DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . The instant First Office Action on the merits is in response to claims filed on 4/12/2024.
Claims 1-17 are pending. Claims 1 and 9 are the base independent claims.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 4/22/2025, 9/30/2024, 9/27/2024, 2/6/2024 was filed before the mailing of a first Office action on the merits. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97(b). Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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, or 365(c) is acknowledged.
Claim Objections
Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 15, “the two or more discontinuous slots” may be referring to “the at least 2 inconsecutive slots” of the parent claim. Thus a consistent limitation is required.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 9 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oteri et al (US 2023/0096490) in view of NAM et al (US 2022/0338035).
Regarding claims 1 and 9, Oteri discloses an apparatus applicable to a network device or a terminal equipment, the apparatus comprising:
a memory; a processor coupled to the memory (fig. 16, par 109; processor and memory; also fig. 15) and configured to:
transmit a system information block 1 (SIB 1) associated with a synchronization signal/PBCH block (SSB) (par 39; SIB 1; also see par 34), and
transmit, in the case that a subcarrier spacing of the SSB is 480kHz or 960kHz and/or a subcarrier spacing of a PDCCH used to schedule the PDSCH carrying the SIB1 is 480kHz or 960kHz (fig. 10A, par 67, par 89; PDCCH and PUCCH transmission may have 480 or 960 kHz subcarrier spacing), the PDCCH in an aggregated slot (par 88-89; the first aggregated slot may include at least one slot).
The reference does not explicitly disclose:
transmit, for SSB with index i, the PDCCH in a slot of at least 2 inconsecutive slots, where the subcarrier spacing (SCS) corresponding to the at least 2 inconsecutive slots is the subcarrier spacing (SCS) of the PDCCH (emphasis added).
However, NAM discloses:
transmit, for SSB with index i, the PDCCH in a slot of at least 2 inconsecutive slots, where the subcarrier spacing (SCS) corresponding to the at least 2 inconsecutive slots is the subcarrier spacing (SCS) of the PDCCH (fig. 5, par 63-64, par 71-72; e.g. the PDCCH MOs may occur once every M slots, where M>1, hence inconsecutive slots).
In view of the above, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of communication protocol configured for the electronic system of NAM with the electronic system of Oteri. One is motivated as such to overcome processing PDCCHs in a short slot duration (NAM, par 64).
Regarding claim 15, NAM discloses:
the two or more discontinuous slots are predefined or are indicated by the SSB; and/or in the two or more discontinuous slots, the number of slots spaced between the slots is predefined or is indicated by the SSB (par 71-72; e.g. the PDCCH MOs may occur once every M slots, where M>1; also par 63, 66).
Claims 2-4, 6, 10-12 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oteri et al (US 2023/0096490) in view of NAM et al (US 2022/0338035), further in view of KIM et al (US 2023/0071927).
Regarding claims 2 and 10, the combination discloses the subject matter of claims 1 and 9, except:
transmit indication information indicating a frequency-domain position of the synchronization signal/PBCH block wherein in a case where a subcarrier spacing of the SSB is 960 kHz, the indication information does not indicate a frequency-domain position to which a sync raster with a predetermined global synchronization channel number (GSCN) corresponds.
However, KIM discloses:
In par 242-243, even for the
for SS/PBCH block that is not transmitted in the synchronization raster information…therefore, information on a frequency-domain offset (information on the number of REs and/or RBs or a synchronization raster index) between the SS/PBCH block with the 480/960 kHz SCS and the SS/PBCH block with the 120 kHz SCS may be transmitted by a PBCH payload included in the SS/PBCH block with the 480/960 kHz SCS.
In view of the above, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of communication protocol configured for the electronic system of KIM with the electronic system of Oteri and NAM. One is motivated as such to transmit information on higher layer signaling (KIM, par 243).
Regarding claims 3 and 11, KIM further discloses:
the indication information is included in RRC signaling (par 242; e.g. SIB1; also par 117).
Regarding claims 4 and 12, KIM further discloses:
the sync raster with a predetermined global synchronization channel number (GSCN value) is a sync raster defined for an SSB(s) of 120kHz and/or 480kHz; or the sync raster with a predetermined global synchronization channel number (GSCN value) is a sync raster defined for an SSB with an SCS of 960 kHz (par 241; Since the SS/PBCH block with the 480/960 kHz SCS is not used for the initial access, the SS/PBCH block with the 480/960 kHz SCS may be transmitted at a position other than a synchronization raster as the center frequency).
Regarding claims 6 and 14, KIM further discloses:
in a case where the SCS of the SSB is 960 kHz, the information used to indicate the contents of the SIB1 associated with the SSB indicates that the SIB1 is only used for automatic neighbor relationship report or cell global identifier report (ANR/CGI report), or that the SIB1 does not include information for supporting initial access (par 173; an SS/PBCH block with an SCS of 480 or 960 kHz is used for ANR other than the initial access).
Claims 5 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oteri et al (US 2023/0096490) in view of NAM et al (US 2022/0338035), and further in view of Zhou et al (US 2024/0080151).
Regarding claims 5 and 13, the combination discloses the subject matter of claims 1 and 9, except:
in a case where the subcarrier spacing of the SSB is 960kHz, in a master information block (MIB) of the SSB, a cell selection-related field is set to be of a first predetermined value and/or a cell reselection-related field is set to be of a second predetermined value.
However, Zhou discloses:
In par 59, e.g. the value of the QCL parameter of the SSB can be determined by the MIB with regard to the SSB with the subcarrier spacing of 120 kHz or 240 kHz in the initial cell search or selection. In par 71, since the SSB may have the subcarrier spacing of 480 kHz or 960 kHz, the terminal equipment can determine the value of the QCL parameter of the SSB based on the MIB and/or the SIB.
In view of the above, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of communication protocol configured for the electronic system of KIM with the electronic system of Oteri and NAM. One is motivated as such to complete a beam scanning process accurately and efficiently (Zhou, par 71).
Claims 7-8 and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oteri et al (US 2023/0096490) in view of NAM et al (US 2022/0338035), further in view of TANG (US 2021/0219249).
Regarding claims 7 and 16, the combination discloses the subject matter of claims 1 and 9, NAM further discloses:
wherein, the at least 2 inconsecutive slots includes slot n₀ and slot n₀ + k (k ≥ 2), where the value of k being predefined (par 71-72; e.g. the PDCCH MOs may occur once every M slots, where M>1).
The combination does not explicitly disclose:
PNG
media_image1.png
136
734
media_image1.png
Greyscale
.
However, TANG discloses:
In par 47, time domain candidate position of the CORESET of the RMSI associated with the SSB satisfies:
PNG
media_image2.png
132
480
media_image2.png
Greyscale
.
In view of the above, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of communication protocol configured for the electronic system of TANG with the electronic system of Oteri and NAM. One is motivated as such to transmit a complete SSB and a CORESET of the RMSI associated with the SSB to the terminal device within an available channel (TANG, par 15).
Regarding claims 8 and 17, NAM discloses:
wherein, index i is an SSB index or a candidate SSB index (par 71; e.g. SSB0).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YAOTANG WANG whose telephone number is (571)272-4023. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00-18:00 ET (M, W, TH & alternate F).
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, HADI ARMOUCHE can be reached at 571-270-3618. 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.
/YAOTANG WANG/SCE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2409