DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
2. Acknowledgment is made of the present application claims the benefits of U.S. Provisional Application Serial No. 63/380,960, entitled "MCS SELECTION IN SBFD" and filed on October 26, 2022.
Examiner's Notes
3. Applicant is encouraged to submit a written authorization for Internet communications (PTO/SB/439, http://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/sb0439.pdf) in the instant patent application to authorize the examiner to communicate with the applicant via email. The authorization will allow the examiner to better practice compact prosecution. The written authorization can be submitted via one of the following methods only: (1) Central Fax which can be found in the Conclusion section of this Office action; (2) regular postal mail; (3) EFS WEB; or (4) the service window on the Alexandria campus. EFS web is the recommended way to submit the form since this allows the form to be entered into the file wrapper within the same day (system dependent). Written authorization submitted via other methods, such as direct fax to the examiner or email, will not be accepted. See MPEP § 502.03.
Application Status
4. Acknowledgment is made of Applicant’s submission of the application on October 11, 2023. Claims 1-20 are pending. This communication is considered fully responsive and sets forth below.
Claim Objections
5. Claims 16 and 19 are objected to under 37 CFR 1.75(c) because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 16, it recites, “wherein to receive a slot configuration indicating the one or more partitioned slots and the one or more non-partitioned slots, the at least one processor is further configured to:
receive a slot configuration indicating the one or more partitioned slots and the one or more non-partitioned slots.”
Apparently, the limitation of “receive a slot configuration indicating the one or more partitioned slots and the one or more non-partitioned slots” appears twice as indicated in italics above.
A proper correction is anticipated to make the claim language flows better.
Same rationale applies to the usage of the term “determine a transport block (TB) size for the one or more data channels based on one of the first MCS or the second MCS” in claim 19, as it appears twice in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
6. 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
7. Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory matter.
Regarding claim 20, it recites, “A computer-readable medium storing computer executable code for wireless communication of a user equipment (UE), comprising code to…”
Apparently, it claims “computer readable medium”. This claim is transitory signals per se, since there is no record showing the "computer readable medium" is a non-transitory storage medium in the claims or in the specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
8. 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 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.
9. 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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.
10. Claims 1, 5, 12, 16, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yang et al. (US 2022/0104180).
Regarding claim 1, Yang et al. teach the method of wireless communication of a user equipment (UE) (paragraph [0060] lines 1-14; Examiner’s Notes: UE 402 depicted in FIG. 4 of the prior art teaches the limitation of “a user equipment (UE)” in the instant application), comprising:
receiving scheduling of one or more data channels for transmission on a set of slots (paragraphs [0050] lines 1–22 & [0055] lines 11–17; Examiner’s Notes: the slots depicted in FIG. 2 of the prior art teaches the limitation of “a set of slots;”
in fact, the device, e.g., UE 402 depicted in FIG. 4, receiving scheduling of data transmission on the slots in the prior art teaches the limitation of “receiving scheduling of one or more data channels for transmission on a set of slots” in the instant application);
determining the set of slots including one or more partitioned slots and one or more non-partitioned slots (paragraphs [0071] lines 1–9 & [0081] lines 9–23; Examiner’s Notes: the slots within the non-partitioned resource, e.g., communication resource pool 820 as depicted in FIG. 8 and 1208 as depicted in FIG. 12, of the prior art teaches the limitation of “non-partitioned slots;”
the slots within the discovery resource pool 806 partitioned into part 1 and part 2, as depicted in FIG. 8, of the prior art teaches the limitation of “partitioned slots;”
in fact, determining the slots, such as the slots within the discovery resource pool 806 partitioned into part 1 and part 2, and the slots within the non-partitioned resource, e.g., communication resource pool 820 as illustrated in FIG. 8, of the prior art teaches the limitation of “determining the set of slots including one or more partitioned slots and one or more non-partitioned slots” in the instant application);
receiving an indication of a first modulation and coding scheme (MCS) for the non-partitioned slots and an indication of a second MCS for the partitioned slots (paragraph [0056] lines 1–9; Examiner’s Notes: an appropriate coding and modulation scheme for the slots within the discovery resource pool 806, as illustrated in FIG. 8 in the prior art teaches the limitations of “a first modulation and coding scheme (MCS);” an appropriate coding and modulation scheme for the slots within the communication resource pool 820, as illustrated in FIG. 8 in the prior art teaches the limitations of “a second MCS;”
in fact, the device, e.g., UE 402 depicted in FIG. 4, receiving information/indication to select the appropriate coding and modulation schemes for the slots within the discovery resource pool 806 partitioned into part 1 and part 2, and the slots within the non-partitioned resource, e.g., communication resource pool 820 as illustrated in FIG. 8, of the prior art teaches the limitation of “receiving an indication of a first modulation and coding scheme (MCS) for the non-partitioned slots and an indication of a second MCS for the partitioned slots” in the instant application); and
transmitting a first part of the one or more data channels on the one or more non- partitioned slots according to the first MCS and a second part of the one or more data channels on the one or more partitioned slots according to the second MCS (paragraphs [0071] lines 1–9 & [0056] lines 1–9; Examiner’s Notes: transmitting the data channels on the slots within the non-partitioned resource, e.g., communication resource pool 820, and the slots within the discovery resource pool 806 partitioned into part 1 and part 2, as illustrated in FIG. 8, according to the appropriate coding and modulation scheme in the prior art teaches the limitation of “transmitting a first part of the one or more data channels on the one or more non- partitioned slots according to the first MCS and a second part of the one or more data channels on the one or more partitioned slots according to the second MCS” in the instant application).
Regarding claim 5, Yang et al. teach the method, further comprising: receiving a slot configuration indicating the one or more partitioned slots and the one or more non-partitioned slots (paragraphs [0071] lines 1–9 & [0081] lines 9–23; Examiner’s Notes: the configuration for slot in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a slot configuration;”
in fact, receiving the configuration regards to the slots, such as the slots within the discovery resource pool 806 partitioned into part 1 and part 2, and the slots within the non-partitioned resource, e.g., communication resource pool 820 as illustrated in FIG. 8, of the prior art teaches the limitation of “receiving a slot configuration indicating the one or more partitioned slots and the one or more non-partitioned slots” in the instant application).
Regarding claim 12, Yang et al. teach the apparatus for wireless communication, the apparatus being a user equipment (UE) (paragraphs [0054] lines 1–9 & [0060] lines 1-14; Examiner’s Notes: device/UE, e.g., 350 depicted in FIG. 3 and 402 depicted in FIG. 4, in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a user equipment (UE)” in the instant application), comprising:
a memory (paragraph [0054] lines 1–9; Examiner’s Notes: memory 360 in device/UE 350 depicted in FIG. 3 of the prior art teaches the limitation of “a memory” in the instant application); and
at least one processor coupled to the memory and configured to (paragraph [0054] lines 1–9; Examiner’s Notes: controller/processor 359 in device/UE 350 depicted in FIG. 3 of the prior art teaches the limitation of “one processor” in the instant application):
receive scheduling of one or more data channels for transmission on a set of slots (paragraphs [0050] lines 1–22 & [0055] lines 11–17; Examiner’s Notes: the slots depicted in FIG. 2 of the prior art teaches the limitation of “a set of slots;”
in fact, the device, e.g., UE 402 depicted in FIG. 4, receiving scheduling of data transmission on the slots in the prior art teaches the limitation of “receive scheduling of one or more data channels for transmission on a set of slots” in the instant application);
determine the set of slots including one or more partitioned slots and one or more non-partitioned slots (paragraphs [0071] lines 1–9 & [0081] lines 9–23; Examiner’s Notes: the slots within the non-partitioned resource, e.g., communication resource pool 820 as depicted in FIG. 8 and 1208 as depicted in FIG. 12, of the prior art teaches the limitation of “non-partitioned slots;”
the slots within the discovery resource pool 806 partitioned into part 1 and part 2, as depicted in FIG. 8, of the prior art teaches the limitation of “partitioned slots;”
in fact, determining the slots, such as the slots within the discovery resource pool 806 partitioned into part 1 and part 2, and the slots within the non-partitioned resource, e.g., communication resource pool 820 as illustrated in FIG. 8, of the prior art teaches the limitation of “determine the set of slots including one or more partitioned slots and one or more non-partitioned slots” in the instant application);
receive an indication of a first modulation and coding scheme (MCS) for the non-partitioned slots and an indication of a second MCS for the partitioned slots (paragraph [0056] lines 1–9; Examiner’s Notes: an appropriate coding and modulation scheme for the slots within the discovery resource pool 806, as illustrated in FIG. 8 in the prior art teaches the limitations of “a first modulation and coding scheme (MCS);” an appropriate coding and modulation scheme for the slots within the communication resource pool 820, as illustrated in FIG. 8 in the prior art teaches the limitations of “a second MCS;”
in fact, the device, e.g., UE 402 depicted in FIG. 4, receiving information/indication to select the appropriate coding and modulation schemes for the slots within the discovery resource pool 806 partitioned into part 1 and part 2, and the slots within the non-partitioned resource, e.g., communication resource pool 820 as illustrated in FIG. 8, of the prior art teaches the limitation of “receive an indication of a first modulation and coding scheme (MCS) for the non-partitioned slots and an indication of a second MCS for the partitioned slots” in the instant application); and
transmit a first part of the one or more data channels on the one or more non- partitioned slots according to the first MCS and a second part of the one or more data channels on the one or more partitioned slots according to the second MCS (paragraphs [0071] lines 1–9 & [0056] lines 1–9; Examiner’s Notes: transmitting the data channels on the slots within the non-partitioned resource, e.g., communication resource pool 820, and the slots within the discovery resource pool 806 partitioned into part 1 and part 2, as illustrated in FIG. 8, according to the appropriate coding and modulation scheme in the prior art teaches the limitation of “transmit a first part of the one or more data channels on the one or more non- partitioned slots according to the first MCS and a second part of the one or more data channels on the one or more partitioned slots according to the second MCS” in the instant application).
Regarding claim 16, Yang et al. further teach the apparatus, wherein to receive a slot configuration indicating the one or more partitioned slots and the one or more non-partitioned slots (paragraphs [0071] lines 1–9 & [0081] lines 9–23; Examiner’s Notes: the configuration for slot in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a slot configuration;”
in fact, receiving the configuration regards to the slots, such as the slots within the discovery resource pool 806 partitioned into part 1 and part 2, and the slots within the non-partitioned resource, e.g., communication resource pool 820 as illustrated in FIG. 8, of the prior art teaches the limitation of “receive a slot configuration indicating the one or more partitioned slots and the one or more non-partitioned slots” in the instant application).
Regarding claim 20, Yang et al. teach the computer-readable medium storing computer executable code for wireless communication of a user equipment (UE) (paragraphs [0054] lines 1–9 & [0060] lines 1-14; Examiner’s Notes: device/UE, e.g., 350 depicted in FIG. 3 and 402 depicted in FIG. 4, in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a user equipment (UE);” memory 360 in device/UE 350 depicted in FIG. 3 of the prior art teaches the limitation of “computer-readable medium” in the instant application), comprising code to:
receive scheduling of one or more data channels for transmission on a set of slots (paragraphs [0050] lines 1–22 & [0055] lines 11–17; Examiner’s Notes: the slots depicted in FIG. 2 of the prior art teaches the limitation of “a set of slots;”
in fact, the device, e.g., UE 402 depicted in FIG. 4, receiving scheduling of data transmission on the slots in the prior art teaches the limitation of “receive scheduling of one or more data channels for transmission on a set of slots” in the instant application);
determine the set of slots including one or more partitioned slots and one or more non-partitioned slots (paragraphs [0071] lines 1–9 & [0081] lines 9–23; Examiner’s Notes: the slots within the non-partitioned resource, e.g., communication resource pool 820 as depicted in FIG. 8 and 1208 as depicted in FIG. 12, of the prior art teaches the limitation of “non-partitioned slots;”
the slots within the discovery resource pool 806 partitioned into part 1 and part 2, as depicted in FIG. 8, of the prior art teaches the limitation of “partitioned slots;”
in fact, determining the slots, such as the slots within the discovery resource pool 806 partitioned into part 1 and part 2, and the slots within the non-partitioned resource, e.g., communication resource pool 820 as illustrated in FIG. 8, of the prior art teaches the limitation of “determine the set of slots including one or more partitioned slots and one or more non-partitioned slots” in the instant application);
receive an indication of a first modulation and coding scheme (MCS) for the non-partitioned slots and an indication of a second MCS for the partitioned slots (paragraph [0056] lines 1–9; Examiner’s Notes: an appropriate coding and modulation scheme for the slots within the discovery resource pool 806, as illustrated in FIG. 8 in the prior art teaches the limitations of “a first modulation and coding scheme (MCS);” an appropriate coding and modulation scheme for the slots within the communication resource pool 820, as illustrated in FIG. 8 in the prior art teaches the limitations of “a second MCS;”
in fact, the device, e.g., UE 402 depicted in FIG. 4, receiving information/indication to select the appropriate coding and modulation schemes for the slots within the discovery resource pool 806 partitioned into part 1 and part 2, and the slots within the non-partitioned resource, e.g., communication resource pool 820 as illustrated in FIG. 8, of the prior art teaches the limitation of “receive an indication of a first modulation and coding scheme (MCS) for the non-partitioned slots and an indication of a second MCS for the partitioned slots” in the instant application); and
transmit a first part of the one or more data channels on the one or more non- partitioned slots according to the first MCS and a second part of the one or more data channels on the one or more partitioned slots according to the second MCS (paragraphs [0071] lines 1–9 & [0056] lines 1–9; Examiner’s Notes: transmitting the data channels on the slots within the non-partitioned resource, e.g., communication resource pool 820, and the slots within the discovery resource pool 806 partitioned into part 1 and part 2, as illustrated in FIG. 8, according to the appropriate coding and modulation scheme in the prior art teaches the limitation of “transmit a first part of the one or more data channels on the one or more non- partitioned slots according to the first MCS and a second part of the one or more data channels on the one or more partitioned slots according to the second MCS” in the instant application).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
11. 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.
12. Claims 2, 6-11, 13, and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang et al. (US 2022/0104180) in view of Kim et al. (US 2019/0223204).
Regarding claim 2, Yang et al. teach the method without explicitly teaching implementing receiving a first field indicating the first MCS in downlink control information (DCI).
Kim et al. from the same or similar field of endeavor teach implementing fairness of the method, wherein receiving the indication of the first MCS and the indication of the second MCS comprises: receiving a first field indicating the first MCS in downlink control information (DCI) (paragraph [0210] lines 1–24; Examiner’s Notes: the MCS value in the prior art teaches the limitation of “the first MCS;”
In fact, receiving the DCI indicating the MCS value in the prior art teaches the limitation of “receiving a first field indicating the first MCS in downlink control information” in the instant application); and
receiving a second field indicating the second MCS in the DCI (paragraph [0210] lines 8–24; Examiner’s Notes: the varying MCS value in the prior art teaches the limitation of “the second MCS;”
In fact, receiving the DCI indicating a varying MCS value in the prior art teaches the limitation of “receiving a second field indicating the second MCS in the DCI” in the instant application).
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in art to implement the method of Kim et al. in the system of Yang et al.
The motivation for implementing receiving a first field indicating the first MCS in downlink control information (DCI), is to further enhance the mechanism for a UE receiving first physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) and a second PDCCH, wherein a first physical downlink data channel (PDSCH) corresponding to the first PDCCH, and a second PDSCH corresponding to the second PDCCH are transmitted to the UE, when the first PDSCH has a lower decoding priority than the second PDSCH, and the decoding timing of the first PDSCH and the decoding timing of the second PDSCH overlap, the UE decodes the second PDSCH and not the first PDSCH at the decoding timing, and transmits information with respect to the first PDSCH as first ACK/NACK information, and as a reply to the first ACK/NACK information, a third PDCCH not having a corresponding PDSCH is transmitted to the UE.
Regarding claim 6, Yang et al. teach the method without explicitly teaching implementing the bitmap.
Kim et al. from the same or similar field of endeavor teach implementing fairness of the method, wherein the slot configuration comprises a bitmap (paragraph [0179] lines 1–20; Examiner’s Notes: the bitmap regards to the slot parameter/configuration in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein the slot configuration comprises a bitmap” in the instant application).
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in art to implement the method of Kim et al. in the system of Yang et al.
The motivation for implementing the bitmap, is to further enhance the mechanism for a UE receiving first physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) and a second PDCCH, wherein a first physical downlink data channel (PDSCH) corresponding to the first PDCCH, and a second PDSCH corresponding to the second PDCCH are transmitted to the UE, when the first PDSCH has a lower decoding priority than the second PDSCH, and the decoding timing of the first PDSCH and the decoding timing of the second PDSCH overlap, the UE decodes the second PDSCH and not the first PDSCH at the decoding timing, and transmits information with respect to the first PDSCH as first ACK/NACK information, and as a reply to the first ACK/NACK information, a third PDCCH not having a corresponding PDSCH is transmitted to the UE.
Regarding claim 7, Yang et al. teach the method without explicitly teaching implementing a data channel according to a semi-persistent scheduling (SPS).
Kim et al. from the same or similar field of endeavor teach implementing fairness of the method, wherein the one or more data channels comprise one or more of:
a data channel according to a semi-persistent scheduling (SPS),
repetition physical downlink shared channels (PDSCHs),
a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) according to a configured grant (CG), and
a PUSCH according to a dynamic grant (DG) (paragraph [0099] lines 1–15; Examiner’s Notes: the PDSCH according to scheduling information, e.g., a SPS, in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a data channel according to a semi-persistent scheduling (SPS)” in the instant application;
consequently, the PDSCH according to scheduling information, e.g., a SPS, in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein the one or more data channels comprise one or more of:
a data channel according to a semi-persistent scheduling (SPS),
repetition physical downlink shared channels (PDSCHs),
a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) according to a configured grant (CG), and
a PUSCH according to a dynamic grant (DG)” in the instant application as well).
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in art to implement the method of Kim et al. in the system of Yang et al.
The motivation for implementing a data channel according to a semi-persistent scheduling (SPS), is to further enhance the mechanism for a UE receiving first physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) and a second PDCCH, wherein a first physical downlink data channel (PDSCH) corresponding to the first PDCCH, and a second PDSCH corresponding to the second PDCCH are transmitted to the UE, when the first PDSCH has a lower decoding priority than the second PDSCH, and the decoding timing of the first PDSCH and the decoding timing of the second PDSCH overlap, the UE decodes the second PDSCH and not the first PDSCH at the decoding timing, and transmits information with respect to the first PDSCH as first ACK/NACK information, and as a reply to the first ACK/NACK information, a third PDCCH not having a corresponding PDSCH is transmitted to the UE.
Regarding claim 8, Yang et al. teach the method without explicitly teaching determining a transport block (TB) size for the one or more data channels based on one of the first MCS or the second MCS.
Kim et al. from the same or similar field of endeavor teach implementing fairness of the method, determining a transport block (TB) size for the one or more data channels based on one of the first MCS or the second MCS (paragraph [0206] lines 1–20; Examiner’s Notes: determining a TBS for the data channel according to a specific MCS in the prior art teaches the limitation of “determining a transport block (TB) size for the one or more data channels based on one of the first MCS or the second MCS” in the instant application).
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in art to implement the method of Kim et al. in the system of Yang et al.
The motivation for determining a transport block (TB) size for the one or more data channels based on one of the first MCS or the second MCS, is to further enhance the mechanism for a UE receiving first physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) and a second PDCCH, wherein a first physical downlink data channel (PDSCH) corresponding to the first PDCCH, and a second PDSCH corresponding to the second PDCCH are transmitted to the UE, when the first PDSCH has a lower decoding priority than the second PDSCH, and the decoding timing of the first PDSCH and the decoding timing of the second PDSCH overlap, the UE decodes the second PDSCH and not the first PDSCH at the decoding timing, and transmits information with respect to the first PDSCH as first ACK/NACK information, and as a reply to the first ACK/NACK information, a third PDCCH not having a corresponding PDSCH is transmitted to the UE.
Regarding claim 9, Yang et al. further teach the method, wherein the TB size is determined based on:
the first MCS corresponding to the non-partitioned slots;
the second MCS corresponding to the partitioned slots;
a first one of the first MCS or the second MCS indicated in downlink control information; or
a second one of the first MCS or the second MCS indicated in the DCI (paragraph [0056] lines 1–9; Examiner’s Notes: selecting/determining the appropriate coding and modulation schemes for the slots within the non-partitioned resource, e.g., communication resource pool 820 as illustrated in FIG. 8, of the prior art teaches the limitation of “the first MCS corresponding to the non-partitioned slots” in the instant application;
consequently, selecting/determining the TB size/indication based on the appropriate coding and modulation schemes for the slots within the non-partitioned resource, e.g., communication resource pool 820 as illustrated in FIG. 8, of the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein the TB size is determined based on:
the first MCS corresponding to the non-partitioned slots;
the second MCS corresponding to the partitioned slots;
a first one of the first MCS or the second MCS indicated in downlink control information; or
a second one of the first MCS or the second MCS indicated in the DCI” in the instant application as well).
Regarding claim 10, Yang et al. teach the method without explicitly teaching determining a first TB size for the one or more data channels based on the first MCS.
Kim et al. from the same or similar field of endeavor teach implementing fairness of the method, determining a first TB size for the one or more data channels based on the first MCS (paragraph [0206] lines 1–20; Examiner’s Notes: determining a TBS for the data channel according to a MCS in the prior art teaches the limitation of “determining a first TB size for the one or more data channels based on the first MCS” in the instant application); and
determining a second TB size for the one or more data channels based on the second MCS (paragraph [0206] lines 12–20; Examiner’s Notes: determining a TBS for the data channel according to a specific MCS in the prior art teaches the limitation of “determining a second TB size for the one or more data channels based on the second MCS” in the instant application).
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in art to implement the method of Kim et al. in the system of Yang et al.
The motivation for determining a first TB size for the one or more data channels based on the first MCS, is to further enhance the mechanism for a UE receiving first physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) and a second PDCCH, wherein a first physical downlink data channel (PDSCH) corresponding to the first PDCCH, and a second PDSCH corresponding to the second PDCCH are transmitted to the UE, when the first PDSCH has a lower decoding priority than the second PDSCH, and the decoding timing of the first PDSCH and the decoding timing of the second PDSCH overlap, the UE decodes the second PDSCH and not the first PDSCH at the decoding timing, and transmits information with respect to the first PDSCH as first ACK/NACK information, and as a reply to the first ACK/NACK information, a third PDCCH not having a corresponding PDSCH is transmitted to the UE.
Regarding claim 11, Yang et al. further teach the method, wherein the first part of the one or more data channels is transmitted according to the first TB size on the non-partitioned slots (paragraph [0056] lines 1–9; Examiner’s Notes: transmitting the data channel according to an appropriate information, e.g., the first TB size, on the slots within the non-partitioned resource, e.g., communication resource pool 820, as illustrated in FIG. 8 in the prior art teaches the limitations of “wherein the first part of the one or more data channels is transmitted according to the first TB size on the non-partitioned slots” in the instant application),
wherein the second portion of the one or more data channels is transmitted according to the second TB size on the partitioned slots (paragraph [0056] lines 1–9; Examiner’s Notes: transmitting the data channel according to an appropriated information, e.g., the second TB size, on the slots within the discovery resource pool 806 partitioned into part 1 and part 2, as illustrated in FIG. 8, of the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein the second portion of the one or more data channels is transmitted according to the second TB size on the partitioned slots” in the instant application).
Regarding claim 13, Yang et al. teach the apparatus without explicitly teaching implementing receiving a first field indicating the first MCS in downlink control information (DCI).
Kim et al. from the same or similar field of endeavor teach implementing fairness of the method, wherein to receive the indication of the first MCS and the indication of the second MCS, the at least one processor is further configured to: receive a first field indicating the first MCS in downlink control information (DCI) (paragraph [0210] lines 1-24; Examiner’s Notes: the MCS value in the prior art teaches the limitation of “the first MCS;”
In fact, receiving the DCI indicating the MCS value in the prior art teaches the limitation of “receive a first field indicating the first MCS in downlink control information” in the instant application); and
receive a second field indicating the second MCS in the DCI (paragraph [0210] lines 8–24; Examiner’s Notes: the varying MCS value in the prior art teaches the limitation of “the second MCS;”
In fact, receiving the DCI indicating a varying MCS value in the prior art teaches the limitation of “receive a second field indicating the second MCS in the DCI” in the instant application).
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in art to implement the method of Kim et al. in the system of Yang et al.
The motivation for implementing receiving a first field indicating the first MCS in downlink control information (DCI), is to further enhance the mechanism for a UE receiving first physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) and a second PDCCH, wherein a first physical downlink data channel (PDSCH) corresponding to the first PDCCH, and a second PDSCH corresponding to the second PDCCH are transmitted to the UE, when the first PDSCH has a lower decoding priority than the second PDSCH, and the decoding timing of the first PDSCH and the decoding timing of the second PDSCH overlap, the UE decodes the second PDSCH and not the first PDSCH at the decoding timing, and transmits information with respect to the first PDSCH as first ACK/NACK information, and as a reply to the first ACK/NACK information, a third PDCCH not having a corresponding PDSCH is transmitted to the UE.
Regarding claim 17, Yang et al. teach the apparatus without explicitly teaching implementing the bitmap.
Kim et al. from the same or similar field of endeavor teach implementing fairness of the method, wherein the slot configuration comprises a bitmap (paragraph [0179] lines 1–20; Examiner’s Notes: the bitmap regards to the slot parameter/configuration in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein the slot configuration comprises a bitmap” in the instant application).
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in art to implement the method of Kim et al. in the system of Yang et al.
The motivation for implementing the bitmap, is to further enhance the mechanism for a UE receiving first physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) and a second PDCCH, wherein a first physical downlink data channel (PDSCH) corresponding to the first PDCCH, and a second PDSCH corresponding to the second PDCCH are transmitted to the UE, when the first PDSCH has a lower decoding priority than the second PDSCH, and the decoding timing of the first PDSCH and the decoding timing of the second PDSCH overlap, the UE decodes the second PDSCH and not the first PDSCH at the decoding timing, and transmits information with respect to the first PDSCH as first ACK/NACK information, and as a reply to the first ACK/NACK information, a third PDCCH not having a corresponding PDSCH is transmitted to the UE.
Regarding claim 18, Yang et al. teach the apparatus without explicitly teaching implementing a data channel according to a semi-persistent scheduling (SPS).
Kim et al. from the same or similar field of endeavor teach implementing fairness of the method, wherein the one or more data channels comprise one or more of:
a data channel according to a semi-persistent scheduling (SPS),
repetition physical downlink shared channels (PDSCHs),
a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) according to a configured grant (CG), and
a PUSCH according to a dynamic grant (DG) (paragraph [0099] lines 1–15; Examiner’s Notes: the PDSCH according to scheduling information, e.g., a SPS, in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a data channel according to a semi-persistent scheduling (SPS)” in the instant application;
consequently, the PDSCH according to scheduling information, e.g., a SPS, in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein the one or more data channels comprise one or more of:
a data channel according to a semi-persistent scheduling (SPS),
repetition physical downlink shared channels (PDSCHs),
a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) according to a configured grant (CG), and
a PUSCH according to a dynamic grant (DG)” in the instant application as well).
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in art to implement the method of Kim et al. in the system of Yang et al.
The motivation for implementing a data channel according to a semi-persistent scheduling (SPS), is to further enhance the mechanism for a UE receiving first physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) and a second PDCCH, wherein a first physical downlink data channel (PDSCH) corresponding to the first PDCCH, and a second PDSCH corresponding to the second PDCCH are transmitted to the UE, when the first PDSCH has a lower decoding priority than the second PDSCH, and the decoding timing of the first PDSCH and the decoding timing of the second PDSCH overlap, the UE decodes the second PDSCH and not the first PDSCH at the decoding timing, and transmits information with respect to the first PDSCH as first ACK/NACK information, and as a reply to the first ACK/NACK information, a third PDCCH not having a corresponding PDSCH is transmitted to the UE.
Regarding claim 19, Yang et al. teach the apparatus without explicitly teaching determining a transport block (TB) size for the one or more data channels based on one of the first MCS or the second MCS.
Kim et al. from the same or similar field of endeavor teach implementing fairness of the method, determining a transport block (TB) size for the one or more data channels based on one of the first MCS or the second MCS (paragraph [0206] lines 1–20; Examiner’s Notes: determining a TBS for the data channel according to a specific MCS in the prior art teaches the limitation of “determining a transport block (TB) size for the one or more data channels based on one of the first MCS or the second MCS” in the instant application).
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in art to implement the method of Kim et al. in the system of Yang et al.
The motivation for determining a transport block (TB) size for the one or more data channels based on one of the first MCS or the second MCS, is to further enhance the mechanism for a UE receiving first physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) and a second PDCCH, wherein a first physical downlink data channel (PDSCH) corresponding to the first PDCCH, and a second PDSCH corresponding to the second PDCCH are transmitted to the UE, when the first PDSCH has a lower decoding priority than the second PDSCH, and the decoding timing of the first PDSCH and the decoding timing of the second PDSCH overlap, the UE decodes the second PDSCH and not the first PDSCH at the decoding timing, and transmits information with respect to the first PDSCH as first ACK/NACK information, and as a reply to the first ACK/NACK information, a third PDCCH not having a corresponding PDSCH is transmitted to the UE.
13. Claims 3, 4, 14, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang et al. (US 2022/0104180) in view of MolavianJazi et al. (US 2022/0408464).
Regarding claim 3, Yang et al. teach the method without explicitly teaching implementing receiving a differential MCS field indicating a difference between the first MCS and the second MCS.
MolavianJazi et al. from the same or similar field of endeavor teach implementing fairness of the method, receiving a first field indicating the first MCS in downlink control information (DCI) (paragraph [0418] lines 1–14; Examiner’s Notes: receiving the DCI indicating the MCS value in the prior art teaches the limitation of “receiving a first field indicating the first MCS in downlink control information” in the instant application); and
receiving a differential MCS field indicating a difference between the first MCS and the second MCS (paragraph [0419] lines 1–23; Examiner’s Notes: the filed, e.g., a differential MCS field of 1 bit, in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a differential MCS field;”
In fact, receiving a differential MCS field of 1 bit indicating a difference between the MCS and another MCS in the prior art teaches the limitation of “receiving a differential MCS field indicating a difference between the first MCS and the second MCS” in the instant application).
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in art to implement the method of MolavianJazi et al. in the system of Yang et al.
The motivation for implementing receiving a differential MCS field indicating a difference between the first MCS and the second MCS, is to further enhance the mechanism for receiving down-link control information (DCI) for multi-cell scheduling, including receiving first information for a first number of sets of serving cells, a first physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) providing a first downlink control information (DCI) format on a first cell, and a second PDCCH providing a second DCI format on a second cell.
Regarding claim 4, MolavianJazi et al. further teach the method comprising: receiving the second MCS based on the first MCS and the differential MCS field (paragraph [0419] lines 1–23; Examiner’s Notes: receiving another MCS based on the first MCS and the differential MCS field of 1 bit in the prior art teaches the limitation of “receiving the second MCS based on the first MCS and the differential MCS field” in the instant application).
Regarding claim 14, Yang et al. teach the apparatus without explicitly teaching implementing receiving a differential MCS field indicating a difference between the first MCS and the second MCS.
MolavianJazi et al. from the same or similar field of endeavor teach implementing fairness of the method, wherein to receive the indication of the fist MCS and the indication of the second MCS, the at least one processor is further configured to:
receive a first field indicating the first MCS in downlink control information (DCI) (paragraph [0418] lines 1–14; Examiner’s Notes: receiving the DCI indicating the MCS value in the prior art teaches the limitation of “receive a first field indicating the first MCS in downlink control information” in the instant application); and
receive a differential MCS field indicating a difference between the first MCS and the second MCS (paragraph [0419] lines 1–23; Examiner’s Notes: the filed, e.g., a differential MCS field of 1 bit, in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a differential MCS field;”
In fact, receiving a differential MCS field of 1 bit indicating a difference between the MCS and another MCS in the prior art teaches the limitation of “receive a differential MCS field indicating a difference between the first MCS and the second MCS” in the instant application).
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in art to implement the method of MolavianJazi et al. in the system of Yang et al.
The motivation for implementing receiving a differential MCS field indicating a difference between the first MCS and the second MCS, is to further enhance the mechanism for receiving down-link control information (DCI) for multi-cell scheduling, including receiving first information for a first number of sets of serving cells, a first physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) providing a first downlink control information (DCI) format on a first cell, and a second PDCCH providing a second DCI format on a second cell.
Regarding claim 15, MolavianJazi et al. further teach the apparatus, wherein to receive the indication of the fist MCS and the indication of the second MCS, the at least one processor is further configured to:
determine the second MCS based on the first MCS and the differential MCS field (paragraph [0419] lines 1–23; Examiner’s Notes: determining another MCS based on the first MCS and the differential MCS field of 1 bit in the prior art teaches the limitation of “determine the second MCS based on the first MCS and the differential MCS field” in the instant application).
Conclusion
14. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Lo (US 2018/0020441) is cited to show the collaborative transmission in a wireless communication system, wherein the control information indicates time-frequency resources allocated or assigned for data transmission by the transmitter.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WEI ZHAO whose telephone number is (571)270-5672. The examiner can normally be reached from 8:00AM to 5:00PM Monday through Friday.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor JAE Y. LEE can be reached on 571-270-3936. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/WEI ZHAO/ Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2473