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 .
DETAILED ACTION
2. This Office Action is in response to application filed on 01/22/2024. Claims 1-20 were previously pending. Claims 1-20 are rejected.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
3. 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.
3.1. 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.
3.2. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
3.3. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by Lu et al., (“Lu”, US 2025/0274249 A1) in view of Muruganathan et al., ("Muru", US 2025/0247187 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Lu teaches, an apparatus for wireless communications, comprising: at least one memory comprising instructions; and one or more processors, individually or collectively, configured to execute the instructions and cause the apparatus to (Lu, FIG.18, network device 1800, processor 1804, memory 1805, [0288-289]: The processor 1804 invokes the instructions or program in the memory 1805 to perform the methods):
output an indication of scheduled resources for one or more transmissions, wherein the scheduled resources are in accordance with one or more scheduling rules associated with the capability information, and wherein the one or more scheduling rules indicate at least one of (Lu, [0062]: A UE receives indication information that is used for determining a PRG granularity (“scheduling rule”)):
a size of each physical resource block group (PRG) allocated for the UE is associated with an even number (Lu, [0129]: UE assumes that the PRG granularity is 2, that is, the PRG size=n2 (that is, 2PRB)).
Lu does not expressly teach
obtain capability information of a user equipment (UE).
Muru teaches (Muru, FIG.1, network node (BS) 14, communication device (UE) 12, capability signaling 20, [0083]: the UE 12 transmits capability signaling 20 to the BS 14)
Prior to the effective filing date of invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to implement the “capability information” of Muru into the invention of Lu. The suggestion/motivation would have been for base station sending resource allocation information includes scheduling constraint based on UE’s capability information. Including the “UE’s capability information” of Muru into the invention of Lu was within the ordinary ability of one of ordinary skill in the art based on the teachings of Muru.
Regarding Claim 2, Lu-Muru teaches, the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the capability information indicates at least one of:
the UE is configured with a time resource associated with a sub-band full duplex (SBFD) duplexing scheme at the apparatus (Lu, [0069]: the UE may determine the PRG granularity of the at least one DL subband in the SBFD mode based on the first information (“capability information”) when the network side device allocates a frequency domain resource to the user equipment on the at least one DL subband in the SBFD mode).
Regarding Claim 3, Lu-Muru teaches, the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the capability information indicates that the UE supports scheduling of one or more partial PRGs per downlink sub-band within the downlink BWP for the UE, and wherein one or more PRBs of a total number of PRBs in each partial PRG are used for the one or more transmissions (Muru, [0150-151]: when the UE indicates the orphan RE handling capability, the UE expects to be scheduled with multiple groups of consecutive groups of PRBs belonging to the same PDSCH, where the groups are using non-consecutive PRBs and where at least one of these groups of PRBs has an odd number of PRBs for PDSCH when using the new Rel-18 Type 1 DMRS design).
Regarding Claim 4, Lu-Muru teaches, the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the capability information indicates at least one of:
the UE does not support scheduling of resource elements (REs) that are not in multiples of an even number (Muru, [0150-151]: when the UE does not indicate the orphan RE handling capability, the UE does not expect to be scheduled with multiple groups of consecutive groups of PRBs belonging to the same PDSCH, where the groups are using non-consecutive PRBs and where at least one of these groups of PRBs has an odd number of PRBs for PDSCH when using the new Rel-18 Type 1 DMRS design).
Regarding Claim 5, Lu-Muru teaches, the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the capability information indicates that the UE supports scheduling of resources with a wideband precoding (Lu, [0119]: in a case that the UE does not have the dynamic downlink physical resource block PRB bundling capability and if the PRB bundling type configured by the first information is the static bundling and the PRG granularity is the wideband, precoding on the consecutive PRBs allocated to the UE in each subband of the at least one DL subband being the same).
Regarding Claim 6, Lu-Muru teaches, the apparatus of claim 5, wherein at least one scheduling rule indicates that a value of a PRB scheduling offset corresponding to the PRBs allocated in the each downlink sub-band within the downlink BWP for the UE does not have to be even (Lu, FIG.9, PRG1, PRG9, [0175-176]: a BWP bandwidth is 70 PRBs. Compared with a common PRB, a sequence number of a starting PRB is 3. It is assumed that the PRG granularity configured by the network side device is 4, the BWP is divided into 19 PRGs. A first PRG (PRG1) and a last PRG (PRG19) include one PRB, and the remaining PRGs include 4 PRBs).
Regarding Claim 7, Lu-Muru teaches, the apparatus of claim 5, wherein at least one scheduling rule indicates that a value of a PRB scheduling offset corresponding to the PRBs allocated in the each downlink sub-band within the downlink BWP for the UE has to be even (Muru, [0030, 145]: capability signaling 20 from the UE to the network indicating if the UE can handle orphan frequency-domain orthogonal cover code (FD-OCC) or not. a network scheduling restriction for UEs without orphan FD-OCC capability: scheduled over a number of PRBs such that there is no orphan OCC problem (this may correspond to scheduling an even number of PRBs).
Regarding Claim 8, Lu-Muru teaches, the apparatus of claim 1, further comprising at least one transceiver configured to receive the capability information and transmit the indication of the scheduled resources, wherein the apparatus is configured as a network entity (Muru, FIG.1, data channel 16, demodulation reference signal 18, [0084]: the network node (BS) 14 receives capability signaling 20 from the UE 12, the capability signaling 20 indicates that the UE 12 is capable of demodulating the data channel 16 using a demodulation reference signal 18 that is scheduled without restriction on the number of resource elements, resource blocks, or resource block groups to which the demodulation reference signal 18 is mapped).
Regarding Claim 9, Lu teaches, an apparatus for wireless communications, comprising: at least one memory comprising instructions; and one or more processors, individually or collectively, configured to execute the instructions and cause the apparatus to (Lu, FIG.17, user equipment (UE) 1700, memory 1709, processor 1710, [0274, 278-279]: The processor 1710 invokes the instructions or program in the memory 1709 to perform the methods):
obtain an indication of scheduled resources for one or more transmissions, wherein the scheduled resources are in accordance with one or more scheduling rules associated with the capability information, and wherein the one or more scheduling rules indicate at least one of (Lu, [0062]: A user equipment receives indication information that is used for determining a PRG granularity (“scheduling rule”)):
a size of each physical resource block group (PRG) allocated for the apparatus is associated with an even number (Lu, [0129]: UE assumes that the PRG granularity is 2, that is, the PRG size=n2 (that is, 2PRB)).
Lu does not expressly teach
output capability information of the apparatus.
Muru teaches (Muru, FIG.1, network node (BS) 14, communication device (UE) 12, capability signaling 20, [0083]: the UE 12 transmits capability signaling 20 to the BS 14)
Prior to the effective filing date of invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to implement the “capability information” of Muru into the invention of Lu. The suggestion/motivation would have been for base station sending resource allocation information includes scheduling constraint based on UE’s capability information. Including the “UE’s capability information” of Muru into the invention of Lu was within the ordinary ability of one of ordinary skill in the art based on the teachings of Muru.
Regarding Claim 10, Lu-Muru teaches, the apparatus of claim 9, wherein the capability information indicates at least one of:
the apparatus is configured with a time resource associated with a sub-band full duplex (SBFD) duplexing scheme at the apparatus (Lu, [0069]: the UE may determine the PRG granularity of the at least one DL subband in the SBFD mode based on the first information (“capability information”) when the network side device allocates a frequency domain resource to the user equipment on the at least one DL subband in the SBFD mode).
Regarding Claim 11, Lu-Muru teaches, the apparatus of claim 9, wherein the capability information indicates that the apparatus supports scheduling of one or more partial PRGs per downlink sub-band within the downlink BWP for the apparatus, and wherein one or more PRBs of a total number of PRBs in each partial PRG are used for the one or more transmissions (Muru, [0150-151]: when the UE indicates the orphan RE handling capability, the UE expects to be scheduled with multiple groups of consecutive groups of PRBs belonging to the same PDSCH, where the groups are using non-consecutive PRBs and where at least one of these groups of PRBs has an odd number of PRBs for PDSCH when using the new Rel-18 Type 1 DMRS design).
Regarding Claim 12, Lu-Muru teaches, the apparatus of claim 9, wherein the capability information indicates at least one of:
the apparatus does not support scheduling of resource elements (REs) that are not in multiples of an even number (Muru, [0150-151]: when the UE does not indicate the orphan RE handling capability, the UE does not expect to be scheduled with multiple groups of consecutive groups of PRBs belonging to the same PDSCH, where the groups are using non-consecutive PRBs and where at least one of these groups of PRBs has an odd number of PRBs for PDSCH when using the new Rel-18 Type 1 DMRS design).
Regarding Claim 13, Lu-Muru teaches, the apparatus of claim 9, wherein the capability information indicates that the apparatus supports scheduling of resources with a wideband precoding (Lu, [0119]: n a case that the UE does not have the dynamic downlink physical resource block PRB bundling capability and if the PRB bundling type configured by the first information is the static bundling and the PRG granularity is the wideband, precoding on the consecutive PRBs allocated to the UE in each subband of the at least one DL subband being the same).
Regarding Claim 14, Lu-Muru teaches, the apparatus of claim 13, wherein at least one scheduling rule indicates that a value of a PRB scheduling offset corresponding to the PRBs allocated in the each downlink sub-band within the downlink BWP for the apparatus does not have to be even (Lu, FIG.9, PRG1, PRG9, [0175-176]: a BWP bandwidth is 70 PRBs. Compared with a common PRB, a sequence number of a starting PRB is 3. It is assumed that the PRG granularity configured by the network side device is 4, the BWP is divided into 19 PRGs. A first PRG (PRG1) and a last PRG (PRG19) include one PRB, and the remaining PRGs include 4 PRBs).
Regarding Claim 15, Lu-Muru teaches, the apparatus of claim 13, wherein at least one scheduling rule indicates that a value of a PRB scheduling offset corresponding to the PRBs allocated in the each downlink sub-band within the downlink BWP for the apparatus has to be even (Muru, [0030, 145]: capability signaling 20 from the UE to the network indicating if the UE can handle orphan frequency-domain orthogonal cover code (FD-OCC) or not. a network scheduling restriction for UEs without orphan FD-OCC capability: Scheduled over a number of PRBs such that there is no orphan OCC problem (this may correspond to scheduling an even number of PRB).
Regarding Claim 16, Lu-Muru teaches, the apparatus of claim 9, further comprising at least one transceiver configured to transmit the capability information and receive the indication of the scheduled resources, wherein the apparatus is configured as a user equipment (UE) (Muru, FIG.1, data channel 16, demodulation reference signal 18, [0084]: the network node (BS) 14 receives capability signaling 20 from the UE 12, the capability signaling 20 indicates that the UE 12 is capable of demodulating the data channel 16 using a demodulation reference signal 18 that is scheduled without restriction on the number of resource elements, resource blocks, or resource block groups to which the demodulation reference signal 18 is mapped).
Regarding Claim 17, Lu teaches, a method for wireless communications at a first wireless node, comprising:
outputting an indication of scheduled resources for one or more transmissions, wherein the scheduled resources are in accordance with one or more scheduling rules associated with the capability information, and wherein the one or more scheduling rules indicate at least one of (Lu, [0062]: A UE receives indication information that is used for determining a PRG granularity (“scheduling rule”)):
a size of each physical resource block group (PRG) allocated for the second wireless node is associated with an even number (Lu, [0129]: UE assumes that the PRG granularity is 2, that is, the PRG size=n2 (that is, 2PRB)).
Lu does not expressly teach
obtaining capability information of a second wireless node.
Muru teaches (Muru, FIG.1, network node (BS) 14, communication device (UE) 12, capability signaling 20, [0083]: the UE 12 transmits capability signaling 20 to the BS 14)
Prior to the effective filing date of invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to implement the “capability information” of Muru into the invention of Lu. The suggestion/motivation would have been for base station sending resource allocation information includes scheduling constraint based on UE’s capability information. Including the “UE’s capability information” of Muru into the invention of Lu was within the ordinary ability of one of ordinary skill in the art based on the teachings of Muru.
Regarding Claim 18, Lu-Muru teaches, the method of claim 17, wherein the capability information indicates at least one of:
the second wireless node is configured with a time resource associated with a sub-band full duplex (SBFD) duplexing scheme at the first wireless node (Lu, [0069]: the UE may determine the PRG granularity of the at least one DL subband in the SBFD mode based on the first information (“capability information”) when the network side device allocates a frequency domain resource to the user equipment on the at least one DL subband in the SBFD mode).
Regarding Claim 19, Lu-Muru teaches, the method of claim 17, wherein the capability information indicates that the second wireless node supports scheduling of one or more partial PRGs per downlink sub-band within the downlink BWP for the second wireless node, and wherein one or more PRBs of a total number of PRBs in each partial PRG are used for the one or more transmissions (Muru, [0150-151]: when the UE indicate the orphan RE handling capability, the UE expect to be scheduled with multiple groups of consecutive groups of PRBs belonging to the same PDSCH, where the groups are using non-consecutive PRBs and where at least one of these groups of PRBs has an odd number of PRBs for PDSCH when using the new Rel-18 Type 1 DMRS design).
Regarding Claim 20, Lu-Muru teaches, the method of claim 17, wherein the capability information indicates at least one of:
the second wireless node does not support scheduling of resource elements (REs) that are not in multiples of an even number (Muru, [0150-151]: when the UE does not indicate the orphan RE handling capability, the UE does not expect to be scheduled with multiple groups of consecutive groups of PRBs belonging to the same PDSCH, where the groups are using non-consecutive PRBs and where at least one of these groups of PRBs has an odd number of PRBs for PDSCH when using the new Rel-18 Type 1 DMRS design).
Conclusion
4. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
Abotabl et al., US 2021/0400637 A1, Method For Wireless Communication At Scheduling Entity In Wireless Communication Network, Involves Transmitting Downlink-uplink (DU) Slot Interpretation To Scheduled Entity, FIG.10.
Jang et al., US 2025/0193911 A1, Method Of Terminal In Communication System, Involves Receiving Physical Downlink Shared Channel (PDSCH) From Base Station Based On Resource Allocation Information, And Resource Allocation Information Includes Scheduling Constraint, FIG.1.
5. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should
be directed to CHHIAN (AMY) LING whose telephone number is (571)270-1074. The examiner can
normally be reached M-F 9-6 ET.
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,
BRIAN J GILLIS can be reached on (571) 272-7952. 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.
/C.L/Examiner, Art Unit 2446
/BRIAN J. GILLIS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2446
Prosecution Insights