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 .
The instant office action is in response to communication filed on 08/11/2023.
Claims 1-30 are pending of which claims 1, 25, and 26 are independent.
The IDS(s) submitted on 12/26/2024 is considered and found to be relevant.
Internet Communications
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29 and 30 s/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lee et al (US 20220232403A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Lee discloses in apparatus (Wireless Device 100 in Fig. 15 with its components memory 104 processor 102 further shown in Fig. 16 and refers to the UE (User Equipment) in Fig. 8 and detailed in paragraphs [0309-0325]) for wireless communication (See Fig. 8), comprising: at least one memory (Fig. 15 memory 104 and Fig. 16 Memory unit 130 and has programs/code/commands/information stored in the memory per paragraph 318) comprising computer-executable instructions; and one or more processors (Figure 15 processor 102 and Fig. 16 Control Unit /Processor(s) 120) configured to execute the computer-executable instructions and cause the apparatus to: obtaining signaling indicating one or more search space (SS) parameters (i.e. see paragraph 114 indicating SS parameter being PDCCH SS sets containing PDCCH candidates per CCE aggregation level and per paragraph 172 G-RNTI is additional parameter for MBS related search space set (MSS) including at least one of: a defined set of control channel element (CCE) aggregation levels or a quantity of one or more physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) candidates per CCE aggregation level (See paragraph 6 indicating receiving/obtaining configuration for a plurality of search space (SS) sets and in paragraph 113 the obtained PDCCH configuration contains PDCCH SS set . In paragraph 114 it is disclosed that the PDCCH SS set includes PDCCH candidates and the PDCCH candidates are CCEs (Control Channel Elements) with corresponding Aggregation Levels (AL). See Paragraphs 115-121 on SS configuration and included parameters); and
monitor for one or more PDCCHs scheduling communication via one or more multicast-broadcast service (MBS) channels based on the one or more SS parameters. (Per paragraph 171 the BS provides MBS related Search Space (MSS ) and the MSS set is configured to be associated with one MBS channel such as MCCH and MTCH and the MSS has additional parameter G-RNTI and based on the MSS/SS parameter of G-RNTI the UE monitors PDCCH scheduling communication as detailed in paragraphs 15 and 297. See also paragraphs 8 and 172-176 on MBS related search space (MSS) and related parameters)
Regarding claim 25, Lee discloses a method (Figs. 1-17) for wireless communication at a wireless node, the method comprising:
obtaining signaling indicating one or more search space (SS) parameters (i.e. see paragraph 114 indicating SS parameter being PDCCH SS sets containing PDCCH candidates per CCE aggregation level and per paragraph 172 G-RNTI is additional parameter for MBS related search space set (MSS) including at least one of: a defined set of control channel element (CCE) aggregation levels or a quantity of one or more physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) candidates per CCE aggregation level (See paragraph 6 indicating receiving/obtaining configuration for a plurality of search space (SS) sets and in paragraph 113 the obtained PDCCH configuration contains PDCCH SS set . In paragraph 114 it is disclosed that the PDCCH SS set includes PDCCH candidates and the PDCCH candidates are CCEs (Control Channel Elements) with corresponding Aggregation Levels (AL). See Paragraphs 115-121 on SS configuration and included parameters); and
monitoring for one or more PDCCHs scheduling communication via one or more multicast-broadcast service (MBS) channels based on the one or more SS parameters. (Per paragraph 171 the BS provides MBS related Search Space (MSS ) and the MSS set is configured to be associated with one MBS channel such as MCCH and MTCH and the MSS has additional parameter G-RNTI and based on the MSS/SS parameter of G-RNTI the UE monitors PDCCH scheduling communication as detailed in paragraphs 15 and 297. See also paragraphs 8 and 172-176 on MBS related search space (MSS) and related parameters)
Regarding Claim 26, Lee discloses in apparatus (Wireless Device 200 in Fig. 15 with its components processor 202 and memory 204 shown in Fig. 16 and refers to the BS (Base Station) in Fig. 8 and detailed in paragraphs [0309-0325]) for wireless communication (See Fig. 8), comprising: at least one memory (Fig. 15 Memory 204 and Fig. 16 Memory unit 130 and has programs/code/commands/information stored in the memory per paragraph 318) comprising computer-executable instructions; and one or more processors (Fig. 15 processor 202 and Fig. 16 Control Unit /Processor(s) 120) configured to execute the computer-executable instructions and cause the apparatus to: output for transmission signaling (Per paragraph 112 and Fig. 8 PDCCH SS configuration is transmitted from the BS to the UE via RRC signaling) indicating one or more search space (SS) parameters (i.e. see paragraph 114 indicating SS parameter being PDCCH SS sets containing PDCCH candidates per CCE aggregation level and per paragraph 172 G-RNTI is additional parameter for MBS related search space set (MSS) including at least one of: a defined set of control channel element (CCE) aggregation levels or a quantity of one or more physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) candidates per CCE aggregation level (See paragraph 6 indicating receiving/obtaining configuration for a plurality of search space (SS) sets and in paragraph 113 the obtained PDCCH configuration contains PDCCH SS set . In paragraph 114 it is disclosed that the PDCCH SS set includes PDCCH candidates and the PDCCH candidates are CCEs (Control Channel Elements) with corresponding Aggregation Levels (AL). See Paragraphs 115-121 on SS configuration and included parameters); and
output for transmission (See Fig. 8 BS outputting MSS on MTCH to UE) one or more PDCCHs scheduling communication via one or more multicast-broadcast service (MBS) channels based on the one or more SS parameters. (Per paragraph 171 the BS provides MBS related Search Space (MSS ) and the MSS set is configured to be associated with one MBS channel such as MCCH and MTCH and the MSS has additional parameter G-RNTI and based on the MSS/SS parameter of G-RNTI the UE monitors PDCCH scheduling communication as detailed in paragraphs 15 and 297. See also paragraphs 8 and 172-176 on MBS related search space (MSS) and related parameters)
Regarding claim 2, Lee discloses the apparatus of claim 1, and further discloses wherein the one or more MBS channels comprise at least one of: an MBS control channel (MCCH) or an MBS traffic channel (MTCH). (See paragraph 177 disclosing that When the BS performs multicast/broadcast transmission based on beamforming, the BS may configure one G-RNTI, one MBS service, or one MCCH/MTCH to be associated with a plurality of CORSETs/MSS sets. See also paragraphs 189 and 199 too)
Regarding claim 27, claim 27 is rejected in the same scope as claim 2.
Regarding claim 3, Lee discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the monitoring comprises monitoring for a PDCCH scheduling communication via a multicast MBS control channel (MCCH), said
monitoring being performed during a radio resource control (RRC) inactive mode.(Per paragraphs 234-245 Lee discloses idle/inactive UE may monitor a search space in the PDCCH in order to receive MBS messages. For example in paragraph 237 Lee discloses the idle/inactive UE or connected UE may monitor a CSS Type 3 PDCCH or USS PDCCH, )
Regarding claim 28, claim 28 is rejected in the same scope as claim 3.
Regarding claim 4, Lee discloses the apparatus of claim 3, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to execute the computer-executable instructions and cause the apparatus to obtain at least one of: a system information block (SIB) or an RRC release message
configuring an SS for the PDCCH to schedule communication via the multicast MCCH. (Lee’s Paragraph 183 disclosing that the MBS SIB may include configuration information on an MCCH DL/UL BWP for at least one MCCH and configuration information on a PDCCH MSS set for MCCH transmission. See also paragraphs 179 and 182 )
Regarding claim 29, claim 29 is rejected in the same scope as claim 4.
Regarding claim 5, Lee discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the monitoring comprises monitoring in a Type0-PDCCH common SS (CSS) or a Type 0B-PDCCH CSS for a first downlink control information (DCI) format scheduling communication via a multicast MBS control channel (MCCH). (Per paragraph 186 it is indicated the Type0A-PDCCH CSS set can be monitored to receive the MBS SIB or any type of CSS included in Table 3 and Type0 PDCCH Common SS is included)
Regarding claim 7, Lee discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the monitoring comprises monitoring for a PDCCH scheduling communication via a multicast MBS traffic channel (MTCH), said monitoring being performed during a radio resource control (RRC) inactive mode. (Lee indicates in paragraph 238 that the UE in inactive state monitors PDCCH scheduling and also monitors PDSCH scheduling and in paragraph 239 Lee discloses PDSCH Scheduling is received in MTCH)
Regarding claim 8, Lee discloses the apparatus of claim 7, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to execute the computer-executable instructions and cause the apparatus to obtain a MBS control channel (MCCH), wherein the MCCH comprises control information that configures a mapping of PDCCH monitoring occasions of the multicast MTCH to synchronization signal blocks (SSBs). (Lee defines PDCCH monitoring occasion in paragraph 121 as monitoring PDCCH candidates using in a time/frequency resources in a slot. Lee discloses associating SSB to PDCCH/SS/MSS in paragraph 177 and in paragraph 178 it is disclosed the plurality of SSBs is mapped to PDCCH/SS/MSS by the BS. In paragraph 178 Lee discloses monitoring PDCCH monitoring occasions of the multicast MTCH to synchronization signal blocks (SSBs). Also note paragraph 173 discloses SS/MSS is associated with at least one MCCH and/or MTCH)
Regarding claim 9, Lee discloses the apparatus of claim 8, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to execute the computer-executable instructions and cause the apparatus to detect one or more of the SSBs, wherein the monitoring comprises monitoring the PDCCH monitoring occasions of the multicast MTCH based on the mapping.(Lee discloses in paragraph 188 detecting SSBs via a CORESET/CSS/PDCCH and measuring the SSB and in paragraph 173 it is disclosed SS/MSS is associated with at least one MCCH and/or MTCH)
Regarding claim 10, Lee discloses the apparatus of claim 7, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to execute the computer-executable instructions and cause the apparatus to obtain at least one of: a system information block (SIB) (See Paragraph 174 indicating MBS SIB being associated and received on MSS/SS set) or an RRC release message configuring a SS, wherein the monitoring comprises monitoring in the SS for the PDCCH scheduling communication via the multicast MTCH. (Paragraph 173 discloses MSS/SS set being received via MTCH where the SS for the PDCCH/PDSCH scheduling communication is disclosed in paragraph 179)
Regarding claim 24. Lee discloses the apparatus of claim 1, further comprising at least one transceiver (i.e. Fig. 15 Transceiver 106) configured to receive the signaling and receiving the one or more PDCCHs, wherein the apparatus is configured as a user equipment (UE). (Fig. 15 apparatus 100 is a UE and receives PDCCH as shown in Fig. 8 and see paragraphs 309-310)
Regarding claim 30, Lee discloses the apparatus of claim 26, further comprising at least one transceiver (i.e. Fig. 15 Transceiver 206) configured to transmit the signaling and transmit the one or more PDCCHs, wherein the apparatus is configured as a network entity. ). (Fig. 15 apparatus 200 is a BS as a network entity and transmits PDCCH as shown in Fig. 8 and see paragraphs 309-310)
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.
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.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Zhang (WO 2024/130598 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Lee discloses the apparatus of claim 5, but fails to disclose wherein the first DCI format is a DCI format 4_0.
Zhang in the same endeavor discloses wherein the first DCI format is a DCI format 4_0. (Paragraph 81 discloses DCI Format 4_0 I used for MCCH-RNTI in an MBS service)
In view of the above, having Lee’s monitoring Search Space techniques and then given the well- established teaching of Zhang’s techniques for formatting DCi, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify Lee’s monitoring Search Space techniques as taught by Zhang’s techniques for formatting DCi, since Zhang states in paragraph 82 that the modification results in allowing the UE to be scheduled for PDSCH broadcast and enable resource-efficient delivery of multicast/broadcast services as further stated in Zhang’s paragraph 2.
Claim(s) 11 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Yerramalli (WO 2022147380 A1).
Regarding claim 11, Lee discloses the apparatus of claim 10 set forth above, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to execute the computer-executable instructions and cause the apparatus to: Lee further discloses monitor another configured SS for a PDCCH scheduling communication via the
multicast MTCH, said monitoring being performed during an RRC connected mode; . (Lee indicates in paragraph 238 that the UE in connected state monitors PDCCH scheduling and also monitors PDSCH scheduling and in paragraph 239 Lee discloses PDSCH Scheduling is received in MTCH)
Lee fails to disclose enter the RRC inactive mode, wherein the RRC release message configuring the SS is obtained.
Yerramalli discloses enter the RRC inactive mode, wherein the RRC release message configuring the SS is obtained. (See paragraph 132 and Fig. 5 from RRC Connected state of Fig. 5 step 520 transitions to RRC connected inactive 530 when an RRC release message is received. The configuration of the Type2a-PDCCH can be signaled as indicated to the UE in the RRC release message that sets up the RRC INACTIVE state 530 (e.g., the RRC release messages at stages 23.6 and 23.10) See paragraphs 100, 117 123 and 155) .
In view of the above, having Lee’s monitoring Search Space techniques and then given the well- established teaching of Yerramalli ’s techniques for inactive RRC mode SS configuring, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify Lee’s monitoring Search Space techniques as taught by Yerramalli ’s techniques for inactive RRC mode SS configuring, since Yerramalli states in paragraph 117 that the modification results in allowing benefits to the network of INACTIVE state positioning include faster UE transitions to the CONNECTED state since the network maintains the UE's context (e.g., network identifiers, radio bearers, etc.) while it is in the INACTIVE state. Benefits to the UE also include faster transitions to the CONNECTED state and in addition, decreased power consumption, as the UE is only monitoring for pages when in the INACTIVE state.
Regarding claim 12, Lee discloses the apparatus of claim 10 set forth above, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to execute the computer-executable instructions and cause the apparatus to: Lee further discloses monitor another configured SS for a PDCCH scheduling communication via the
multicast MTCH, said monitoring being performed during an RRC connected mode; . (Lee indicates in paragraph 238 that the UE in connected state monitors PDCCH scheduling and also monitors PDSCH scheduling and in paragraph 239 Lee discloses PDSCH Scheduling is received in MTCH)
Lee fails to disclose enter the RRC inactive mode, wherein the monitoring comprises continuing to monitor in the other SS for the PDCCH scheduling the multicast MTCH until the SIB is obtained.
Yerramalli discloses enter the RRC inactive mode, wherein the monitoring comprises continuing to monitor in the other SS for the PDCCH scheduling the multicast MTCH until the SIB is obtained. (Per paragraph 132 states a cell-specific Type2a-PDCCH search space can be configured that a UE can monitor while in the RRC INACTIVE state 530. The configuration of the Type2a-PDCCH can be signaled in (1) an existing SIB (e.g., a PDCCH configuration common in remaining minimum system information (RMSI) or positioning SIBs (Pos-SIBs)), (2) a new SIB defined for this purpose)
In view of the above, having Lee’s monitoring Search Space techniques and then given the well- established teaching of Yerramalli ’s techniques for inactive RRC mode SS configuring, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify Lee’s monitoring Search Space techniques as taught by Yerramalli ’s techniques for inactive RRC mode SS configuring, since Yerramalli states in paragraph 117 that the modification results in allowing benefits to the network of INACTIVE state positioning include faster UE transitions to the CONNECTED state since the network maintains the UE's context (e.g., network identifiers, radio bearers, etc.) while it is in the INACTIVE state. Benefits to the UE also include faster transitions to the CONNECTED state and in addition, decreased power consumption, as the UE is only monitoring for pages when in the INACTIVE state.
Claim(s) 13, 15, 17 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Li (WO 2022218326 A1).
Regarding claim 13, Lee discloses the apparatus of claim 7, wherein the monitoring comprises monitoring in a Type0-PDCCH common SS (CSS) or a TypeOB-PDCCH CSS via the multicast MTCH (See Lee’s Table 3 Type0-PDCCH common SS being monitored and transmitted on PDSCH/MTCH as detailed n paragraph 166 and DCI formats taught in table 4)
However, Lee fails to disclose for a second downlink control information (DCI) format scheduling communication for Type0-PDCCH.
Li discloses for a second downlink control information (DCI) format scheduling communication for Type0-PDCCH. (See paragraph 55 Type 0 PDCCH with second or different DCI format. See also paragraph 125)
In view of the above, having Lee’s monitoring Search Space techniques and then given the well- established teaching of Li s techniques allocating a candidate PDCCH via formatting DCI, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify Lee’s monitoring Search Space techniques as taught by Li s techniques allocating a candidate PDCCH via formatting DCI, since Li states in paragraph 8 that the modification results in allocating candidate PDCCH of different search space sets in a non-connected state.
Regarding claim 15, Lee discloses the apparatus of claim 7, wherein the monitoring comprises monitoring in a Type3-PDCCH common SS (CSS) for scheduling communication via the multicast MTCH. (See table 3 Type 3-PDCCH Common SS being monitored and transmitted on PDSCH/MTCH as detailed n paragraph 166 and DCI formats shown in table 4).
However, Lee fails to disclose for a third downlink control information (DCI) format scheduling communication for Type3-PDCCH.
Li in the same endeavor discloses a third downlink control information (DCI) format scheduling communication for Type3-PDCCH. (See paragraph 59 Type 3 PDCCH with third or different DCI format like a fifth format. See also paragraph 125)
In view of the above, having Lee’s monitoring Search Space techniques and then given the well- established teaching of Li s techniques allocating a candidate PDCCH via formatting DCI, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify Lee’s monitoring Search Space techniques as taught by Li s techniques allocating a candidate PDCCH via formatting DCI, since Li states in paragraph 8 that the modification results in allocating candidate PDCCH of different search space sets in a non-connected state.
Regarding claim 17, Lee modified Li discloses the apparatus of claim 15, Lee further discloses wherein the monitoring comprises monitoring at least one of: PDCCH candidates of the defined set of CCE aggregation levels (i.e. Lee ‘s paragraph 114 discloses CCE aggregate levels containing PDCCH candidates being monitored. See tables 7-11 too) or the quantity of one or more PDCCH candidates per CCE aggregation level in a Type3-PDCCH CSS for the PDCCH scheduling communication via the multicast MTCH (alternate limitation need not be addressed being claimed in the alternate. However Lee discloses in paragraph 114 aggregation levels 1, 2, 4, 8 or 16 CCEs with PDCCH candidates . Per paragraphs 119 and 120 the number of PDCCH candidates are defined and monitored. ), said monitoring being performing during the RRC inactive mode.(See Lee paragraphs 236-238 monitoring CSS Type 3 PDCCH when the UE is either in inactive/idle or connected mode)
The motivation to combine Lee and Li is set forth above.
Regarding claim 18, Lee modified Li discloses the apparatus of claim 15, Lee further discloses wherein the monitoring comprises monitoring unrestricted CCE aggregation levels and an unrestricted number of PDCCH candidates per CCE aggregation level (See Lee in paragraph 114 aggregation levels 1, 2, 4, 8 or 16 CCEs with PDCCH candidates . Per paragraphs 119 and 120 the number of PDCCH candidates are defined. However per paragraph 235 Lee indicates unlimited number of PDCCH candidates can be monitored but to lower Blind Detection (BD) overhead a maximum limit of PDCCH candidates is applied, For Type 3 CSS PDCCH per paragraph 275 it can be prioritized and its limit/restriction increased over all USSs) in a Type3-PDCCH CSS for the PDCCH scheduling communication via the multicast MTCH, (See Lee table 3 Type 3-PDCCH Common SS being monitored and transmitted on PDSCH/MTCH as detailed n paragraph 166) said monitoring being performed during the RRC inactive mode. (See Lee paragraphs 236-238 monitoring CSS Type 3 PDCCH when the UE is either in inactive/idle or connected mode. (Lee indicates in paragraph 238 that the UE in inactive state monitors PDCCH scheduling and also monitors PDSCH scheduling and in paragraph 239 Lee discloses PDSCH Scheduling is received in MTCH)
The motivation to combine Lee and Li is set forth above.
Claim(s) 14 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Li and further in view of Yoshioka et al (US 20250175983 A1).
Regarding claim 14, Lee modified by Li discloses the apparatus of claim 13 but fails to disclose wherein the second DCI format is a DCI format 4_1 or a DCI format 4_2 for scheduling communication via the multicast MTCH.
Yoshioka discloses wherein the second DCI format is a DCI format 4_1 or a DCI format 4_2 for scheduling communication via the multicast MTCH. .( Per paragraph 68 Yoshioka discloses use of DCI format 4_1 or DCI format 4_2 for multicast operation on MCCH and MTCH – see also paragraphs 73, 115, 146 and 147)
In view of the above, having Lee’s monitoring Search Space techniques modified by Li s techniques allocating a candidate PDCCH via formatting DCI and then given the well- established teaching of Yoshioka’ s use of DCI format, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to further modify Lee’s monitoring Search Space techniques modified by Li s techniques allocating a candidate PDCCH via formatting DCI as taught by Yoshioka’ s use of DCI format, since Yoshika states in paragraph 68 that the modification results in providing DCI formats for multicast.
Regarding claim 16, Lee modified by Li discloses the apparatus of claim 15 but fails to disclose the third DCI format is a DCI format is a DCI format 4_1 for scheduling communication via the multicast MTCH.
Yoshioka discloses the third DCI format is a DCI format is a DCI format 4_1 for scheduling communication via the multicast MTCH.( Per paragraph 68 Yoshioka discloses use of DCI format 4_2 for multicast operation on MCCH and MTCH – see also paragraphs 73, 115, 146 and 147)
In view of the above, having Lee’s monitoring Search Space techniques modified by Li s techniques allocating a candidate PDCCH via formatting DCI and then given the well- established teaching of Yoshioka’ s use of DCI format, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to further modify Lee’s monitoring Search Space techniques modified by Li s techniques allocating a candidate PDCCH via formatting DCI as taught by Yoshioka’ s use of DCI format, since Yoshika states in paragraph 68 that the modification results in providing DCI formats for multicast.
Claim(s) 19-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Chatterjee et al (US 20190246254 A1).
Regarding claim 19, Lee discloses the apparatus of claim 1 including Type3-PDCCH (Table 3) and MCCH and MTCH (paragraph 166), however Lee fails to disclose wherein the monitoring comprises monitoring in a TypeOB—PDCCH common SS (CSS) or a Type3-PDCCH CSS for PDCCHs scheduling communication via a broadcast MBS control channel (MCCH) and a broadcast MBS traffic channel (MTCH).
Chatterjee in the same endeavor discloses, wherein the monitoring comprises monitoring in a TypeOB—PDCCH common SS (CSS) or a Type3-PDCCH CSS for PDCCHs scheduling communication via a broadcast MBS control channel (MCCH) and a broadcast MBS traffic channel (MTCH). (Chatterjee literally teaches the limitation in question in paragraphs 45, 63 and 64. In paragraph 45 Type3-CSS for MPDCCH/NPDCCH used for scheduling for downlink channel (i.e. MCCH) is established and in paragraph 63 Chatterjee further establishes SC-MCCH scheduled by MPDCCH/NPDCCH in Type 3-CSS. Further in paragraph 64 Chatterjee discloses Type3-CSS and the associated PDSCH/NPDSCH carrying SC-MCCH and SC-MTCH content, respectively, with other search spaces and downlink channels that the UE may be expected to monitor or receive.)
In view of the above, having Lee’s monitoring Search Space techniques and then given the well- established teaching of Chatterjee’s Type3-CSS for MPDCCH/NPDCCH, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify Lee’s monitoring Search Space techniques as taught by Chatterjee’s Type3-CSS for MPDCCH/NPDCCH, since Chatterjee states in paragraph 45 given the broadcast nature of SC-PTM transmissions in a single cell that the modification results in allowing all or a group of UEs within a multicast region (cell ) to monitor the scheduling of the downlink control channel (i.e. the SC-MCCH) using MPDCCH/NPDCCH.
Regarding claim 20, Lee modified by Chatterjee discloses the apparatus of claim 19, Lee further disclose wherein the monitoring comprises:
monitoring at least one of: the defined set of CCE aggregation levels (i.e. Lee ‘s paragraph 114 discloses CCE aggregate levels containing PDCCH candidates being monitored. See tables 7-11 too) or the quantity of one or more PDCCH candidates per CCE aggregation level for the PDCCH (i.e. See Lee’s paragraphs 119 and 120 indicating the quantity of PDCCH candidates to be monitored) scheduling communication via one of the broadcast MTCH and the broadcast MCCH(See Lee table 3 Type 3-PDCCH Common SS being monitored and transmitted on PDSCH/MTCH as detailed n paragraph 166) ; and
monitoring unrestricted CCE aggregation levels and unrestricted number of PDCCH candidates per CCE aggregation level for the PDCCH scheduling (See Lee in paragraph 114 aggregation levels 1, 2, 4, 8 or 16 CCEs with PDCCH candidates . Per paragraphs 119 and 120 the number of PDCCH candidates are defined. However per paragraph 235 Lee indicates unlimited number of PDCCH candidates can be monitored but to lower Blind Detection (BD) overhead a maximum limit of PDCCH candidates is applied, For Type 3 CSS PDCCH per paragraph 275 it can be prioritized and its limit/restriction increased over all USSs) communication via the other one of the broadcast MTCH and the broadcast MCCH. (See Lee’s Paragraph 166 on broadcast MCCH and MTCH)
The motivation to combine Lee and Chatterjee is set forth above.
Regarding claim 21, Lee modified by Chatterjee discloses the apparatus of claim 19, Lee further discloses monitoring at least one of: the defined set of CCE aggregation levels (i.e. Lee ‘s paragraph 114 discloses CCE aggregate levels containing PDCCH candidates being monitored. See tables 7-11 too) or the quantity of one or more PDCCH candidates per CCE aggregation level for the PDCCH (i.e. See Lee’s paragraphs 119 and 120 indicating the quantity of PDCCH candidates to be monitored. See Lee table 3 Type 3-PDCCH Common SS being monitored and transmitted on PDSCH/MTCH as detailed n paragraph 166)
Lee fails to disclose for both the PDCCH scheduling communication via the broadcast MTCH and the PDCCH scheduling communication via the broadcast MCCH.
Chatterjee in the same endeavor discloses, for both the PDCCH scheduling communication via the broadcast MTCH and the PDCCH scheduling communication via the broadcast MCCH. (Chatterjee discloses in paragraph 56 aggregation level of the PDCCH/MPDCCH type 3-CSS. Chatterjee literally teaches the limitation in question in paragraphs 45, 63 and 64. In paragraph 45 Type3-CSS for MPDCCH/NPDCCH used for scheduling for downlink channel (i.e. MCCH) is established and in paragraph 63 Chatterjee further establishes SC-MCCH scheduled by MPDCCH/NPDCCH in Type 3-CSS. Further in paragraph 64 Chatterjee discloses Type3-CSS and the associated PDSCH/NPDSCH carrying SC-MCCH and SC-MTCH content, respectively, with other search spaces and downlink channels that the UE may be expected to monitor or receive.)
In view of the above, having Lee’s monitoring Search Space techniques and then given the well- established teaching of Chatterjee’s Type3-CSS for MPDCCH/NPDCCH, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify Lee’s monitoring Search Space techniques as taught by Chatterjee’s Type3-CSS for MPDCCH/NPDCCH, since Chatterjee states in paragraph 45 given the broadcast nature of SC-PTM transmissions in a single cell that the modification results in allowing all or a group of UEs within a multicast region (cell ) to monitor the scheduling of the downlink control channel (i.e. the SC-MCCH) using MPDCCH/NPDCCH.
Regarding claim 22, Lee modified by Chatterjee discloses the apparatus of claim 19, Lee further discloses wherein the monitoring comprises monitoring unrestricted CCE aggregation levels and an unrestricted number of PDCCH candidates per CCE aggregation level (See Lee in paragraph 114 aggregation levels 1, 2, 4, 8 or 16 CCEs with PDCCH candidates . Per paragraphs 119 and 120 the number of PDCCH candidates are defined. However per paragraph 235 Lee indicates unlimited number of PDCCH candidates can be monitored but to lower Blind Detection (BD) overhead a maximum limit of PDCCH candidates is applied, For Type 3 CSS PDCCH per paragraph 275 it can be prioritized and its limit/restriction increased over all USSs and Type3-PDCCH CSS for the PDCCH scheduling communication via the multicast MTCH taught -See Lee table 3 Type 3-PDCCH Common SS being monitored and transmitted on PDSCH/MTCH as detailed n paragraph 166)
Lee fails to disclose for both the PDCCH scheduling communication via the broadcast MTCH and the PDCCH scheduling communication via the broadcast MCCH.
Chatterjee in the same endeavor discloses, for both the PDCCH scheduling communication via the broadcast MTCH and the PDCCH scheduling communication via the broadcast MCCH. (Chatterjee discloses in paragraph 56 aggregation level of the PDCCH/MPDCCH type 3-CSS. Chatterjee literally teaches the limitation in question in paragraphs 45, 63 and 64. In paragraph 45 Type3-CSS for MPDCCH/NPDCCH used for scheduling for downlink channel (i.e. MCCH) is established and in paragraph 63 Chatterjee further establishes SC-MCCH scheduled by MPDCCH/NPDCCH in Type 3-CSS. Further in paragraph 64 Chatterjee discloses Type3-CSS and the associated PDSCH/NPDSCH carrying SC-MCCH and SC-MTCH content, respectively, with other search spaces and downlink channels that the UE may be expected to monitor or receive.)
In view of the above, having Lee’s monitoring Search Space techniques and then given the well- established teaching of Chatterjee’s Type3-CSS for MPDCCH/NPDCCH, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify Lee’s monitoring Search Space techniques as taught by Chatterjee’s Type3-CSS for MPDCCH/NPDCCH, since Chatterjee states in paragraph 45 given the broadcast nature of SC-PTM transmissions in a single cell that the modification results in allowing all or a group of UEs within a multicast region (cell ) to monitor the scheduling of the downlink control channel (i.e. the SC-MCCH) using MPDCCH/NPDCCH.
Claim(s) 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Zhang et al (US 20250031276 A1).
Regarding claim 23, Lee discloses the apparatus of claim 19 including PDCCH scheduling communication on broadcast MBS channel, MCCH, and PCell but fails to disclose wherein the PDCCH scheduling communication via the broadcast MBS channel is on at least one of a primary cell (PCell) or a secondary cell (Scell) during a radio resource control (RRC) connected mode.
Latheef fails to disclose wherein the PDCCH scheduling communication via the broadcast MBS channel is on at least one of a primary cell (PCell) or a secondary cell (Scell) during a radio resource control (RRC) connected mode. (See paragraph 92 narrating while being connected to the PCell receiving PDCCH scheduling on MBS broadcast channel, MCCH, in RRC_Connected mode with the PCell. See also paragraphs 16 and 17 on PDCCH and MCCH )
In view of the above, having Lee’s monitoring Search Space techniques and then given the well- established teaching of Latheef ’s techniques on configuring MBS services for PCell/SCell , it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify Lee’s monitoring Search Space techniques as taught by Latheef ’s techniques on configuring MBS services for PCell/SCell, since Latheef states in paragraphs 10 and 13 that the modification results in allowing to deliver MBS service related configuration that facilitate a UE's operation and access to the relevant MBS service and to specify a new SIB carrying frequency-service mapping which is also applicable in a non-MBS cell and ensure cell reselection and service continuity aspects for MBS.
Conclusion
Examiner’s Note: Applicant is advised to review the following prior arts:
A) Wang (US20250168668 A1) discloses type0B-PDCCh CSS in paragraph 93.
B) Baek et al (US 20230189295 A1) discloses in paragraph 83 teaches the limitations of dependent claims 10 and 11.
C) Babaei et al (US 20230371046 A1) discloses in paragraph 129 teaches the limitations of claims 10 and 11.
D) Jeon et al (US 20220322419 A1) in paragraphs 228, 230, 249, 263 285, 295 and 387 teaches the limitations of independent claims and dependent claims 10 and 11.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HABTE MERED whose telephone number is (571)272-6046. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 12-10 PM EST.
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, Michael Thier can be reached at 5712722832. 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.
/HABTE MERED/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2474