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 § 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 1-15 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.
Regarding claim 1, since there is no mention of a node/device in the preamble or body of the claim, it is unclear which node (network device or terminal) performs each steps in the claims.
Similar issues with claimed steps in claims 2-15.
Note:
In view of claims 13, 15 and especially claims 17 (single apparatus claim) and 18, the Examiner interprets steps of claims 1-15 and 17-21 are performed by a terminal.
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.
Claim(s) 1-15 and 17-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Khoshnevisan et al. (US Pub. No. 2022/0225291).
Regarding claims 1, 17, and 18, Khoshnevisan discloses physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) transmission method (see figure 5) comprising, a communication device, a non-transitory computer medium (paragraphs 91-93) comprising:
a processor (figure 2 processor 280; paragraph 48);
a memory (figure 2 memory 282; paragraph 48) for storing instructions (paragraphs 91-93) executable by the processor; wherein the processor is configured to load and execute the executable instructions to implement:
determining a control resource set (CORESET) priority rule (paragraphs 7, 8, 180-182: priority rule is a search space type first, carrier index second, search space set index third, etc.);
selecting at least one CORESET from a plurality of CORESETs based on the CORESET priority rule (figure 5 step 530; paragraphs 7, 179-181: selecting a first/second sets of CORESET from a plurality of CORESETs base at least in part on a priority rule); and
performing PDCCH transmission at an overlapped PDCCH monitor occasion based on the at least one CORESET (figure 5 step 540: PDCCH transmission and paragraphs 6, 176 and 183: first monitoring occasion is at least partially overlap with second monitoring occasion).
Regarding claims 2 and 19, all limitations of claim 1 are disclosed above. Khoshnevisan further teaches determining the CORESET priority rule comprises at least one:
determining the CORESET priority rule based on a Common Search Space (CSS) set index (paragraphs 22, 23, and 182-198);
determining the CORESET priority rule based on a UE-specific Search Space (USS) set index (paragraphs 22, 23, and 182-198).
Regarding claims 3 and 20, all limitations of claims 2 and 19 are disclosed above. Khoshnevisan further teaches determining the CORESET priority rule satisfying that in all CSS sets not constituting any CSS set pair and all CSS set pairs, the smaller a CSS set index or a CSS set pair index, the higher a corresponding CORESET priority (figures 6 and 8; paragraphs 184-189); or determining the CORESET priority rule satisfying that a CORESET priority corresponding to a CSS set pair is higher than a CORESET priority corresponding to a CSS set that does not constitute any CSS set pair; in all CSS set pairs, the smaller a CSS set pair index, the higher a corresponding CORESET priority; and in all CSS sets that do not constitute any CSS set pair, the smaller a CSS set index, the higher a corresponding CORESET priority; wherein a CSS set pair comprises two linked CSS sets (figures 6 and 8; paragraphs 184-189).
Regarding claim 4, all limitations of claim 3 are disclosed above. Khoshnevisan further teaches, wherein a CSS set pair index of the CSS set pair is a smaller index of CSS set indexes of the two linked CSS sets (figure 6 paragraphs 184-189), or a CSS set pair index of the CSS set pair is an index value for the CSS set pair configured by a network device (figures 5, 6, and 8; paragraphs 184-189).
Regarding claims 5 and 21, all limitations of claims 2 and 19 are disclosed above. Khoshnevisan further teaches determining the CORESET priority rule based on the USS set index or USS set pair index corresponding to each CORESET, comprises: determining the CORESET priority rule satisfying that in all USS sets not constituting any USS set pair and all USS set pairs, the smaller a USS set index or a USS set pair index, the higher a corresponding CORESET priority (figures 6 and 8; paragraphs 184-189; 197-200); or
determining the CORESET priority rule satisfying that a CORESET priority corresponding to a USS set pair is higher than a CORESET priority corresponding to a USS set that does not constitute any USS set pair; in all USS set pairs, the smaller a USS set pair index, the higher a corresponding CORESET priority; and in all USS sets that do not constitute any USS set pair, the smaller a USS set index, the higher a corresponding CORESET priority; wherein a USS set pair comprises two linked USS sets (figures 6 and 8; paragraphs 184-189; 197-200).
Regarding claim 6, all limitations of claim 5 are disclosed above. Khoshnevisan further teaches a USS set pair index of the USS set pair is a smaller index of USS set indexes of the two linked USS sets, or a USS set pair index of the USS set pair is an index value for the USS set pair configured by a network device (figures 5, 6, and 8; paragraphs 184-189).
Regarding claim 7, all limitations of claim 2 are disclosed above. Khoshnevisan further teaches determining whether one or more CORESETs each containing a CSS set exist in the plurality of CORESETs; and determining the CORESET priority rule based on the CSS set index or the CSS set pair index corresponding to each CORESET, and selecting the at least one CORESET from the one or more CORESETs each containing the CSS set, wherein the one or more CORESETs each containing the CSS set exist in the plurality of CORESETs (figures 6, and 8; paragraphs 184-189, 198).
Regarding claim 8, all limitations of claim 7 are disclosed above. Khoshnevisan further teaches determining whether one or more CORESETs each containing a USS set exist in the plurality of CORESETs; and determining the CORESET priority rule based on the USS set index or the USS set pair index corresponding to each CORESET, and selecting the at least one CORESET from the one or more CORESETs each containing the USS set, wherein no CORESET containing the CSS set exists in the plurality of CORESETs, and the one or more CORESETs each containing the USS set exist in the plurality of CORESETs (figures 6, and 8; paragraphs 184-189, 198).
Regarding claim 9, all limitations of claim 7 are disclosed above. Khoshnevisan further teaches a terminal participating in the PDCCH transmission is configured with a plurality of serving cells (paragraph 169); and determining the CORESET priority rule based on the CSS set index or the CSS set pair index corresponding to each CORESET, and selecting the at least one CORESET from the one or more CORESETs each containing the CSS set, comprises: determining one or more CORESETs corresponding to all CSS set pairs from the one or more CORESETs each containing the CSS set; selecting a serving cell with a smallest serving cell index from serving cells each having a CSS set pair (paragraph 169 in view of figures 6 and 8 and paragraphs 184-189, 198); and determining the CORESET priority rule based on the CSS set index or the CSS set pair index corresponding to each CORESET, and selecting the at least one CORESET from one or more CORESETs corresponding to the CSS set pair corresponding to the serving cell with the smallest serving cell index (paragraph 169).
Regarding claim 10, all limitations of claim 7 are disclosed above. Khoshnevisan further teaches a terminal participating in the PDCCH transmission is configured with a plurality of serving cells (paragraph 169); and determining the CORESET priority rule based on the CSS set index or the CSS set pair index corresponding to each CORESET, and selecting the at least one CORESET from the one or more CORESETs each containing the CSS set, comprises:
selecting a serving cell with a smallest serving cell index from serving cells each having a CSS set (paragraph 169: highest priority); and determining the CORESET priority rule based on the CSS set index or the CSS set pair index corresponding to each CORESET, and selecting the at least one CORESET from one or more CORESETs corresponding to the CSS set or a CSS set pair corresponding to the
serving cell with the smallest serving cell index paragraph 169 in view of figures 6 and 8 and paragraphs 184-189, 198).
Regarding claim 11, all limitations of claim 7 are disclosed above. Khoshnevisan further teaches wherein a terminal participating in the PDCCH transmission is configured with a plurality of serving cells (paragraph 169); and determining the CORESET priority rule based on the USS set index or the USS set pair index corresponding to each CORESET, and selecting the at least one CORESET from
the one or more CORESETs each containing the USS set, comprises: determining one or more CORESETs corresponding to all USS set pairs from the one or more CORESETs each containing the USS set (figure 6 and figure 8: paragraphs 184-198); selecting a serving cell with a smallest serving cell index from serving cells each having a USS set pair (paragraph 169); and determining the CORESET priority rule based on the USS set index or USS set pair index corresponding to each CORESET, and selecting the at least one CORESET from one or more CORESETs corresponding to the USS set pair corresponding to the serving cell with the smallest serving cell index (paragraph 169).
Regarding claim 12, all limitations of claim 8 are disclosed above. Khoshnevisan further teaches wherein a terminal participating in the PDCCH transmission is configured with a plurality of serving cells (paragraph 169); and determining the CORESET priority rule based on the USS set index or the USS set pair index corresponding to each CORESET, and selecting the at least one CORESET from the one or more CORESETs each containing the USS set, comprises: selecting a serving cell with a smallest serving cell index from serving cells each having a USS set (paragraph 169); and determining the CORESET priority rule based on the USS set index or the USS set pair index corresponding to each CORESET, and selecting the at least one CORESET from one or more CORESETs corresponding to the USS set or a USS set pair corresponding to the serving cell with the smallest serving cell index (paragraph 169 in view of paragraphs 184-198).
Regarding claim 13, all limitations of claim 1 are disclosed above. Khoshnevisan further teaches the method is executed by a terminal (see figure 5), and performing the PDCCH transmission at the overlapped PDCCH monitor occasion based on the at least one CORESET, comprises: monitoring, at the overlapped PDCCH monitor occasion, a PDCCH in the selected at least one CORESET, and the PDCCH in another CORESET having at least one same Quasi Co Location (QCL) Type D with any CORESET in the selected at least one CORESET (paragraphs 169 and 170, 175); or determining at least one QCL Type D of the selected at least one CORESET, and monitoring, at the overlapped PDCCH monitor occasion, a PDCCH in a CORESET having a same QCL Type D as any one of the at least one QCL Type D (paragraphs 169 and 170, 175).
Regarding claim 14, all limitations of claim 1 are disclosed above. Khoshnevisan further teaches the at least one CORESET comprises a plurality of CORESETs, and each CORESET in the plurality of CORESETs is configured with one TCI state (paragraphs 6 and 27)
Regarding claim 15, all limitations of claim 1 are disclosed above. Khoshnevisan further teaches wherein the method is executed by a terminal (figure 5), and the method further comprises: receiving a radio resource control signaling (paragraph 152) sent by a network device, the radio resource control signaling comprising the plurality of CORESETs and configuration information of search space sets (figure 5; paragraphs 152, 162; and 176) and determining the overlapped PDCCH monitor occasion based on the configuration information (paragraphs 176 and 177).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Seo et al. (US Pub. No. 2021/0289377) discloses selecting a CORESET among a plurality of CORESETs based on an overlap between PDCCH monitoring occasions.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TITO Q PHAM whose telephone number is (571)272-4122. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday: 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, Faruk Hamza can be reached at 571-272-7969. 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.
/TITO Q PHAM/ Examiner, Art Unit 2466
/FARUK HAMZA/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2466