DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 1, 2, 7 - 9, 12, 13, 18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. Claims 1, 2, 7 - 9, 12, 13, 18, and 20 fail to point out what the symbol of “BWP” represents in the claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(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.
Claims 1 – 4, 6, 8 – 10, 12 – 15, 17, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yerramalli et al. (Pub. No.: US 2020/0154446; hereinafter Yerramalli).
Regarding claim 1, Yerramalli discloses a transmission method, comprising: determining, by a terminal, a transmission mode for a signal on a second BWP based on a first synchronization signal block set (SSB set); and transmitting, by the terminal, the signal on the second BWP based on the transmission mode (see para. 0121, At 505, UE 115-d may receive, from base station 105-e, a set of SSB configurations (ex: transmission mode) for a set of frequency resource sets (e.g., BWPs, subbands, sub-channels) configured for communications in a shared radio frequency spectrum band. In some cases, each of the set of SSB configurations may correspond to at least one of the set of frequency resource sets (e.g., BWPs), para. 0124, At 520, base station 105-e and/or UE 115-d may select, based on a result of the performed LBT procedure, a frequency resource set of the set of frequency resource sets (e.g., BWPs) for communication); wherein the signal on the second BWP comprises a second SSB set (see Fig. 3, for example, BWP 310-b comprises a SSB set 320-b).
Regarding claim 2, Yerramalli discloses wherein an SSB in the first SSB set meets at least one of the following characteristics: being a cell-defined CD-SSB; or being configured within the first BWP (see Fig. 3, for example, a SSB in SSB set 320-a is configured within BWP 310-a).
Regarding claim 3, Yerramalli discloses wherein a periodicity of the second SSB set is not less than a periodicity of the first SSB set (see para. 0121, a first SSB configuration of the set of SSB configurations may indicate a first SSB periodicity, and a second SSB configuration of the set of SSB configurations may indicate a second SSB periodicity different from the first SSB periodicity).
Regarding claim 4, Yerramalli discloses wherein index values of SSBs in the second SSB set are the same as index values of SSBs in the first SSB set (see Fig. 3, there are four SSB bursts, para. 0102, each SSB burst includes a set number of SSBs 320 (e.g., four SSBs)); or index values of SSBs in the second SSB set are a subset of index values of SSBs in the first SSB set.
Regarding claim 6, Yerramalli discloses wherein the terminal operates in a half-duplex mode on an FDD frequency band (see para. 0060,… to employ operating modes that reduce power consumption, such as half-duplex communications, para. 0102, frequency spectrum band), or the terminal operates on an asymmetric spectrum.
Regarding claim 8, Yerramalli discloses a transmission method, wherein the method comprises: determining, by a network-side device, a transmission mode for a signal on a second BWP based on a first synchronization signal block set (SSB set); and transmitting, by the network-side device, the signal on the second BWP based on the transmission mode (see para. 0121, At 505, UE 115-d may receive, from base station 105-e, a set of SSB configurations (ex: transmission mode) for a set of frequency resource sets (e.g., BWPs, subbands, sub-channels) configured for communications in a shared radio frequency spectrum band. In some cases, each of the set of SSB configurations may correspond to at least one of the set of frequency resource sets, para. 0124, At 520, base station 105-e and/or UE 115-d may select, based on a result of the performed LBT procedure, a frequency resource set of the set of frequency resource sets (e.g., BWPs) for communication); wherein the signal on the second BWP comprises a second SSB set (see Fig. 3, for example, BWP 310-b comprises a SSB set 320-b).
Regarding claim 9, Yerramalli discloses wherein an SSB in the first SSB set meets at least one of the following characteristics: being a cell-defined CD-SSB; or being configured within the first BWP (see Fig. 3, for example, a SSB in SSB set 320-a is configured within BWP 310-a).
Regarding claim 10, Yerramalli discloses wherein index values of SSBs in the second SSB set are the same as index values of SSBs in the first SSB set (see Fig. 3, there are four SSB bursts, para. 0102, each SSB burst includes a set number of SSBs 320 (e.g., four SSBs)); or index values of SSBs in the second SSB set are a subset of index values of SSBs in the first SSB set.
Regarding claim 12, Yerramalli discloses a terminal, comprising a processor, a memory, and a program or instructions stored in the memory and capable of running on the processor, wherein when the program or instructions are executed by the processor (see Fig. 10, device 1005 (UE 115) includes a processor 1040 and memory 1030 storing code with instructions to be executed…), the following steps are implemented: determining a transmission mode for a signal on a second BWP based on a first synchronization signal block set (SSB set); and transmitting the signal on the second BWP based on the transmission mode (see para. 0121, At 505, UE 115-d may receive, from base station 105-e, a set of SSB configurations (ex: transmission mode) for a set of frequency resource sets (e.g., BWPs, subbands, sub-channels) configured for communications in a shared radio frequency spectrum band. In some cases, each of the set of SSB configurations may correspond to at least one of the set of frequency resource sets, para. 0124, At 520, base station 105-e and/or UE 115-d may select, based on a result of the performed LBT procedure, a frequency resource set of the set of frequency resource sets (e.g., BWPs) for communication); wherein the signal on the second BWP comprises a second SSB set (see Fig. 3, for example, BWP 310-b comprises a SSB set 320-b).
Regarding claim 13, Yerramalli discloses wherein an SSB in the first SSB set meets at least one of the following characteristics: being a cell-defined CD-SSB; or being configured within the first BWP (see Fig. 3, for example, a SSB in SSB set 320-a is configured within BWP 310-a).
Regarding claim 14, Yerramalli discloses wherein a periodicity of the second SSB set is not less than a periodicity of the first SSB set (see para. 0121, a first SSB configuration of the set of SSB configurations may indicate a first SSB periodicity, and a second SSB configuration of the set of SSB configurations may indicate a second SSB periodicity different from the first SSB periodicity).
Regarding claim 15, Yerramalli discloses wherein index values of SSBs in the second SSB set are the same as index values of SSBs in the first SSB set (see Fig. 3, there are four SSB bursts, para. 0102, each SSB burst includes a set number of SSBs 320 (e.g., four SSBs)); or index values of SSBs in the second SSB set are a subset of index values of SSBs in the first SSB set.
Regarding claim 17, Yerramalli discloses wherein the terminal operates in a half-duplex mode on an FDD frequency band (see para. 0060,… to employ operating modes that reduce power consumption, such as half-duplex communications, para. 0102, frequency spectrum band), or the terminal operates on an asymmetric spectrum.
Regarding claim 19, Yerramalli discloses a network-side device, comprising a processor, a memory, and a program or instructions stored in the memory and capable of running on the processor, wherein when the program or instructions are executed by the processor, the steps of the method according to claim 8 are implemented (see Fig. 14, device 1405 (base station 105) includes a processor 1440 and memory 1435 storing code with instructions to be executed).
Regarding claim 20, Yerramalli discloses wherein an SSB in the first SSB set meets at least one of the following characteristics: being a cell-defined CD-SSB; or being configured within the first BWP (see Fig. 3, for example, a SSB in SSB set 320-a is configured within BWP 310-a).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 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.
Claims 5, 11 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yerramalli et al. (Pub. No.: US 2020/0154446; hereinafter Yerramalli) in view of Takahashi et al. (Pub. No.: US 2022/0369297; hereinafter Takahashi).
Yerramalli does not disclose the claimed features as recited in claims 5, 11 and 16.
Regarding claim 5, Takahashi discloses wherein in a case that an index value of a second SSB in the second SSB set is the same as an index value of a first SSB in the first SSB set, a first parameter of the first SSB is the same as or quasi-co-located with a first parameter of the second SSB (see para. 0113, The SS/PBCH blocks with the same relative time in each SS burst set in the multiple SS burst sets are assigned with the same SSB index. The SS/PBCH blocks with the same relative time in each SS burst set in the multiple SS burst sets may be assumed to be QCLed (or the same downlink transmit beam may be assumed to be applied to these SS/PBCH blocks)).
Regarding claim 11, Takahashi discloses when an index value of a second SSB in the second SSB set is the same as an index value of a first SSB in the first SSB set, a transmission parameter for the first SSB is the same as a transmission parameter for the second SSB (see para. 0113, The SS/PBCH blocks with the same relative time in each SS burst set in the multiple SS burst sets are assigned with the same SSB index. The SS/PBCH blocks with the same relative time in each SS burst set in the multiple SS burst sets may be assumed to be QCLed (or the same downlink transmit beam may be assumed to be applied to these SS/PBCH blocks)).
Regarding claim 16, Takahashi discloses wherein in a case that an index value of a second SSB in the second SSB set is the same as an index value of a first SSB in the first SSB set, a first parameter of the first SSB is the same as or quasi-co-located with a first parameter of the second SSB (see para. 0113, The SS/PBCH blocks with the same relative time in each SS burst set in the multiple SS burst sets are assigned with the same SSB index. The SS/PBCH blocks with the same relative time in each SS burst set in the multiple SS burst sets may be assumed to be QCLed (or the same downlink transmit beam may be assumed to be applied to these SS/PBCH blocks)).
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Yerramalli, and have the features, as taught by Takahashi, where the use of a method for such dropping allows the use of flexible scheduling with high efficiency of usage of time resources in a case of the mixture of transmission of the PUSCH using many symbols due to repetition transmission and reception of downlink signals, as discussed by Takahashi (para. 0261).
Claims 7 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yerramalli et al. (Pub. No.: US 2020/0154446; hereinafter Yerramalli) in view of Jan et al. (Pub. No.: US 2024/0080821; hereinafter Jan).
Yerramalli does not disclose the claimed features as recited in claim 7 and 18.
Regarding claim 7, Jan discloses wherein the second BWP is a BWP configured for a redcap terminal (see abstract, para. 0006 – 0007, at least one active BWP of the REDCAP user equipment).
Regarding claim 18, Jan discloses wherein the second BWP is a BWP configured for a redcap terminal (see abstract, para. 0006 – 0007, at least one active BWP of the REDCAP user equipment).
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Yerramalli, and have the features, as taught by Jan, where bandwidth reduction can effectively reduce the cost and power consumption of the REDCAP user equipment, as discussed by Jan (para. 0004).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Anh Ngoc M Nguyen whose telephone number is (571) 270-5139. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Friday, from 7:30 am to 4:00 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kwang Bin Yao can be reached on ((571) 272-3182. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
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 .
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.
/ANH NGOC M NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2473