DETAILED ACTION
Status of Case
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This Office Action is in response to the claims filed on 11/2/2023.
Claims 1-13 and 16-22 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) filed on 11/2/2023, 8/15/2024, and 12/9/2024 have been considered by Examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-13 and 16-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Claims 1-13 and 16-22 are directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., an abstract idea) without significantly more. For example, in claim 1, the steps of “receiving an indication message…” and “determining the system message to be monitored according to the indication message”, broadly interpreted, can be performed by a human operator viewing a monitoring screen, which therefore amounts to the judicial exception of an abstract idea since they can be performed completely in the human mind or by a human using a pen and paper. More specifically, and to identify the judicial exception by referring to what is recited (i.e., set forth or described) in the claim and to explain why it is considered an exception, the steps receiving an indication and determining are taken as collecting and comparing data, which courts have taken as being directed towards an abstract idea.
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. Although the additional elements of “a transceiver,” “memory,” and “processor” are recited in the claims that are beyond the judicial exception of the abstract idea (as explained in detail above), the additional elements, taken individually and also taken in combination with the rest of the claim, do not result in the claim as a whole amounting to significantly more than the abstract idea itself because they are well-understood, routine, and conventional in the art.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-8, 10-13, 16-19, 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Ly (USPAN 2021/0044380).
Consider claims 1 and 16, Ly discloses a method for receiving a system message (see figures 10 (reproduced below for convenience), as well as paragraphs 46 and 48, wherein disclosed is said method), and a corresponding reduced capability user equipment (redcap UE), comprising: a transceiver; a memory for storing computer-executable instructions; and a processor, connected to the transceiver and the memory respectively (see figures 11 and 12, wherein disclosed is said transceiver, memory, and processor) and configured to:
receive an indication message, wherein the indication message is configured to indicate a monitoring behavior of the redcap UE; and determine the system message to be monitored according to the indication message (see paragraphs 46 and 48: the UE may receive a signal (e.g., a MIB) from a base station configuring downlink bandwidth for a broadcast channel (e.g., a PDCCH) and determine that the bandwidth capability of the UE is less than the signaled downlink bandwidth…“The base station may determine a period in which the broadcast channel is repeated in multiple search space occasions. The period and the search space occasions may be associated with a control resource set (CORESET) and a search space set. In some examples, the base station may explicitly signal the period to the UE, for example in system information”; also, see claim 1).
PNG
media_image1.png
722
474
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Consider claims 2 and 13, Ly discloses that the indication message being configured to indicate the monitoring behavior of the redcap UE comprises: the indication message is configured to indicate the redcap UE to monitor a first system message or not to monitor a second system message, wherein the first system message corresponds to the redcap UE, or the second system message corresponds to a system message defined in an existing system (see paragraph 175 and claims 1 and 19: the indication message received by the UE is a signal configuring a downlink bandwidth of a broadcast channel to the UE, and in some cases, the signal includes a system information block (SIB)).
Consider claims 3 and 18, Ly discloses determining the system message to be monitored according to the indication message comprises one of: determining the first system message to be monitored in response to the indication message in a first state; determining the second system message not to be monitored in response to the indication message in a first state; determining the first system message to be monitored and the second system message not to be monitored in response to the indication message in a first state; or determining the second system message to be monitored in response to the indication message in a second state (see paragraph 175 and claims 1 and 19: the indication message received by the UE is a signal configuring a downlink bandwidth of a broadcast channel to the UE, and in some cases, the signal includes a system information block (SIB), which thereby maps to the condition of “determining the first system message to be monitored in response to the first indication message in a first state,” wherein said signal as transmitted is taken as a “first state”).
Consider claim 4, Ly discloses that the indication message comprises a master information block (MIB) and the MIB is configured to indicate the monitoring behavior of the redcap UE (see paragraph 175 and claim 19: the signal includes a MIB or a SIB; also, see paragraph 46).
Consider claim 5, Ly discloses that the indication message comprises a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH), and the PDCCH is configured for the second system message and the PDCCH is configured to indicate the monitoring behavior of the redcap UE (see paragraph 46: the signal from the base station configures a downlink bandwidth for a broadcast channel such as a PDCCH).
Consider claim 6, Ly discloses that the indication message comprises a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH), and the PDSCH is configured for the second system message and the PDSCH is configured to indicate the monitoring behavior of the redcap UE (see paragraph 49: enable a UE with reduced bandwidth capability to decode or demodulate a second broadcast channel (e.g., a PDSCH) indicated by a first broadcast channel (e.g., a PDCCH)).
Consider claims 7 and 19, Ly discloses that when determining the first system message to be monitored, the method further comprises: determining a transmission parameter of the first system message (see paragraph 46: the period and search space occasions may be associated with a control resource set (CORESET) and a search space set).
Consider claim 8, Ly discloses that the transmission parameter comprises at least one of: a parameter of a bandwidth part (BWP) where the first system message is located; a set parameter of a control resource set (CORESET) for scheduling the first system message; or a set parameter of a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) for scheduling the first system message (see paragraph 46: CORESET).
Consider claims 10 and 21, Ly discloses determining the transmission parameter of the first system message comprises: determining the transmission parameter according to at least one of a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) or a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH), wherein the at least one of the PDCCH or the PDSCH comprises a specific configuration of the transmission parameter (see paragraph 49: enable a UE with reduced bandwidth capability to decode or demodulate a second broadcast channel (e.g., a PDSCH) indicated by a first broadcast channel (e.g., a PDCCH)).
Consider claim 11, Ly discloses that the PDCCH is a PDCCH shared by the redcap UE and a non-redcap UE or a PDCCH dedicated to the redcap UE (see paragraph 46: the UE may receive a signal from a base station configuring a downlink bandwidth for a broadcast channel (PDCCH)).
Consider claims 12 and 22, Ly discloses method for transmitting a system message (see figures 10 (reproduced below for convenience), as well as paragraphs 46 and 48, wherein disclosed is said method) and a corresponding base station, comprising a transceiver; a memory for storing computer-executable instructions; and a processor, connected to the transceiver and the memory respectively (see figures 11 and 12, wherein disclosed is said transceiver, memory, and processor), comprising:
transmitting an indication message, wherein the indication message is configured to indicate a monitoring behavior of a reduced capability user equipment (redcap UE), so that the redcap UE determines the system information to be monitored according to the indication message (see paragraphs 46 and 48: the UE may receive a signal (e.g., a MIB) from a base station configuring downlink bandwidth for a broadcast channel (e.g., a PDCCH) and determine that the bandwidth capability of the UE is less than the signaled downlink bandwidth…“The base station may determine a period in which the broadcast channel is repeated in multiple search space occasions. The period and the search space occasions may be associated with a control resource set (CORESET) and a search space set. In some examples, the base station may explicitly signal the period to the UE, for example in system information”; also, see claim 1).
PNG
media_image1.png
722
474
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Consider claim 17, Ly discloses a non-transitory computer storage medium having stored therein instructions that, when executed by a processor of a reduced capability user equipment (redcap UE), cause the redcap UE to perform the method according to claim 1 (see paragraph 260: computer-readable media includes non-transitory computer storage media and communication media).
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 9 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ly (USPAN 2021/0044380) in view of Rico Alvarino (USPAN 2020/0351844).
Consider claims 9 and 20, although Ly discloses determining the transmission parameter of the first system message (see above), Ly does not specifically disclose determining transmission parameters of the first system message being the same as corresponding transmission parameters of the second system message, wherein the transmission parameters of the first system message comprise two or more of: a bandwidth; a sub-carrier spacing (SCS); or a modulation and coding scheme (MCS).
Rico Alvarino discloses determining transmission parameters of the first system message being the same as corresponding transmission parameters of the second system message, wherein the transmission parameters of the first system message comprise two or more of: a bandwidth; a sub-carrier spacing (SCS); or a modulation and coding scheme (MCS) (see paragraph 7: modulation and coding scheme (MCS) and enhanced bandwidth, among other parameters).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Ly and combine it with the noted teachings of Rico Alvarino. The motivation to combine these references is to provide an improved method for supporting wireless communications using preconfigured uplink resources (see paragraph 5 of Rico Alvarino).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jamal Javaid whose telephone number is 571-270-5137 and email address is Jamal.Javaid@uspto.gov.
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, Charles Jiang, can be reached on 571-270-7191. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/JAMAL JAVAID/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2412