CTNF 18/354,408 CTNF 80143 DETAILED ACTION This Office Action is in response to the Request for Continued Examination filed 5/1/2026. Claims 5 and 19 have been canceled. Claims 1-4, 6-18, and 20-30 are currently pending in the application. Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot because they do not apply to the new grounds of rejection made in view of newly cited Si et al. (U.S. Publication US 2025/0294539 A1). Due to the claim amendments, the previous rejection of claim 20 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) has been withdrawn. Independent claims 1, 11, 16, and 25 have been amended to include a new limitation stating “effective available resources of the SBFD frequency resources are determined by an overlap of a corresponding sub-band of the one or more sub-bands and the BWP associated with the UE, the corresponding sub-band extending beyond the BWP”. Previously cited Lei et al. (U.S. Publication US 2025/0097918 A1) discloses an equivalent of effective available resources of the SBFD frequency resources are determined by an overlap of a corresponding sub-band of the one or more sub-bands and the BWP associated with the UE (See paragraph 69 and Figure 8 of Lei et al. for reference to the overlapped part of the candidate frequency domain resources, i.e. the BWP in the frequency domain resource configuration, and an allocated sub-band being used as final effective resources, as illustrated by the overlap shown in Figure 8). However, Lei et al. does not specifically disclose an embodiment wherein the corresponding sub-band extends beyond the BWP, as now claimed. Newly cited Si et al. (U.S. Publication US 2025/0294539 A1) discloses embodiments of determining overlapping frequency domain resources allocated for use, wherein the overlap is between a BWP and a target sub-band, including an embodiment wherein the target sub-band extends beyond the BWP, i.e. as shown in Figure 2 the bandwidth of the target sub-band extends beyond the bandwidth of BWP2 and it is determined that the overlapping PRBs between BWP2 and the target sub-band are used as resource in a sub-band full-duplex mode (See paragraphs 210-212, paragraphs 226-227 and Figure 2). Determining to use overlapped resources in a case where a sub-band extends beyond an overlapped BWP has the advantage of allowing the most potential resources to be used while operating in sub-band full-duplex mode. Thus, based on these teachings of Si et al. and the previously cited teachings of Lei et al., it is believed that the amended claim limitations are obvious in view of the prior art. Please refer to the rejections below for further detail. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1-4, 7-11, 16-18, and 21-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lei (U.S. Publication US 2025/0097918 A1) in view of Si et al. (U.S. Publication US 2025/0294539 A1) . With respect to claims 1 and 11 , Lei discloses a network entity configured for wireless communication, comprising: one or more memories; and one or more processors coupled to the one or more memories, the one or more processors being configured to perform a method for wireless communication (See paragraphs 31-32, paragraphs 76-77, paragraph 83, and Figures 3, 10, and 11 of Lei for reference to a network device comprising a memory and processing circuitry coupled to the memory performing a method of wireless communication with a terminal device) . Lei also discloses configuring sub-band full duplex (SBFD) frequency resources for one or more sub-bands based on at least one of a size of the one or more sub-bands or a size of a bandwidth part (BWP) associated with a user equipment (UE), wherein effective available resources of the SBFD frequency resources are determined by an overlap of a corresponding sub-band of the one or more sub-bands and the BWP associated with the UE (See paragraph 69 and Figure 8 of Lei for reference to configuring sub-band full-duplex resources, i.e. RBGs, in the frequency domain based on the size of sub-bands and the size of a BWP used by a terminal device, which is a UE, and for reference to the overlapped part of the candidate frequency domain resources, i.e. the BWP in the frequency domain resource configuration, and an allocated sub-band being used as final effective resources, as illustrated by the overlap shown in Figure 8) . Lei further discloses providing scheduling information to the UE, wherein the scheduling information includes a configuration of the SBFD frequency resources based on at least one of the size of the one or more sub-bands or the size of the BWP associated with the UE (See paragraphs 31-32, paragraph 69, and Figures 3 and 8 of Lei for reference to the network device transmitting first configuration information to the terminal device regarding the configuration of SBFD RBGs, i.e. based on the size of sub-band 2 and the BWP of the terminal device as illustrated in Figure 8, wherein the first configuration information schedules data transmission between the terminal device and the network device on the configured resources) . Although Lei does disclose the effective available resources being determined by the claimed overlap (See paragraph 69 and Figure 8 of Lei) , Lei does not specifically the corresponding sub-band extending beyond the BWP. However, Si et al., in the field of communications, discloses embodiments of determining overlapping frequency domain resources allocated for use, wherein the overlap is between a BWP and a target sub-band, including an embodiment wherein the target sub-band extends beyond the BWP, i.e., as shown in Figure 2, the bandwidth of the target sub-band extends beyond the bandwidth of BWP2 and it is determined that the overlapping PRBs between BWP2 and the target sub-band are used as resource in a sub-band full-duplex mode (See paragraphs 210-212, paragraphs 226-227 and Figure 2) . Determining to use overlapped resources in a case where a sub-band extends beyond an overlapped BWP has the advantage of allowing the most potential resources to be used while operating in sub-band full-duplex mode. Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing, when presented with the work of Si et al., to combine Determining to use overlapped resources in a case where a sub-band extends beyond an overlapped BWP, as suggested by Si et al., within the system and method of Lei with the motivation being to allow the most potential resources to be used while operating in sub-band full-duplex mode. With respect to claims 16 and 25 , Lei discloses a user equipment (UE), comprising: one or more memories; and one or more processors coupled to the one or more memories, wherein the one or more processors are configured to perform a method for wireless communications (See paragraphs 31-32, paragraphs 72-73, paragraph 83, and Figures 3, 9, and 11 of Lei for reference to a terminal device, which is a UE, comprising a memory and processing circuitry coupled to the memory performing a method of wireless communication with a network device) . Lei also discloses receiving scheduling information that includes a configuration of sub-band full duplex (SBFD) frequency resources for one or more sub-bands, wherein the configuration is based on a size of the one or more sub-bands and a size of a bandwidth part (BWP) associated with the UE, and wherein effective available resources of the SBFD frequency resources are determined by an overlap of a corresponding sub-band of the one or more sub-bands and the BWP associated with the UE (See paragraphs 31-32, paragraph 69, and Figures 3 and 8 of Lei for reference to the terminal device receiving first configuration information from the network device regarding the configuration of sub-band full-duplex RBGs, i.e. RBGs 3-5, based on the size of sub-band 2 and a BWP of the terminal device as illustrated in Figure 8, wherein the first configuration information schedules data transmission between the terminal device and the network device on the configured resources, and for reference to the overlapped part of the candidate frequency domain resources, i.e. the BWP in the frequency domain resource configuration, and an allocated sub-band being used as final effective resources, as illustrated by the overlap shown in Figure 8) . Lei further discloses communicating with a network via the SBFD frequency resources based on the scheduling information (See paragraphs 46-47 and Figure 3 of Lei et al. for reference to communicating in the uplink and/or downlink between the terminal device and the network device base on the first configuration information) . Although Lei does disclose the effective available resources being determined by the claimed overlap (See paragraph 69 and Figure 8 of Lei) , Lei does not specifically the corresponding sub-band extending beyond the BWP. However, Si et al., in the field of communications, discloses embodiments of determining overlapping frequency domain resources allocated for use, wherein the overlap is between a BWP and a target sub-band, including an embodiment wherein the target sub-band extends beyond the BWP, i.e., as shown in Figure 2, the bandwidth of the target sub-band extends beyond the bandwidth of BWP2 and it is determined that the overlapping PRBs between BWP2 and the target sub-band are used as resource in a sub-band full-duplex mode (See paragraphs 210-212, paragraphs 226-227 and Figure 2) . Determining to use overlapped resources in a case where a sub-band extends beyond an overlapped BWP has the advantage of allowing the most potential resources to be used while operating in sub-band full-duplex mode. Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing, when presented with the work of Si et al., to combine Determining to use overlapped resources in a case where a sub-band extends beyond an overlapped BWP, as suggested by Si et al., within the system and method of Lei with the motivation being to allow the most potential resources to be used while operating in sub-band full-duplex mode. With respect to claims 2 and 17 , Lei discloses wherein the SBFD frequency resources configured for the one or more sub-bands includes at least two resource block groups (RBGs) within each of the one or more sub-bands (See paragraph 27, paragraph 69, and Figure 8 of Lei for reference to different RBG sizes being selected according to bandwidth of different BWPs, wherein the size of RBGs 3-5 are different as illustrated by the vertical line shaded part of Figure 8) . With respect to claims 3 and 18 , Lei discloses wherein the at least two RBGs within each of the one or more sub-bands include a first sub-band RBG and a last sub-band RBG, and wherein the RBG size of RBGs between the first sub-band RBG and the last sub-band RBG each have a different RBG size than the first sub-band RBG and the last sub-band RBG (See paragraph 69 and Figure 8 of Lei for reference to the size of the first RBG3 and last RBG5 being different that the size of RBG4 that is between the first and last RBG) . With respect to claims 4 and 26 , Lei discloses wherein the processor is configured to configure the SBFD frequency resources so that a resource block group (RBG) size of SBFD symbols is different than an RBG size of non-SBFD symbols (See paragraph 69 and Figure 8 of Lei for reference to the RBG size of non-SBFD symbols as illustrated on the left side of Figure 8 is different than the RBG size of SBFD symbols for RBG3 and RBG5 as illustrated on the right side of Figure 8) . With respect to claims 7 and 21 , Lei discloses wherein the SBFD frequency resources configured for the one or more sub-bands includes a number of bits allocated for a frequency domain resource assignment (FDRA) in an SBFD slot based on the effective available resources in the SBFD slot (See paragraphs 26-27, paragraph 69, and Figure 8 of Lei for reference to the size of the RBGs for SBFD slots, which equates to the number of bits carried in each RBG, being based on the overlap between sub-band and the BWP of the terminal device, as illustrated in Figure 8) . With respect to claims 8 and 22 , Lei discloses wherein the SBFD frequency resources configured for the one or more sub-bands includes a configuration across a single sub-band, and wherein the effective available resources in the SBFD slot are determined by an overlap of the single sub-band and the BWP associated with the UE (See paragraph 69 and Figure 8 of Lei for reference to an embodiment wherein a single sub-band 2 is configured with the available SBFD resources being determined according to the overlap of sub-band 2 and the BWP of the UE as illustrated in Figure 8) . With respect to claims 9 and 23 , Lei discloses wherein the SBFD frequency resources configured for the one or more sub-bands includes a configuration across multiple non-continuous sub-bands, and wherein the effective available resources in the SBFD slot are determined by an overlap of the multiple non-continuous sub-bands and the BWP associated with the UE (See paragraph 61 and Figure 7 of Lei for reference to an embodiment wherein a multiple non-continuous sub-bands 0 and 1 are configured with the available SBFD resources being determined according to the overlap of sub-bands 0 and 1 and the BWP of the UE as illustrated in Figure 7) . With respect to claims 10 and 24 , Lei discloses wherein the scheduling information includes at least one downlink control information (DCI) bitfield indicating one or more sub-bands for data scheduling in an SBFD slot (See paragraphs 31-34, paragraph 69, and Figure 3 and 8 of Lei for reference to the first configuration information being carrier in DCI to indicate the sub-band for the SBFD slot) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 6, 14-15, 20, and 29-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lei et al. in view of Si et al., and in further view of Nemeth et al. (U.S. Publication US 2025/0203583 A1) . With respect to claims 6 and 20 , although Lei et al. does disclose wherein at least one of the SBFD frequency resources is not aligned with the one or more sub-bands (See paragraph 69 and Figure 8 of Lei for reference to configuring sub-band full-duplex resources, i.e. RBGs, in the frequency domain based on the size of sub-bands and the size of a BWP used by a terminal device, which is a UE, wherein the sub-band full-duplex RBGs 3-5 are not aligned with the sub-band 2, as illustrated in Figure 8) , and although Lei also discloses embodiments wherein first and last RBGs have different sizes than a RBG between the first and last RBGs (See paragraph 69 and Figure 8 of Lei) , Lei does not specifically disclose wherein the SBFD frequency resources configured for the one or more sub-bands includes at least two precoding resource block groups (PRGs) within each of the one or more sub-bands having a different PRG size and wherein the at least two PRGs within each of the one or more sub-bands include a first sub-band PRG and a last sub-band PRG, and wherein the PRG size of the first sub-band PRG is different than the PRG size of the last sub-band PRG. However, Nemeth et al., in the field of communications, discloses communicating over SBFD slots/symbols using PRGs having different sizes, i.e. 2PRBs and 4PRBs, corresponding to the size of RBGs of the SBFD slots/symbols including embodiments wherein the first and last RBGs have different sizes (See paragraph 10, paragraphs 46-49, and Figure 4 of Nemeth et al.) . Based on the teachings of Nemeth et al. that PRG size may be 2PRBs and 4PRBs, and that RBG sizes used also include 2PRBs and 4PRBs, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing, that a PRG size of 2PRBs may be used for RBGs having the same size of 2PRBs and that a PRG size of 4PRBs may be used for RBGs having the same size of 4PRBs Using PRGs having different sizes has the advantage of allowing for optimal resource utilization for SBFD slots having RBGs of different sizes. Nemeth et al. also teaches SBFD allocation including fractional RBGs at the BWP edges such that the first and last RBGs at the edge of the BWP may have different sizes than other RBGs of the BWP (See Figure 4 of Nemeth et al.) . Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing, when presented with the work of Nemeth et al., to combine using PRGs having different sizes, as suggested by Nemeth et al., within the system and method of Lei with the motivation being to allow optimal resource utilization for SBFD slots having RBGs of different sizes. With respect to claims 14 and 29 , Lei does not disclose wherein the scheduling information further comprises an indication of a static bundling of precoding resource block group (PRG) sizes With respect to claims 15 and 30 , Lei does not disclose wherein the scheduling information further comprises an indication of a dynamic bundling of precoding resource block group (PRG) sizes. With further respect to claims 14-15 and 29-30 , Nemeth et al. also discloses an embodiment wherein the bundle size of the PRG may be set semi-statically (See paragraph 48 of Nemeth) and an embodiment wherein the bundle size of the PRG may be set dynamically (See paragraph 49 of Nemeth) . Using PRGs having different sizes configured semi-statically or dynamically has the advantage of allowing for optimal resource utilization for SBFD slots. Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing, when presented with the work of Nemeth et al., to combine using PRGs having different sizes configured semi-statically or dynamically, as suggested by Nemeth et al., within the system and method of Lei with the motivation being to allow optimal resource utilization for SBFD slots . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 12-13 and 27-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lei in view of Si et al., and in further view of Xiong et al. (U.S. Publication US 2023/0224880 A1) . With respect to claims 12 and 27 , although Lei does disclose the configuration of RBGs having different RBG sizes including different RBG sizes for SBFD and non-SBFD slots (See paragraph 27, paragraph 69, and the left and right sides Figure 8 of Lei) , Lei does not specifically disclose referencing a first table for determining resource block group (RBG) sizes for an SBFD slot; and referencing a second table for determining RBG sizes for a non-SBFD slot. With respect to claims 13 and 28 , although Lei does disclose the configuration of RBGs having different RBG sizes including different RBG sizes for SBFD and non-SBFD slots (See paragraph 27, paragraph 69, and the left and right sides Figure 8 of Lei) , Lei does not specifically disclose wherein the configuration of the SBFD resources includes referencing a same table for determining resource block group (RBG) sizes for an SBFD slot and RBG sizes for a non-SBFD slot. With further respect to claims 12-13 and 27-28 , Xiong et al., in the field of communications, discloses resource mapping using multiple configuration tables, i.e. for RBG size configuration 1 and configuration 2 (See paragraph 16, paragraph 140, and Table 1 of Xiong et al.) . The use of either the same configuration table or different configuration tables 1 and 2 for SBFD slots and non-SBFD slots is a design choice based on the determined optimal configuration for SBFD slots and non-SBFD slots. Thus, it would have been an obvious design choice for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to use the same RBG size configuration table or different RBG size configuration tables for SBFD slots and non-SBFD slots based on whether the same or different optimal configuration 1 or 2 is determined for the SBFD slots and non-SBFD slots. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jason E Mattis whose telephone number is (571)272-3154. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00am-4:30pm. 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, Huy Vu can be reached at 571-2723155. 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. /JASON E MATTIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2461 Application/Control Number: 18/354,408 Page 2 Art Unit: 2461 Application/Control Number: 18/354,408 Page 3 Art Unit: 2461 Application/Control Number: 18/354,408 Page 4 Art Unit: 2461 Application/Control Number: 18/354,408 Page 5 Art Unit: 2461 Application/Control Number: 18/354,408 Page 6 Art Unit: 2461 Application/Control Number: 18/354,408 Page 7 Art Unit: 2461 Application/Control Number: 18/354,408 Page 8 Art Unit: 2461 Application/Control Number: 18/354,408 Page 9 Art Unit: 2461 Application/Control Number: 18/354,408 Page 10 Art Unit: 2461 Application/Control Number: 18/354,408 Page 11 Art Unit: 2461 Application/Control Number: 18/354,408 Page 12 Art Unit: 2461
Prosecution Insights