DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
Response to Applicant’s Arguments
Applicant argues that Tang’s first-stage DCI scheduling a second-stage DCI does not disclose communicating the first message via a first RAT while the multi-stage grant schedules communication via a second RAT different from the first RAT, and that Jindal does not cure that deficiency. The argument is persuasive as to the previously applied Tang/Jindal combination. The present rejection does not rely on Jindal for the amended relationship. Tang expressly places the first-stage DCI on PDCCH and the second-stage DCI in the PDSCH scheduled by that first-stage DCI. Reference B Xiong ¶¶[0059]-[0060], ¶[0062], ¶[0066], and Fig. 6 expressly place F-PDCCH on P-RAT and the scheduled F-PDSCH on S-RAT, including identifying the S-RAT/carrier in the scheduling control. Therefore, applying Xiong’s cross-RAT PDSCH architecture to Tang’s PDSCH that carries the second-stage DCI results in Tang’s first message being communicated via the first RAT and Tang’s second message being communicated via the different second RAT. Tang’s second-stage DCI then schedules the subsequent communication. Accordingly, the new Tang/Xiong combination addresses the specific relationship added by amendment and is not dependent on the Jindal teaching challenged by Applicant.
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.
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.
Claims 1, 4-9, 11-13, 15-17, 19-30, and 37-44 — 35 U.S.C. § 103 — Tang in view of Xiong
Claims 1, 4-9, 11-13, 15-17, 19-30, and 37-44 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tang et al. (WO 2022/133893 A1, hereinafter Tang) in view of Xiong et al. (WO 2016/137532 A1).
Regarding claim 1 , Tang discloses “A network entity
for wireless communication, comprising: at least one memory; at least one ommunication interface; and at least one processor coupled to the at least one memory and the at least one communication interface, wherein the network entity is configured to: receive, via a first frequency carrier and via a first radio access technology (RAT), a first message of a multi-stage grant, wherein the multi-stage grant includes the first message and a second message, wherein the multi-stage grant schedules a communication via a second RAT different from the first RAT, wherein the first message indicates first information associated with the second message of the multi-stage grant, and wherein the first frequency carrier is associated with the first RAT; receive, via a second frequency carrier and via the second RAT, the second message of the multi-stage grant, wherein the second frequency carrier is different from the first frequency carrier, wherein the second message indicates second information associated with the communication, and wherein the second frequency carrier is associated with the second RAT; and communicate, based on the second information, the communication via the second RAT.” except for the expressly recited different-RAT relationship discussed below. Tang discloses the claimed two-stage grant because the first-stage DCI is received on PDCCH, contains scheduling information for the second-stage DCI, and the second-stage DCI is received in PDSCH resources identified by the first-stage DCI and contains scheduling information for the subsequent PDSCH/PUSCH communication. Tang further discloses a first-carrier/second-carrier embodiment in which the first-stage DCI is received on a first carrier and identifies a second carrier for the second-stage DCI. See Tang ¶[0019], ¶[0221], Fig. 9B, and the first-carrier/second-carrier embodiment accompanying the two-stage DCI disclosure. Thus, Tang teaches the first message, the second message, the first information associated with the second message, the different first and second frequency carriers, and the second information associated with the scheduled communication. Reference A does not expressly disclose “receive, via a first frequency carrier and via a first radio access technology (RAT), a first message of a multi-stage grant” together with “receive, via a second frequency carrier and via the second RAT, the second message of the multi-stage grant,” where “the second RAT [is] different from the first RAT.” Reference B, Xiong, discloses the missing cross-RAT relationship. Xiong ¶[0059] discloses F-PDSCH on a secondary RAT (S-RAT) scheduled by F-PDCCH on a primary RAT (P-RAT); Xiong ¶[0060] discloses an S-RAT index and carrier-band index for the S-RAT in the scheduling control information; Xiong ¶[0062] and Fig. 6 illustrate P-RAT F-PDCCH scheduling S-RAT F-PDSCH in an FDD implementation; and Xiong ¶[0066] again identifies the S-RAT F-PDSCH as indicated by the P-RAT F-PDCCH. Because Tang expressly carries the second-stage DCI in the PDSCH scheduled by the first-stage DCI, applying Xiong’s P-RAT-PDCCH-to-S-RAT-PDSCH arrangement to Tang causes Tang’s first-stage DCI to be communicated via the first RAT and Tang’s PDSCH carrying the second-stage DCI to be communicated via the different second RAT. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Tang’s known two-stage DCI architecture according to Xiong’s known cross-RAT scheduling technique in order to obtain flexible coordination of resources on a secondary RAT using control signaling available on a primary RAT, with the predictable result that Tang’s second-stage DCI is conveyed on the S-RAT and then schedules the communication as Tang teaches.
Regarding claim 4, Tang further discloses “wherein the first information indicates a first resource allocation for the second message, and wherein the second information indicates a second resource allocation for the communication. Tang teaches this limitation directly. In Tang’s two-stage DCI disclosure, the first-stage DCI carries frequency-domain/time-domain scheduling information that identifies the resources on which the second-stage DCI is to be received; that scheduling information is the claimed “first resource allocation for the second message.” Tang then describes the second-stage DCI as carrying scheduling information for PDSCH/PUSCH data; that scheduling information is the claimed “second resource allocation for the communication.” See Tang ¶[0019], ¶[0221], and Fig. 9B.
Regarding claim 5, Tang, further discloses “wherein, to receive the second message, the network entity is configured to receive, via the first resource allocation, the second message, and wherein, to communicate the communication, the network entity is configured to communicate, via the second resource allocation, the communication.. Fig. 9B and the accompanying receive-side description teach that the UE receives the second-stage DCI using the resources identified by the first-stage DCI and thereafter receives or transmits the data communication using the resources identified by the second-stage DCI. Accordingly, the first-stage resource allocation is used to receive the second message and the second-stage resource allocation is used to perform the communication, exactly as recited.
Regarding claim 6, Reference A, Tang et al. (WO 2022/133893 A1; “Tang”), further discloses “wherein the first information indicates a first one or more communication parameters associated with the second message, and wherein the second information indicates a second one or more communication parameters associated with the communication..” Tang teaches that first-stage DCI contains scheduling/control parameters used to obtain the second-stage DCI, including carrier and time/frequency resource information, while the second-stage DCI contains scheduling/control parameters used for the subsequent PDSCH/PUSCH communication. Tang’s disclosure under “Scheduling Parameters for PDSCH Carrying Second Stage DCI vs. Data,” together with Fig. 8 and ¶[0019], therefore supplies the claimed first one or more communication parameters and second one or more communication parameters.
Regarding claim 7, Tang, further discloses “wherein, to receive the second message, the network entity is configured to receive the second message based on the first one or more communication parameters, and wherein, to communicate the communication, the network entity is configured to communicate the communication based on the second one or more communication parameters..” Reference A teaches the claimed functional use of those parameters: the receiver uses the parameters in the first-stage DCI to locate and decode the second-stage DCI, then uses the parameters in the second-stage DCI to receive or transmit the scheduled data. Tang ¶[0221] and Fig. 9B show that sequence, so the second message and communication are respectively performed “based on” the first and second sets of parameters.
Regarding claim 8, Tang further discloses “wherein the first information indicates at least one of: a format associated with the multi-stage grant, the second frequency carrier, a priority level of the second message, a monitoring adaptation parameter, a radio resource allocation of the second message, a size of the second message, a code rate of the second message, a demodulation reference signal configuration of the second message, or a cyclic redundancy check configuration of the second message..” Reference A expressly teaches at least the recited “second frequency carrier” alternative. Tang ¶[0019] states that the scheduling information in the first-stage DCI may indicate a second carrier for the second-stage DCI. Because claim 8 requires only “at least one of” the enumerated alternatives, Tang’s carrier-indication field directly satisfies the limitation.
Regarding claim 9, Tang further discloses “wherein the second information indicates, for the communication, at least one of: a third frequency carrier, a bandwidth part, a scheduling offset parameter, a radio resource allocation, coverage enhancement information, precoding information, antenna port information, a modulation and coding scheme, a new data indicator, hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) information, power control information, or reference signal resource information..” Reference A expressly teaches multiple recited alternatives in the second-stage DCI. Tang’s second-stage scheduling disclosure identifies frequency/time resource allocation, modulation order/coding information, NDI/HARQ-related information, transmit-power control, antenna-port information, and carrier/BWP information for the scheduled data. Those fields are second information associated with the communication and each maps to an expressly listed alternative; therefore at least one alternative is met.
Regarding claim 11, Reference A, Tang et al. (WO 2022/133893 A1; “Tang”), further discloses “decode the first message via a blind decoding operation, and decode the second message based on the first information..” Reference A teaches that the first-stage DCI is obtained by blind decoding, whereas the second-stage DCI is not blindly searched because the first-stage DCI explicitly supplies its scheduling information. Tang’s blind-decoding discussion and Fig. 7B therefore teach “decode the first message via a blind decoding operation” and “decode the second message based on the first information.”
Regarding claim 12, Tang further discloses the subject matter of claim 1 and reception of the first-stage DCI on PDCCH. Xiong further discloses “wherein, to receive the first message, the network entity is configured to receive the first message in at least one of: a downlink time interval, a flexible time interval, a full-duplex time interval, a subband-full-duplex time interval, a frequency-division-duplexing time interval, or a time-division-duplexing time interval.” at least through the expressly recited frequency-division-duplexing alternative: Xiong ¶[0062] and Fig. 6 identify an FDD system in which F-PDCCH is transmitted on P-RAT DL and schedules F-PDSCH on S-RAT DL. The P-RAT control message is therefore received in an FDD downlink timing arrangement. Because claim 12 requires only one of the enumerated alternatives, the FDD implementation satisfies the additional limitation.
Regarding claim 13, Tang further discloses “receive a configuration of a search space, and wherein, to receive the first message, the network entity is configured to: receive the first message via the search space..” Tang expressly teaches search-space configuration. Tang’s search-space discussion states that “for a search space, BS sends the configuration to the UE,” and Tang further teaches the UE monitoring the configured search space for the first-stage DCI. See Tang Fig. 17 and the accompanying search-space paragraph. The transmitted configuration is the claimed “configuration of a search space,” and monitoring/receiving the first-stage DCI in that configured space is “receive the first message via the search space.”
Regarding claim 15, Tang further discloses “wherein the first message is associated with one or more fixed parameters..” Tang expressly teaches that the first-stage DCI is compact and has a fixed size and that a fixed number of resource elements can be used to transmit the first-stage DCI. See Tang ¶¶[0843]-[0845]. The fixed DCI size and fixed transmission resource amount are fixed parameters associated with the first message itself, not merely with the later PDSCH. Tang therefore directly teaches the recited limitation.
Regarding 3
, Tang further discloses “wherein the one or more fixed parameters include at least one of: a modulation order, a size, a coding rate, or an aggregation level..” ¶[0843] expressly teaches that the first-stage DCI has a fixed size, and ¶[0845] further teaches a lower coding rate for the first-stage DCI. Because claim 16 requires at least one of the enumerated alternatives, Tang’s fixed first-stage DCI size directly satisfies the recited “size” alternative.
Regarding claim 17, Tang discloses “A first network entity for wireless communication, comprising: at least one memory; at least one communication interface; and at least one processor coupled to the at least one memory and the at least one communication interface, wherein the first network entity is configured to: transmit, via a first frequency carrier and via a first radio access technology (RAT), a first message of a multi-stage grant, wherein the multi-stage grant includes the first message and a second message, wherein the multi-stage grant schedules a communication for a second network entity via a second RAT different from the first RAT, wherein the first message indicates first information associated with the second message of the multi-stage grant, and wherein the first frequency carrier is associated with the first RAT; transmit, via a second frequency carrier and via the second RAT, the second message of the multi-stage grant, wherein the second frequency carrier is different from the first frequency carrier, wherein the second message indicates second information associated with the communication, and wherein the second frequency carrier is associated with the second RAT; and communicate, based on at least one of the first information or the second information, the communication via the second RAT.” except for the different-RAT relationship. Tang’s transmitter-side disclosure teaches transmitting a first-stage DCI on PDCCH that identifies resources for a second-stage DCI, transmitting the second-stage DCI in the identified PDSCH resources, and using the second-stage DCI to schedule the subsequent communication; Tang also teaches first-carrier/second-carrier operation. See Tang ¶[0019], ¶[0220], and Fig. 9A. Reference A does not expressly disclose transmitting the first message via a first RAT and transmitting the second message via a second RAT different from the first RAT. Reference B, Xiong, teaches that exact cross-RAT channel relationship: Xiong ¶[0059] places F-PDCCH on P-RAT and the scheduled F-PDSCH on S-RAT, ¶[0060] identifies the S-RAT/carrier in the scheduling control, and ¶[0062] and Fig. 6 illustrate the P-RAT-to-S-RAT scheduling sequence. Since Tang places its second-stage DCI in the scheduled PDSCH, the combination places Tang’s first-stage DCI on P-RAT and Tang’s second-stage DCI on S-RAT. It would have been obvious to make the modification to obtain Xiong’s known cross-RAT coordination while retaining Tang’s known two-stage control sequence and its predictable scheduling function.
Regarding claim 19, Reference A, Tang et al. (WO 2022/133893 A1; “Tang”), further discloses “wherein the first information indicates a first resource allocation for the second message, and wherein the second information indicates a second resource allocation for the communication..” Reference A teaches the transmitter-side first and second resource allocations: the first-stage DCI specifies resources for the second-stage DCI, and the second-stage DCI specifies resources for the scheduled data. See Tang ¶[0019], ¶[0220], and Fig. 9A.
Regarding claim 20, Reference A, Tang et al. (WO 2022/133893 A1; “Tang”), further discloses “wherein, to transmit the second message, the first network entity is configured to transmit, via the first resource allocation, the second message, and wherein, to communicate the communication, the first network entity is configured to communicate, via the second resource allocation, the communication..” Reference A Fig. 9A teaches transmitting the second-stage DCI using the resources identified by the first-stage DCI and then transmitting/communicating the data using resources identified by the second-stage DCI. Thus Tang teaches transmission via the first allocation and communication via the second allocation.
Regarding claim 21, Reference A, Tang et al. (WO 2022/133893 A1; “Tang”), further discloses “wherein the first information indicates a first one or more communication parameters associated with the second message, and wherein the second information indicates a second one or more communication parameters associated with the communication..” Reference A teaches first-stage control parameters governing transmission of the second-stage DCI and second-stage control parameters governing the subsequent data communication, as described in Tang’s Fig. 8 scheduling-parameter discussion and Fig. 9A. Those are respectively the claimed first and second communication parameters.
Regarding claim 22, Reference A, Tang et al. (WO 2022/133893 A1; “Tang”), further discloses “wherein, to transmit the second message, the first network entity is configured to transmit the second message based on the first one or more communication parameters, and wherein, to communicate the communication, the first network entity is configured to communicate the communication based on the second one or more communication parameters..” Reference A Fig. 9A shows the network transmitting the second-stage DCI in accordance with the first-stage scheduling information and then performing the data communication in accordance with the second-stage scheduling information. This directly teaches the two claimed “based on” relationships.
Regarding claim 23, Tang further discloses “wherein the first information indicates at least one of: a format associated with the multi-stage grant, the second frequency carrier, a priority level of the second message, a monitoring adaptation parameter, a radio resource allocation of the second message, a size of the second message, a code rate of the second message, a demodulation reference signal configuration of the second message, or a cyclic redundancy check configuration of the second message..” ¶[0019] expressly teaches a field in the first-stage DCI that indicates a second carrier for the second-stage DCI. That is the claimed “second frequency carrier” alternative and is sufficient because claim 23 requires only at least one listed alternative.
Regarding claim 24, Tang further discloses “wherein the second information indicates, for the communication, at least one of: a third frequency carrier, a bandwidth part, a scheduling offset parameter, a radio resource allocation, coverage enhancement information, precoding information, antenna port information, a modulation and coding scheme, a new data indicator, hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) information, power control information, or reference signal resource information..” Tang teaches second-stage DCI fields that govern the scheduled communication, including resource allocation, MCS, NDI/HARQ-related information, power control, antenna-port information, and carrier/BWP information. Those disclosures map directly to multiple alternatives recited in claim 24.
Regarding claim 25, Tang discloses “A method of wireless communication performed by a network entity, comprising: receiving, via a first frequency carrier and via a first radio access technology (RAT), a first message of a multi-stage grant, wherein the multi-stage grant includes the first message and a second message, wherein the multi-stage grant schedules a communication via a second RAT different from the first RAT, wherein the first message indicates first information associated with the second message of the multi-stage grant, and wherein the first frequency carrier is associated with the first RAT; receiving, via a second frequency carrier and via the second RAT, the second message of the multi-stage grant, wherein the second frequency carrier is different from the first frequency carrier, wherein the second message indicates second information associated with the communication, and wherein the second frequency carrier is associated with the second RAT; and communicating, based on the second information, the communication via the second RAT.” except for the different-RAT relationship. Tang’s receive-side method receives the first-stage DCI on PDCCH, receives the second-stage DCI in PDSCH resources scheduled by the first-stage DCI, and performs the data communication according to the second-stage DCI; Tang also teaches first-carrier/second-carrier operation. See Tang ¶[0019], ¶[0221], and Fig. 9B. Tang does not expressly disclose receiving the first message via a first RAT and the second message via a second RAT different from the first RAT. Reference B, Xiong, discloses P-RAT F-PDCCH scheduling S-RAT F-PDSCH and expressly identifies the S-RAT/carrier in the scheduling control. See Xiong ¶¶[0059]-[0060], ¶[0062], ¶[0066], and Fig. 6. Applying Xiong’s S-RAT PDSCH arrangement to the PDSCH that Tang uses to carry its second-stage DCI directly results in receiving the first-stage DCI via the first RAT and receiving the second-stage DCI via the different second RAT. It would have been obvious for the same cross-RAT resource-coordination rationale stated for claim 1.
Regarding claim 26, Tang further discloses “receiving information indicative of a respective range of values for each parameter of one or more parameters associated with the multi-stage grant, wherein the one or more parameters are associated with the first message..” Tang teaches separately predefined or network-configured sets of possible parameter values for the second-stage-DCI transmission, including modulation order, coding rate, time/frequency resources, transport-block number, and MIMO-layer options, in the Fig. 8 scheduling-parameter discussion. Tang further teaches network configuration of those sets. A UE receiving that network configuration receives information defining the available set/range of values for parameters associated with the first-stage message and multi-stage grant. Thus the cited configuration disclosure teaches the recited “receiving information indicative of a respective range of values.”
Regarding claim 27, Tang further discloses “wherein the one or more parameters include at least one of: a size, a coding rate, or an aggregation level..” Reference A expressly includes coding-rate options among the separately predefined/configured scheduling-parameter sets and also describes DCI-size options. Accordingly, the “coding rate” and “size” alternatives are taught; because claim 27 requires only one alternative, either disclosure is sufficient.
Regarding claim 28, Tang discloses “wherein the first message is scrambled via a radio network temporary identifier (RNTI)..” Tang teaches DCI whose CRC is scrambled using an RNTI and applies RNTI-based monitoring to the first-stage DCI. See Tang Fig. 7B and the associated RNTI/CRC-scrambling disclosure. Accordingly, the first-stage DCI is the claimed first message scrambled via an RNTI.
Regarding claim 29, Tang further discloses “wherein the RNTI is a user equipment (UE) specific RNTI, a group RNTI, or a fixed RNTI..” Tang identifies UE-specific RNTIs, including C-RNTI-type identifiers, and group-common RNTIs used for DCI monitoring/scrambling. Those disclosures directly satisfy the UE-specific RNTI and group RNTI alternatives.
Regarding claim 30, Tang further discloses “wherein receiving the first message comprises: receiving the first message via at least one transmission associated with the first RAT, wherein the at least one transmission includes: a synchronization signal block (SSB) transmission, a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) transmission, or a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) transmission..” Reference A expressly teaches that the first-stage DCI is transmitted and received on PDCCH. PDCCH is one of the three alternatives expressly recited in claim 30, so the limitation is directly met by Tang’s first-stage-PDCCH disclosure in ¶[0019] and Fig. 9B.
Regarding claim 37, Tang further discloses “wherein communicating the communication comprises transmitting, via an uplink data channel, the communication..” Reference A teaches second-stage DCI scheduling of PUSCH uplink data. Therefore, when the scheduled communication is uplink, the communication comprises transmitting via an uplink data channel, exactly as recited.
Regarding claim 38, Tang further discloses “wherein communicating the communication comprises receiving, via a downlink data channel, the communication..” Reference A teaches second-stage DCI scheduling of PDSCH downlink data. Therefore, when the scheduled communication is downlink, the communication comprises receiving via a downlink data channel, exactly as recited.
Regarding claim 39, Tang further discloses “wherein receiving the second message comprises receiving the second message after receiving the first message..” Tang teaches that the first-stage DCI must be obtained before the second-stage DCI because the first-stage DCI supplies the scheduling information needed to locate the second-stage DCI. Tang ¶[0221] and Fig. 9B therefore directly teach receiving the second message after receiving the first message.
Regarding claim 40, Tang discloses “A method of wireless communication performed by a first network entity, comprising: transmitting, via a first frequency carrier and via a first radio access technology (RAT), a first message of a multi-stage grant, wherein the multi-stage grant includes the first message and a second message, wherein the multi-stage grant schedules a communication for a second network entity via a second RAT different from the first RAT, wherein the first message indicates first information associated with the second message of the multi-stage grant, and wherein the first frequency carrier is associated with the first RAT; transmitting, via a second frequency carrier and via the second RAT, the second message of the multi-stage grant, wherein the second frequency carrier is different from the first frequency carrier, wherein the second message indicates second information associated with the communication, and wherein the second frequency carrier is associated with the second RAT; and communicating, based on at least one of the first information or the second information, the communication via the second RAT.” except for the different-RAT relationship. Tang’s transmit-side method transmits the first-stage DCI on PDCCH, transmits the second-stage DCI in PDSCH resources scheduled by the first-stage DCI, and communicates according to the second-stage DCI; Tang also teaches different first and second carriers. See Tang ¶[0019], ¶[0220], and Fig. 9A. Tang does not expressly disclose transmitting the first message via a first RAT and the second message via a second, different RAT. Xiong, teaches P-RAT F-PDCCH scheduling S-RAT F-PDSCH and identifying the S-RAT/carrier in the scheduling information. See Xiong ¶¶[0059]-[0060], ¶[0062], ¶[0066], and Fig. 6. Because Tang carries the second-stage DCI in the scheduled PDSCH, the combination expressly places the second message on the different S-RAT. It would have been obvious to combine the teachings to obtain Xiong’s known cross-RAT scheduling flexibility while preserving Tang’s known two-stage grant operation.
Regarding claim 41, Tang discloses “transmitting a configuration of a search space, and wherein transmitting the first message comprises transmitting the first message via the search space.” Tang teaches the base-station side of search-space configuration: Tang’s search-space disclosure states that the BS sends the search-space configuration to the UE and then transmits DCI in the configured monitored search space. See Tang Fig. 17 and associated search-space disclosure. Thus Tang teaches transmitting the configuration and transmitting the first message via that search space.
Regarding claim 42, Tang discloses “wherein the first message is associated with one or more fixed parameters..” ¶¶[0843]-[0845] expressly teach that the first-stage DCI is compact and has a fixed size, uses a fixed number of resource elements, and may use a lower coding rate. Those fixed characteristics are associated with the first-stage DCI itself and therefore directly teach the recited fixed-parameter limitation.
Regarding claim 43, Reference A, Tang et al. (WO 2022/133893 A1; “Tang”), further discloses “transmitting information indicative of a respective range of values for each parameter of one or more parameters associated with the multi-stage grant..” Reference A teaches the network-side counterpart of the separately configured sets described in the Fig. 8 scheduling-parameter discussion, including sets of modulation-order, coding-rate, time/frequency-resource, transport-block, and MIMO-layer values. Network signaling that configures those sets transmits information defining the available set/range of values for the multi-stage-grant parameters. Thus Tang teaches “transmitting information indicative of a respective range of values for each parameter of one or more parameters associated with the multi-stage grant.”
Regarding claim 44, Tang further discloses “wherein transmitting the first message comprises: transmitting the first message via at least one transmission associated with the first RAT, wherein the at least one transmission includes: a synchronization signal block (SSB) transmission, a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) transmission, or a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) transmission..” Reference A expressly teaches network transmission of the first-stage DCI on PDCCH in ¶[0019], ¶[0220], and Fig. 9A. PDCCH is one of the listed alternatives, so the limitation is directly satisfied.
Claims 2, 3, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tang in view of Xiong and further in view of Sengupta et al. (US 2020/0382354 A1, hereinafter Sengupta).
Regarding claim 2, Tang and Xiong discloses the subject matter of claim 1 but does not expressly disclose “wherein the first frequency carrier is associated with the second RAT.” in the particular shared-carrier arrangement recited. Sengupta ¶[0007] discloses NR/LTE spectrum sharing in the same licensed or unlicensed band, including fully overlapping and partially overlapping NR and LTE component carriers. A fully overlapping carrier therefore occupies the same frequency-carrier spectrum for both RATs. It would have been obvious to implement Tang/Xiong’s first carrier using Sengupta’s known fully overlapping NR/LTE carrier configuration to permit the first carrier to be associated with the second RAT as well as the first RAT while enabling known multi-RAT spectrum sharing.
Regarding claim 3, Tang/Xiong discloses the subject matter of claim 1 but does not expressly disclose “wherein a multi-RAT shared spectrum includes the first frequency carrier..” Sengupta ¶[0007] discloses spectrum sharing between NR and LTE in the same licensed or unlicensed band and expressly describes fully or partially overlapping NR and LTE component carriers. That disclosure teaches a multi-RAT shared spectrum that includes a carrier used by the two RATs. It would have been obvious to use Sengupta’s shared-spectrum carrier arrangement for Tang/Xiong’s first carrier to obtain the known spectral-efficiency benefit of NR/LTE spectrum sharing.
Regarding claim 18, Tang/Xiong discloses the subject matter of claim 17 but does not expressly disclose “wherein a multi-RAT shared spectrum includes the first frequency carrier.” Sengupta ¶[0007] discloses NR/LTE spectrum sharing in the same band, including fully or partially overlapping component carriers. Thus Sengupta teaches the additional multi-RAT shared-spectrum limitation. It would have been obvious to use that known shared-spectrum arrangement with Tang/Xiong’s transmitter for the same efficient spectrum-utilization reason.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tang in view of Xiong and further in view of Talarico et al. (US 2019/0372719 A1).
Regarding claim 10, Tang/Xiong discloses the subject matter of claim 9, and Tang discloses a frequency-hopping field in DCI, but Reference A does not expressly characterize the recited parameter as “coverage enhancement information” in the manner required by “wherein the coverage enhancement information indicates at least one of: a transport block (TB) scaling parameter, a frequency hopping parameter, a repetition parameter, or a TTI over multiple slots parameter..” Reference C, Talarico et al. (US 2019/0372719 A1; “Talarico”), expressly discloses DCI fields added for Wideband Coverage Enhancement (WCE): the published description at the passage corresponding to lines 1257-1259 teaches a repetition-number field carrying PDSCH repetition levels and/or TBS scaling, and the passages corresponding to lines 1284 and 1313-1314 teach joint indication of repetition and TBS-scaling levels for WCE. Talarico therefore directly teaches both a repetition parameter and a TB-scaling parameter as coverage-enhancement information. It would have been obvious to include those known WCE parameters in Tang/Xiong’s scheduling information to improve coverage/reliability using the very function for which Talarico teaches them.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tang in view of Xiong and further in view of Lee et al. (WO 2020/154380 A1).
Regarding claim 14, Tang discloses the search-space configuration of claim 13 but does not expressly identify the configured search space as one of the two types recited in “wherein the search space is a common search space or a user equipment (UE) specific search space..” Reference C, Lee et al. (WO 2020/154380 A1; “Lee”), ¶[0054] expressly teaches that a CORESET may have multiple search spaces and specifically identifies “common search space” and “UE-specific search space.” It would have been obvious to use either of those known NR PDCCH search-space types for Tang’s configured first-stage DCI monitoring because Lee teaches those as standard alternatives associated with a CORESET.
Claims 31-33 and 45 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tang in view of Xiong and further in view of Lee.
Regarding claim 31, Tang/Xiong discloses the subject matter of claim 30 and Tang carries the first-stage DCI on PDCCH, but Reference A does not expressly disclose “wherein the first message is multiplexed in the at least one transmission..” Reference C, Lee et al. (WO 2020/154380 A1; “Lee”), ¶[0059] expressly teaches multiple PDCCHs multiplexed in a time-division-multiplexing (TDM) manner before DFT, followed by resource mapping and transmission in the same DFT-s-OFDM symbol; ¶[0060] expressly teaches multiple PDCCHs within the same CORESET multiplexed in TDM; and ¶[0061] and Fig. 2 illustrate that PDCCH multiplexing process. Using Tang’s first-stage-DCI PDCCH as one of Lee’s multiplexed PDCCHs therefore makes the first message multiplexed in the PDCCH transmission. It would have been obvious to use Lee’s known PDCCH multiplexing to efficiently map multiple control-channel transmissions into CORESET resources.
Regarding claim 32, Tang/Xiong discloses the subject matter of claim 25 but does not expressly disclose “wherein receiving the first message comprises: receiving multiplexed information, wherein the multiplexed information includes the first message..” Lee et al. (WO 2020/154380 A1; “Lee”), ¶¶[0059]-[0061] and Fig. 2 disclose receiving/transmitting multiple PDCCHs that have been multiplexed in TDM within CORESET resources. Tang’s first-stage DCI is carried by PDCCH; therefore, when that PDCCH is one of Lee’s multiplexed PDCCHs, the received multiplexed control information includes the claimed first message. It would have been obvious to combine the teachings for the same efficient control-resource mapping rationale stated for claim 31.
Regarding claim 33, the Tang/Xiong/Lee combination discloses claim 32 and Lee further discloses “wherein the multiplexed information includes a synchronization signal block (SSB) transmission, a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) transmission, or a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) transmission.” through the PDCCH alternative. Lee ¶¶[0059]-[0061] and Fig. 2 expressly identify the multiplexed items as physical downlink control channels (PDCCHs). Since claim 33 requires only one listed alternative, the multiplexed PDCCH transmission directly satisfies the limitation.
Regarding claim 45, Tang/Xiong discloses the subject matter of claim 40 and Tang transmits the first-stage DCI on PDCCH, but Reference A does not expressly disclose “wherein transmitting the first message comprises: transmitting multiplexed information, wherein the multiplexed information includes the first message..” Reference C, Lee et al. (WO 2020/154380 A1; “Lee”), ¶[0059] teaches multiplexing multiple PDCCHs in TDM and transmitting them after resource mapping; ¶[0060] teaches multiple PDCCHs multiplexed within a CORESET; and ¶[0061] and Fig. 2 illustrate the multiplexing process. Using Tang’s first-stage-DCI PDCCH as one of Lee’s multiplexed PDCCHs therefore transmits multiplexed information that includes the first message. It would have been obvious to use Lee’s known multiplexing to efficiently allocate and transmit multiple control-channel resources.
Claims 34 and 35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tang in view of Xiong and further in view of Jayasinghe et al. (EP 3 556 030 A1).
Regarding claim 34, Tang/Xiong discloses the subject matter of claim 25 but does not expressly disclose “wherein the first message and the second message are associated with a same channel coding scheme..” Jayasinghe ¶[0064] and Fig. 8 disclose first-stage control information that is polar encoded and state that a similar polar encoding is performed for the second-stage control information. Both stages therefore use the same polar channel-coding scheme. It would have been obvious to apply Jayasinghe’s known common polar coding to Tang’s two DCI stages to provide a compatible, known control-channel coding implementation.
Regarding claim 35, Tang/Xiong discloses the subject matter of claim 25 but does not expressly set forth the channel-coding association recited in “wherein the first message is associated with a first channel coding scheme and the second message is associated with a second channel coding scheme..” Jayasinghe ¶[0064] and Fig. 8 disclose polar encoding of the first-stage control information and a separate polar-encoding operation for the second-stage control information. The first-stage polar coding is a first channel-coding scheme associated with the first message and the second-stage polar coding is a second channel-coding scheme associated with the second message. Claim 35 does not require the schemes to be different. It would have been obvious to use those known coding operations for Tang’s respective DCI stages to obtain reliable encoded control signaling.
Claim 36 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tang in view of Xiong and further in view of Manolakos et al. (US 2021/0067205 A1).
Regarding claim 36, Tang/Xiong discloses different first and second frequency carriers but does not expressly disclose “wherein the second frequency carrier is associated with a first frequency range that is equal to or greater than a second frequency range associated with the first frequency carrier..” Reference C, Manolakos et al. (US 2021/0067205 A1; “Manolakos”), Fig. 2 and the accompanying description of first carrier 205 and second carrier 210 disclose the first carrier in a lower frequency range such as FR1 and the second carrier in a higher frequency range such as FR2, FR3, or FR4; Manolakos also discloses both carriers in the same frequency range with the first nearer the lower-frequency end and the second nearer the higher-frequency end. Those alternatives respectively teach a second-carrier frequency range greater than, or equal to, the first-carrier frequency range. It would have been obvious to implement Tang/Xiong’s first and second carriers according to Manolakos’s known cross-carrier frequency-range arrangements to obtain the known flexibility of cross-carrier control across same-range or higher-range carriers.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANGEL T BROCKMAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5664. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 6:00AM-4:30 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, Charles Jiang can be reached at 571-270-7191. 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.
/ANGEL T BROCKMAN/Examiner, Art Unit 2412
Prosecution Insights