the control unit performs the monitoring in a range of a limit value that is the same as a limit a limit value corresponding to an SCS that is less than the certain SCS (see fig. 8: PDCCH monitoring occasion period of SCS= 960 KHz is the same SCS= 480 KHz); or that is less than the limit value.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See attached PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THAI D HOANG whose telephone number is (571)272-3184. The examiner can normally be reached 10:30 am-18:30pm.
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, Asad Nawaz can be reached at (571) 272-3988. 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.
/THAI DINH HOANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2463