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 .
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 1, 9-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over PARK et al PG PUB 2024/0372661 in view of SHIM et al PG PUB 2025/0344086.
Re Claims 1, 14-17, Park et al teaches in figure 6, a WTRU (a wireless communication device comprising a processor) receiving a RRC configuration, initial configuration, indicating a resource configuration set scheduled in a cross-division duplex XDD slot [0127 0134 0136] from a gNB (a wireless communication node comprising a processor) wherein in figure 3 teaches the XDD slot to includes a BWP 302 configured with a second region (one or more frequency domain resources) of the BWP 312 for uplink and a first region and a third region of BWP 310 and BWP 314 (one or more frequency region resources) for downlink [0125]; the gNB (the wireless communication node) can determine whether to dynamically change/adjust/switch a communication direction (e.g., a downlink, an uplink) [0086 0135] to minimize CLI [0086].
PARK et al fails to explicitly teach “remapping…one or more resource units of the resource configuration set that overlap with a frequency band in the XDD slot…”.
However, SHIM et al also teaches in an XDD system configured with DL-UL configuration, a CLI measurement accuracy may be deteriorated due to a BWP mismatch shared on a frequency domain [0547]. To improve the measurement accuracy, a DL BWP may be changed (remapped) to a BWP including or overlapping BWP on which a UL resource [0555] wherein SHIM et al teaches RRCReconfiguration 21-10, See figure 21, indicating the changed/remapped configuration to the UE. One skilled in the art would have been motivated to have remapped the one or more Rus of the resource configuration set that overlaps with the frequency band in the XDD slot to improve the measurement accuracy. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled to have combined the teachings.
Re Claim 9, Park et al teaches sending by the base station (the wireless communication node) to the WTRU (the wireless communication device) a RRC configuration (signaling) including a bitmap indicating RBs (a time duration) as UL or DL (a transmission direction) [0121 0122 0146].
Re Claim 10, Park et al teaches the bitmap of N bits indicating UL or DL for the T RSs (time domain units) and N and T are positive integers.
Re Claim 11, Park et al teaches the bitmap can indicate of subbands (M bits) associated with DL or UL wherein Type M2 has 3 subbands and Type M3 has 2 subbands associated with different frequency domain units (F frequency domain units) wherein F and M are positive integers.
Re Claims 12 and 13, Park et al teaches RB level bitmap comprising N bits for a BWP associated with a UL or DL [0125] wherein the RB level bitmap can include a time TDRA field (T time domain units for the time duration) indicating a group of RBs (G groups) [0146]; FDRA field (F frequency domain units) indicating a number of subbands [0083] in the XDD slot wherein N, T and G are each a positive integer value. The RB level bitmap (N bits) can incorporate the TDRA field (T time domain units) indicating a group of RS (G groups) and the FDRA field (F domain units).
Park et al fails to explicitly teach "wherein each of G sets of Bits from a MSB of the N bits have a one-to-one mapping with the G groups". However, mapping the TDRA field in the MSB of the RB level bitmap would have been a matter of design choice as long as each field in the RB level bitmap can be determined. The TDRA field/FDRA field has a one-to-one mapping to a number of RG groups (partitioned into G groups of RBs). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the have mapped the TDRA field in the MSB.
Re Claims 18, 21, PARK et al teaches in figure 3, the WTRU is configured with a resource configurations set which includes DL, UL BWPs.
Re Claims 19, 22, Park et al teaches in figure 3, the BWP includes a set of RBs (a RBG).
Re Claims 20, 23-26, SHIM et al teaches to improve the measurement accuracy, a DL BWP may be changed (remapped) to a BWP including or overlapping BWP on which a UL resource [0555]. In so doing, one or more frequency bands in the XDD overlapping within the resource configuration set can be remapped to the same transmission direction to improve the measurement accuracy.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 27-28 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Re Claims 27, 28, prior art fails to teach remapping the one or more RUs to the region in the XDD slot in response to the resource configuration set being a CORESET as claimed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 9-26 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-3130. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30AM-5PM 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, KASSIM KHALAD can be reached at 5712703770. 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.
/ANDREW LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2475
Prosecution Insights