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 .
Claims 1-2, 4-6, 8, 10-12, 14, 16-18, 20, 22-23, 28, and 30-32 are pending.
Claims 3, 7, 9, 13, 15, 19, 21, 24-27, and 29 have been cancelled.
Response to Amendment
In response to Applicant’s amendment filed on 01/16/2026, the title objection has been withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on 01/16/2026 have been considered but they are not persuasive and they are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Claim Objections
Claims 28 and 32 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 28 and 32 recite the acronym “DCI” without initially defining what it stands for.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 of this title, 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-2, 4-5, 8, 12, 14, 16-17, 20, 28, and 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rastegardoost et al. (Pub. No.: US 20210144743 A1), hereinafter Rastegardoost, in view of Liu et al. (Pub. No.: US 20200084002 A1), hereinafter Liu.
With respect to claim 1, Rastegardoost teaches A downlink control information (DCI) scheduling method, performed by a network device, comprising ([0185], a downlink control information (DCI) scheduling method):
sending DCI to a user equipment (UE) for scheduling a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) ([0185], base station sends DCI to a wireless device for scheduling of a PDSCH),
wherein the DCI comprises a first information field and a second information field ([0433], the DCI comprises a first information field and a second information field),
the first information field is configured for the UE to determine a scheduling mode for scheduling two or more different transport blocks ([0433], first information field (i.e. second field) is configured for the UE to determine a scheduling mode for scheduling two or more different transport blocks), and
the second information field ([0433], the DCI comprises a first information field and a second information field); and
perform a scheduling for the PDSCH with multiple slots according to the DCI ([0333-0335], perform a scheduling for the PDSCH with multiple slots (i.e. pdsch-AggregationFactor is eight slots) according to the DCI).
Although Rastegardoost teaches the second information field ([0433], the DCI comprises a first information field and a second information field). Rastegardoost does not explicitly teach the second information field is configured for the UE to determine a number of slots scheduled by the DCI.
However, Liu teaches field is configured for the UE to determine a number of slots scheduled by the DCI ([0006], the number of scheduled time internals (such as slots); [0073], a field indicating the number of scheduled time intervals (i.e. a number of slots) is included in the DCI).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Liu, field is configured for the UE to determine a number of slots scheduled by the DCI, into the teachings of Rastegardoost, in order reduce PDCCH overhead and keep the channel occupied longer (Liu, [0004]-[0006], [0058]-[0060]).
With respect to claim 2, the combination of Rastegardoost and Liu teaches the method of claim 1. Rastegardoost teaches determining a radio network temporary identifier (RNTI) corresponding to the scheduling mode, based on a corresponding relationship between different RNTIs and different scheduling mode indication information ([0433]); and scrambling the DCI with the RNTI ([0428, 0433]); sending the DCI scrambled with the RNTI ([0428, 0433]).
With respect to claim 4, the combination of Rastegardoost and Liu teaches the method of claim 1. Rastegardoost teaches sending first higher layer signaling for configuring the UE to support the scheduling mode ([0433]).
With respect to claim 5, the combination of Rastegardoost and Liu teaches the method of claim 1. Rastegardoost teaches sending indication information for indicating the number of slots ([0300]).
With respect to claim 8, the combination of Rastegardoost and Liu teaches the method of claim 1. Rastegardoost teaches determining a bit value of the second information field based on the number of slots ([0391-0392]).
With respect to claim 12, Rastegardoost teaches A downlink control information (DCI) scheduling method, performed by a user equipment(UE), comprising ([0185], a downlink control information (DCI) scheduling method):
receiving DCI for scheduling a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) ([0185], base station sends DCI to a wireless device for scheduling of a PDSCH),
wherein the DCI comprises a first information field and a second information field ([0433], the DCI comprises a first information field and a second information field);
determining a scheduling mode for scheduling two or more different transport blocks according to the first information field ([0433], first information field (i.e. second field) is configured for the UE to determine a scheduling mode for scheduling two or more different transport blocks);
the second information field ([0433], the DCI comprises a first information field and a second information field);
performing a scheduling for the PDSCH with multiple slots according to the DCI ([0333-0335], perform a scheduling for the PDSCH with multiple slots (i.e. pdsch-AggregationFactor is eight slots) according to the DCI).
Although Rastegardoost teaches the second information field ([0433], the DCI comprises a first information field and a second information field). Rastegardoost does not explicitly teach determining a number of slots scheduled by the DCI according to the second information field.
However, Liu teaches determining a number of slots scheduled by the DCI according to the field ([0006], the number of scheduled time internals (such as slots); [0073], a field indicating the number of scheduled time intervals (i.e. a number of slots) is included in the DCI).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Liu, determining a number of slots scheduled by the DCI according to the field, into the teachings of Rastegardoost, in order reduce PDCCH overhead and keep the channel occupied longer (Liu, [0004]-[0006], [0058]-[0060]).
With respect to claim 14, this claim recites the method of claim 2, and it is rejected for at least the same reasons.
With respect to claim 16, this claim recites the method of claim 4, and it is rejected for at least the same reasons.
With respect to claim 17, this claim recites the method of claim 5, and it is rejected for at least the same reasons.
With respect to claim 20, this claim recites the method of claim 8, and it is rejected for at least the same reasons.
With respect to claim 28, Rastegardoost teaches An electronic device ([0185], a wireless device), comprising:
a processor ([0444], a processor); and
a memory configured to store processor-executable instructions ([0444], a memory); wherein the processor-executable instructions, when execute the processor, cause the processor to ([0444], the processor is configured to execute the processor executable instructions, cause the processor to):
send DCI to a user equipment (UE) for scheduling a physical downlink shared
channel (PDSCH) ([0185], base station sends DCI to a wireless device for scheduling of a PDSCH),
wherein the DCI comprises a first information field and a second information field ([0433], the DCI comprises a first information field and a second information field),
the first information field is configured for the UE to determine a scheduling mode for scheduling two or more different transport blocks ([0433], first information field (i.e. second field) is configured for the UE to determine a scheduling mode for scheduling two or more different transport blocks), and
the second information field ([0433], the DCI comprises a first information field and a second information field); and
perform a scheduling for the PDSCH with multiple slots according to the DCI ([0333-0335], perform a scheduling for the PDSCH with multiple slots (i.e. pdsch-AggregationFactor is eight slots) according to the DCI).
Although Rastegardoost teaches the second information field ([0433], the DCI comprises a first information field and a second information field). Rastegardoost does not explicitly teach the second information field is configured for the UE to determine a number of slots scheduled by the DCI.
However, Liu teaches field is configured for the UE to determine a number of slots scheduled by the DCI ([0006], the number of scheduled time internals (such as slots); [0073], a field indicating the number of scheduled time intervals (i.e. a number of slots) is included in the DCI).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Liu, field is configured for the UE to determine a number of slots scheduled by the DCI, into the teachings of Rastegardoost, in order reduce PDCCH overhead and keep the channel occupied longer (Liu, [0004]-[0006], [0058]-[0060]).
With respect to claim 32, this claim recites the method of claim 12, and it is rejected for at least the same reasons.
Claims 6, 10-11, 18, and 22-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rastegardoost, in view of Liu, in view of Wentink et al. (Pub. No.: US 20130223358 A1), hereinafter Wentink.
With respect to claim 6, the combination of Rastegardoost and Liu teaches the method of claim 1. Rastegardoost teaches sending higher layer signaling indicating the number of slots ([0300]).
The combination of Rastegardoost and Liu does not explicitly teach sending second signaling used for.
However, Wentink teaches sending second signaling used for ([0008]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Wentink, sending second signaling used for, into the teachings of Rastegardoost and Liu, in order to effectively resetting stations within a wireless communication system (Wentink, [0006]).
With respect to claim 10, the combination of Rastegardoost and Liu teaches the method of claim 1. Rastegardoost teaches sending higher layer signaling for indicating that the DCI comprises the second information field (([0391-0392])).
The combination of Rastegardoost and Liu does not explicitly teach sending third signaling.
However, Wentink teaches sending third signaling used for indicating ([0031]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Wentink, sending third signaling used for indicating, into the teachings of Rastegardoost and Liu, in order to effectively resetting stations within a wireless communication system (Wentink, [0006]).
With respect to claim 11, the combination of Rastegardoost and Liu teaches the method of claim 1. Rastegardoost teaches sending higher layer signaling for indicating the scheduling mode (([0391-0392, 0433])).
The combination of Rastegardoost and Liu does not explicitly teach sending fourth signaling.
However, Wentink teaches sending fourth signaling used for indicating ([0031]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Wentink, sending fourth signaling used for indicating, into the teachings of Rastegardoost and Liu, in order to effectively resetting stations within a wireless communication system (Wentink, [0006]).
With respect to claim 18, this claim recites the method of claim 6, and it is rejected for at least the same reasons.
With respect to claim 22, this claim recites the method of claim 10, and it is rejected for at least the same reasons.
With respect to claim 23, this claim recites the method of claim 11, and it is rejected for at least the same reasons.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 30-31 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
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).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KIET TANG whose telephone number is (571)270-7193. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:00-5:00.
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, IAN MOORE can be reached on (571) 272-3085. 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.
/KIET TANG/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2469
Prosecution Insights