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 .
Response to Amendment
This communication is considered fully responsive to the amendment filed on 12/16/2025.
Claims 1, 3, 5, and 6 have been amended.
Claims 2 and 4 have been canceled.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 3, 5, and 6 filed on 12/16/2025 have been considered but are moot because the arguments related solely to newly added limitations addressed in the instant Office Action with newly identified prior art, thus rendering applicant’s arguments moot.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3, and 6 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nory et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20160302180, hereinafter “Nory”) in view of Li (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20190334680, hereinafter “Li”).
Examiner’s note: in what follows, references are drawn to Nory unless otherwise mentioned.
With respect to independent claims:
Regarding claim 1, Nory teaches A communication device (Fig. 1; a first device 110 (interpreted as “A communication device”) and a second device 120 (interpreted as “another communication device”).) comprising:
a receiver (Fig. 6 and para [0075]: a transceiver 650) configured to receive a preamble in resources that are selected autonomously by another communication device (para [0055]: At 330, a preamble transmission from the second device (interpreted as “another communication device”) can be detected in a first set of Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing (OFDM) symbols starting with a first OFDM symbol (interpreted as “resources that are selected autonomously by another communication device”) in a subframe received on the Scell.); and
a processor (Fig. 6, a controller 620) configured to acquire, based on the preamble, information for receiving a control signal from the another communication device (para [0057]: The preamble transmission can carry preamble information indicating a number of subsequent subframes that the second device intends to transmit continuously immediately following the first subframe. … Detecting the preamble transmission can include decoding a downlink control information (DCI) containing preamble information in the first subframe by monitoring a maximum of a first number (N1) of control channel blind decoding candidates (the ‘DCI containing preamble information’ is interpreted as “information for receiving a control signal from the another communication device”). For example, a maximum of N1 control channel blind decoding candidates can be monitored, where N1=N14+N18, and N14 and N18 can be a number of control channel blind decoding candidates corresponding to CCE/ ECCE aggregation level 4 and 8 respectively, and where N14=4 and N18=2. Detecting the preamble transmission can include successfully decoding downlink control information (DCI) containing preamble information (interpreted as “acquire, based on the preamble, information for receiving a control signal from the another communication device”).
wherein the receiver receives the control signal from the another communication device based on the information (para [0071]: At 520, the wireless communication device can communicate with a second device using a primary serving cell (Pcell) operating on a licensed carrier and a secondary serving cell (Scell) operating on an unlicensed carrier. At 530, Downlink Control Information (DCI) containing PDSCH resource assignments can be received in one of two types of control channels in a subframe. At 540, a type of truncation of the subframe can be determined based on the type of control channel on which the DCI is received.) (para [0072]: At 550, the PDSCH can be decoded based on at least the determined type of truncation of the subframe. Decoding can also mean the device can either decode the PDSCH based on the DCI, or the device can do some processing (e.g. compute rate, SINR, etc) to make a determination if it is worth decoding the PDSCH (i.e. if it is likely the decoding will result in failure of the packet) and skip decoding the PDSCH to save some decoding complexity. The DCI can include a subframe truncation field indicating a truncation value for receiving PDSCH in the subframe and decoding can include decoding the PDSCH based on at least the determined type of truncation of the subframe and the truncation value. … Decoding can also include decoding the PDSCH based on the determined type of truncation of the subframe and other information included in the DCI. For example, the other information can include a PDSCH resource assignment and other information (interpreted as “receives the control signal from the another communication device based on the information”, the PDSCH resource assignment and other information included in the DCI is interpreted as “the information”).), and
Nory does not explicitly teaches the above strike features: wherein the information includes a bitmap that indicates, for each bandwidth part allocated to the communication device, an allocated frequency resource in units of a predetermined number of resource blocks, RBs
In analogous art, Li teaches wherein the information includes a bitmap that indicates, for each bandwidth part allocated to the communication device, an allocated frequency resource in units of a predetermined number of resource blocks, RBs (para [0060] of Li: In the LTE standard, downlink resource allocation includes three resource allocation types 0 to 2, and the three resource allocation types are corresponding to three resource indication methods. Details are as follows: ) (para [0061] of Li: (1) In a downlink resource allocation type 0, a downlink control information (DCI) format 1/2/2A/2B/2C indicates, by using a bitmap, a resource block group (RBG) (interpreted as “in units of a predetermined number of resource blocks, RBs”) allocated to UE. The bitmap includes NRBG=┌NRD DL/P┐ bits in total, where NRB DL represents a downlink bandwidth (interpreted as “for each bandwidth part allocated to the communication device”) , P represents a size of the RBG, and NRBG represents a quantity of bits included in the bitmap and a quantity of RBGs as well. In other words, each bit is corresponding to one RBG. An RBG 0 represents a most significant bit, an RBG NRBG−1 represents a least significant bit, and the rest is deduced by analogy. If an RBG is allocated to UE, a corresponding bit in the bitmap is set to 1; If an RBG is not allocated to UE, the bit is set to 0. The resource allocation type 0 supports allocation of nonconsecutive RBs in frequency domain.)
The combination of Nory and the teaching of the LTE standard discussed in Li renders the claimed feature obvious. The use of DCI format indicating, by using a bitmap, a resource block group (RBG) is an inherent characteristic of the LTE standard taught in Li. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of instant application to modify Nory's method by using the LTE standard discussed in Li to indicate, for each bandwidth part allocated to the device, an allocated frequency resource in units of a predetermined number of resource blocks, RBs.
Regarding claim 6, it is a communication method claim corresponding to the device claim 1, and is therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of claim 1.
With respect to dependent claims:
Regarding Claim 3, Nory and Li teaches The communication device according to claim 1, Nory further teaches wherein the information indicates that same frequency domain resources are used for the preamble and the control signal (para [0031]: in the OFDM symbol where the UE expects preamble PDCCH transmission, the UE can map the RE's in the OFDM symbol to REG's, such as 4 REs per REG or 6 RE's per REG, and CCE's, such as 9 REG's per CCE, and number them from 0, 1, . . . N_preCCE-1. The UE can then perform BD's on a set of these CCE's within the superset numbered from 0 to N_preCCE-1 to determine if DCI with the relevant DCI format containing the preamble information is transmitted on them(interpreted as “information that indicates that same frequency domain resources are used for the preamble”).)
Claim(s) 5 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nory in view of Li, and further in view of et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20160302180, hereinafter “Nory”) in view of Hessler et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20190222385, hereinafter “Hessler”).
Regarding Claim 5, Nory and Li teach The communication device according to claim 1, Nory and Li fail to teach wherein the processor determines, based on the control signal, resources for a phase noise correction signal.
In analogous art, Hessler teaches wherein the processor determines, based on the control signal, resources for a phase noise correction signal (para [0011] of Hessler: It is an object of this disclosure to provide approaches allowing improved handling of reference signaling, in particular PT-RS (‘Phase Tracking Reference Signaling’, interpreted as “control signal”). The approaches in some aspects may facilitate low overhead for configuring and/or adaptive correction for phase errors.) (paragraphs [0076-0079] of Hessler: There may be considered a method for signalling a PT-RS configuration in a DCI to a UE, where the UE receives, including at least an MCS or MCS indication, the number of MIMO layers and a resource mapping (interpreted as “based on the control signal”). The method may comprise Determining a carrier frequency associated to said DCI; Derive a PT-RS mapping (interpreted as “resources for a phase noise correction signal”) from said DCI and carrier frequency; Perform radio communication using said derived PT-RS mapping.) (para [0117] of Hessler: In NR for higher carrier frequencies it is agreed that 3GPP should study the effect of phase noise. In terms of phase noise, the main focus is to introduce Phase Noise Compensation reference signals (PT-RS) (interpreted as “control signal”) to compensate for common phase error (CPE) which constitutes the significant part of the phase noise. When evaluating CPE-compensation, the target is to have sufficient quality estimates of the CPE for different deployment scenarios while maintaining a low overhead.)
The combination of Nory, Li, and the teaching of the Hessler renders the claimed feature obvious. The use of PT-RS mapping from said DCI is an inherent characteristic of the 5G network, e.g. according to 3GPP/NR taught in Hessler (see para [0117] of Hessler). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of instant application to modify the combination of Nory and Li by using the PT-RS mapping standard discussed in Hessler to determines, based on the PT-RS mapping, resources for a phase noise correction signal.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WON JUN CHOI whose telephone number is (703)756-1695. The examiner can normally be reached MON-FRI 08:00 - 17:00.
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, Derrick W Ferris can be reached at 571-272-3123. 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.
/WON JUN CHOI/Examiner, Art Unit 2411
/DERRICK W FERRIS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2411