DETAILED ACTION
This office action is a response to an application filed on 01/08/2024, in which claims 1-20 are pending and ready for examination.
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 102 (a) (1) as being unpatentable over by applicant admitted prior art 3GPP TSG RAN WG1 Meeting#104-e, R1-2100900, (hereinafter, “R1-2100900”).
In response to claim 1,
R1-2100900 teaches an initial bandwidth part determining method, comprising: obtaining, by a terminal, first information (section, 2.1, “Reduced minimum number of RX branches”, UEs are interpreted as using a UE or terminal, section 2.2 “Reduced maximum UE bandwidth”, paragraph “proposal 4”, paragraph 8, RO associated with the best SSB is equated to first information, selecting initial UL BWP corresponding with RO associated with best SSB by redcap UE during Alt 3 option is interpreted as obtaining by a terminal a first information); and
determining, by the terminal, a target initial bandwidth part among a first initial bandwidth part and/or a second initial bandwidth part according to the first information (section 2.2 “Reduced maximum UE bandwidth”, paragraph “proposal 4”, paragraph 8, first/second initial BWP (for the best SSB) is interpreted as using a first and a second initial bandwidth, selecting is equated to determining, selecting initial UL BWP corresponding with RO associated with best SSB by redcap UE during Alt 3 option explicitly teaches this limitation),
wherein the first initial bandwidth part is configured for the terminal by a network side device (section 2.2 “Reduced maximum UE bandwidth”, paragraph “proposal 4”, paragraph 8, gNB is equated to a network device, multiple initial UL BWP for redcap UE is interpreted as using a first BWP, configuring multiple initial UL BWP for redcap UE by the gNB is interpreted as wherein the first initial bandwidth part is configured for the terminal by a network side device); and
the first information comprises at least one of the following: first configuration information, wherein the first configuration information is used for configuring the target initial bandwidth part applied by the terminal (section 2.2 “Reduced maximum UE bandwidth”, paragraph “proposal 4”, paragraph 8, multiple initial UL BWP for redcap UE is equated to a first configuration information, configuring multiple initial UL BWP for redcap UE by the gNB is interpreted as the first configuration information is used for configuring the target initial bandwidth part, selecting initial UL BWP corresponding with RO associated with best SSB by redcap UE during Alt 3 option explicitly teaches applied by the terminal); and an applying rule for the target initial bandwidth part.
In response to claim 9,
R1-2100900 teaches an initial bandwidth part determining method, comprising: sending, by a network side device (section 2.2 “Reduced maximum UE bandwidth”, paragraph “proposal 4”, paragraph 8, gNB is equated to a network device, configuring by the gNB and letting a UE to select an initial BWP part explicitly teaches the gNB communicate or sends to a UE); and
the first information comprises at least one of the following (section 2.2 “Reduced maximum UE bandwidth”, paragraph “proposal 4”, paragraph 8, RO associated with the best SSB is equated to first information,): first configuration information, wherein the first configuration information is used for configuring target initial bandwidth part applied by the terminal (section 2.2 “Reduced maximum UE bandwidth”, paragraph “proposal 4”, paragraph 8, multiple initial UL BWP for redcap UE is equated to a first configuration information, configuring multiple initial UL BWP for redcap UE by the gNB is interpreted as the first configuration information is used for configuring the target initial bandwidth part, selecting initial UL BWP corresponding with RO associated with best SSB by redcap UE during Alt 3 option explicitly teaches applied by the terminal); and an applying rule for target initial bandwidth part;
wherein the target initial bandwidth part comprises first initial bandwidth part or second initial bandwidth part (section 2.2 “Reduced maximum UE bandwidth”, paragraph “proposal 4”, paragraph 8, first/second initial BWP (for the best SSB) is interpreted as using a first and a second initial bandwidth,).
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.
Claims 2 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 (a) as being anticipated by applicant admitted prior art 3GPP TSG RAN WG1 Meeting#104-e, R1-2100900, (hereinafter, “R1-2100900”) in view of 3GPP TSG RAN WG1 Meeting#104b-e, R1-2103534, (hereinafter, “R1-2103534”).
In response to claims 2 and 10,
R1-2100900 does not teach explicitly about claims 2 and 10,
R1-2103534 in view of R1-2100900 teaches the first initial bandwidth part is the initial bandwidth part configured for the reduced capability terminal by the network side device (section 1, “Discussion”, paragraph 2, configuring initial BWPs by a gNB is read as configuring a first and a second BWP by the network device, paragraph “proposal 1”,configuring an initial BWP with dedicated CORESET #0 doe the redcap UE is interpreted as the first initial bandwidth part is the initial bandwidth part configured for the reduced capability terminal by the network side device),
the second initial bandwidth part is the initial bandwidth part configured for the non-reduced capability terminal by the network side device (paragraph “proposal 1”, legacy UEs are equated to non-reduced capability terminal, using a pair of initial BWPs and separating legacy UEs for initial access during scheduling is interpreted as using a second initial bandwidth part is the initial bandwidth part configured for the non-reduced capability terminal by the network side device).
It would have been obvious within the scope of a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify R1-2100900 for using first initial bandwidth part is the initial bandwidth part configured for the reduced capability terminal by the network side device and using a second initial bandwidth part is the initial bandwidth part configured for the non-reduced capability terminal by the network side device as taught in R1-2103534 because it would allow sharing initial BWPs with CORESET #0 between redcap UEs and legacy UEs.
Claims 12 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 (a) as being anticipated by applicant admitted prior art 3GPP TSG RAN WG1 Meeting#104-e, R1-2100900, (hereinafter, “R1-2100900”) in view of KOSKINEN et al. (hereinafter, “KOSKINEN”;20210352569).
In response to claim 12,
R1-2100900 teaches obtaining, by the terminal, first information; and determining, by the terminal, a target initial bandwidth part among a first initial bandwidth part and/or a second initial bandwidth part according to the first information, wherein the first initial bandwidth part is configured for the terminal by a network side device; and the first information comprises at least one of the following: first configuration information, wherein the first configuration information is used for configuring the target initial bandwidth part applied by the terminal; and an applying rule for the target initial bandwidth part (these limitations are identical to claim 1, therefore, these limitations are rejected as claim 1).
R1-2100900 does not teach explicitly about using a terminal, comprising a processor, a memory, and a program or an instruction stored in the memory and executable on the processor, wherein the program or instruction, when executed by the processor.
KOSKINEN is view of R1-2100900 teaches a terminal, comprising a processor, a memory, and a program or an instruction stored in the memory and executable on the processor, wherein the program or instruction, when executed by the processor, implements (paragraph 15 teaches these limitations):
It would have been obvious within the scope of a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify R1-2100900 for using a terminal, comprising a processor, a memory, and a program or an instruction stored in the memory and executable on the processor, wherein the program or instruction as taught by KOSKINEN because it would allow authorized user specific system information by Redcap UEs for accessing cells or identifying cells.
In response to claim 20,
R1-2100900 teaches the steps of the initial bandwidth part determining method according to claim 9 (this part of the claim is interpreted as claim 9, therefore, this part of the claim is rejected as claim 9).
R1-2100900 does not teach explicitly about using a network side device, comprising a processor, a memory, and a program or an instruction that are stored in the memory and capable of running on the processor, wherein the program or instruction is executed by the processor to implement.
KOSKINEN is view of R1-2100900 teaches a network side device, comprising a processor, a memory, and a program or an instruction that are stored in the memory and capable of running on the processor, wherein the program or instruction is executed by the processor to implement (paragraph 25 teaches these limitations);
It would have been obvious within the scope of a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify R1-2100900 for using a network side device, comprising a processor, a memory, and a program or an instruction that are stored in the memory and capable of running on the processor, wherein the program or instruction is executed by the processor to implement as taught by KOSKINEN because it would allow authorized user specific system information by Redcap UEs for accessing cells or identifying cells.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 (a) as being anticipated by applicant admitted prior art 3GPP TSG RAN WG1 Meeting#104-e, R1-2100900, (hereinafter, “R1-2100900”) in view of KOSKINEN et al. (hereinafter, “KOSKINEN”;20210352569).
And in further view of 3GPP TSG RAN WG1 Meeting#104b-e, R1-2103534, (hereinafter, “R1-2103534”).
In response to claim 13,
R1-2100900 does not teach explicitly about claims 2 and 10,
R1-2103534 in view of R1-2100900 and KOSKINEN teaches the first initial bandwidth part is the initial bandwidth part configured for the reduced capability terminal by the network side device, the second initial bandwidth part is the initial bandwidth part configured for the non-reduced capability terminal by the network side device (these limitations are identical to claim 1, therefore, these limitations are rejected as claim 2).
It would have been obvious within the scope of a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify R1-2100900 and KOSKINEN for using first initial bandwidth part is the initial bandwidth part configured for the reduced capability terminal by the network side device and using a second initial bandwidth part is the initial bandwidth part configured for the non-reduced capability terminal by the network side device as taught in R1-2103534 because it would allow sharing initial BWPs with CORESET #0 between redcap UEs and legacy UEs.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-8, 11 and 14-19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
As for dependent claims 3 and 14, these claims are objected, because there is no prior art in the record that teaches claimed limitation “under a specific condition, switching to the target initial bandwidth part, wherein the first specific condition comprises at least one of the following: the bandwidth part inactivity timer expires; there is no RO on the active bandwidth part.”
The closet reasonable prior art in the record 3GPP TSG RAN WG1 Meeting#104-e, R1-2100900 teaches in section 2.2 “Reduced maximum UE bandwidth”, paragraph “proposal 4”, paragraph 9 about a Redcap UE tuning from one frequency to another frequency, but he fails to teach the above cited limitation.
As for dependent claims 4 and 15, these claims are objected, because there is no prior art in the record that teaches claimed limitation “wherein after the determining, by the terminal, a target initial bandwidth part among a first initial bandwidth part and/or a second initial bandwidth part according to the first information, the method further comprises: under a specific condition, switching to the target initial bandwidth part, wherein the first specific condition comprises at least one of the following: an active bandwidth part is not the target initial bandwidth part; the terminal releases an RRC connection; the terminal enters an RRC inactive mode or an idle mode; a bandwidth part inactivity timer expires, and the terminal is not configured with a default bandwidth part; the bandwidth part inactivity timer expires, and the default bandwidth part configured by the terminal is an initial bandwidth part; and the terminal needs to initiate random access, and there is no RO on the active bandwidth part.”
The closet reasonable prior art in the record 3GPP TSG RAN WG1 Meeting#104-e, R1-2100900 teaches in section 2.2 “Reduced maximum UE bandwidth”, paragraph “proposal 4”, paragraph 9 about a Redcap UE tuning from one frequency to another frequency, but he fails to teach the above cited limitation.
As for dependent claims 5 and 16, these claims are objected, because there is no prior art in the record that teaches claimed limitation “wherein when the first information comprises the applying rule for the target initial bandwidth part, the determining, by terminal, the target initial bandwidth part among the first initial bandwidth part and/or the second initial bandwidth part according to the applying rule for the target initial bandwidth part comprises at least one of the following: determining, by the terminal, the target initial bandwidth part based on a terminal capability of the terminal, wherein determined target initial bandwidth parts are different when different terminal capability is; and determining, by the terminal, the target initial bandwidth part based on a terminal identifier of the terminal.”
The closet reasonable prior art in the record 3GPP TSG RAN WG1 Meeting#104-e, R1-2100900 teaches in section 2.2 “Reduced maximum UE bandwidth”, paragraph “proposal 4”, paragraphs 8-9 about a Redcap UE selecting an initial uplink BWP based on RO associated with best SSB and tuning from one frequency to another frequency, but he fails to teach the above cited limitation.
As for claims 6-7 and 17-18, these claims are objected, because these claims depend on claims 5 and 17.
As for dependent claims 8, 11 and 19, these claims are objected, because there is no prior art in the record that teaches claimed limitation “wherein the first initial bandwidth part comprises a first initial uplink (UL) bandwidth part and a first initial downlink (DL) bandwidth part.”
The closet reasonable prior art in the record 3GPP TSG RAN WG1 Meeting#104-e, R1-2100900 teaches in section 2.2 “Reduced maximum UE bandwidth”, paragraph “proposal 4”, paragraphs 8-9 about a Redcap UE using 40 (20 +20) MHZ BWP for redcap UE spanning a second (20 MHz) BWP and tuning from one frequency to another frequency, but he fails to teach the above cited limitation.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
20210195579………………….paragraphs 62-68.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABUSAYEED HAQUE whose telephone number is (571)270-7252. The examiner can normally be reached 9 am -7:30 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, Faruk Hamza can be reached at 571-272-7969. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ABUSAYEED M HAQUE/ Examiner, Art Unit 2466
/CHRISTOPHER M CRUTCHFIELD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2466