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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC §102(a)2
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 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)(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.
Claim(s) 21-23,31-33,39-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being clearly anticipated by Yan et al (US 12232125 B2) hereinafter as Yan.
Regarding claim(s) 21,31,39 Yan discloses an apparatus for a user equipment (UE) configured for operation in a fifth-generation new radio (5G NR) network (See Fig(s). 1,See ¶ 12,14) the apparatus comprising: processing circuitry; and memory, wherein the processing circuitry is configured to:
decode radio-resource control (RRC) signaling comprising a ServingCellConfig information element (IE) indicating a number of cell sets configured to the UE for multi-cell (See ¶ 178) physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) scheduling and multi-cell physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) scheduling, the number of cell sets configured to the UE being at least two (See Fig(s). 1, 4, See ¶ 26,36, the terminal device may have a plurality of serving cells, ….. See Fig(s). 4, the TRP 1 and the TRP 2 each may send downlink control information (DCI), and independently schedule a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) and a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH)).;
decode a DCI format scheduling multiple PUSCHs in multiple cells, the DCI format indicating a scheduled cell set and scheduled cells in the scheduled cell set, the scheduled cell set being one of the cell sets configured to the UE in the ServingCellConfig IE (See ¶ 15,50, the terminal device may also determine, based on the set of configuration parameters, the transmission reception point or a link that sends the DCI, …. the terminal device can identify the transmission reception point or the link from which the received DCI comes. Therefore, the terminal device can also send uplink information to the corresponding transmission reception point or link….. See Fig(s). 7, The terminal device may separately send uplink control information to the TRP 1 and the TRP 2 by using corresponding PUCCH configurations…. See ¶ 98, the terminal device may send uplink data to a PUSCH corresponding to the determined TRP);
schedule a PUSCH for transmission in each of the scheduled cells of the scheduled cell set (See ¶ 98, the terminal device may send uplink data to a PUSCH corresponding to the determined TRP).
Further with respect to claim 31, Yan discloses a processor and memory for performing non-transitory CRM (See Fig(s). 9,11-12).
Further with respect to claim 39, Yan discloses a gNB node configured to perform mirrored method of claim 21 (See Fig(s). 1,4,9).
Regarding claim(s) 22,32,40, Yan discloses wherein the scheduled cell sets indicated in the DCI format comprises a bit field, and wherein the processing circuitry is configured to map the bit field to an index to determine the scheduled cell set (See ¶ 112, the terminal device knows that information carrying the index 1 is information sent by the TRP #1 (for example, the information is DCI), and information carrying the index 2 is information sent by the TRP #2 (for example, the information is DCI).).
Regarding claim(s) 23,33, Yan discloses wherein the configured cell sets configured to the UE by the ServingCellConfig information element (IE) are assigned the index in ascending order based on a cell set ID, and wherein the scheduled cells in the scheduled cell set are indicated in the DCI format by a corresponding entry in the ServingCellConfig information element (IE) (See ¶ 82, The cell identification information may include at least one of the following: a cell global identifier (CGI), a physical cell identifier (PCI), a serving cell index (for example, ServCellIndex), and a cell group identifier (for example, Cell Group Id).).
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 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) 24-27,34-37 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yan et al (US 12232125 B2) hereinafter as Yan in view of Jung et al (US 20240031070 A1) hereinafter as Jung.
Regarding claim(s) 24,34 Yan fails to disclose wherein the DCI format further includes a CSI request field and wherein the processing circuitry is configured to apply the CSI request field to a scheduled cell.
Jung discloses wherein the DCI format further includes a CSI request field and wherein the processing circuitry is configured to apply the CSI request field to a scheduled cell (See ¶ Yan 36,40), scheduled cell set with a lowest serving cell index (See ¶ 150, the particular serving cell is a serving cell of the at least one serving cell that has the lowest serving cell index.). The UE may determine a serving cell of the one or more serving cells where the serving cell has a lowest cell index among the one or more serving cells.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the teachings of Jung within Yan, so that a UE selects a cell based on priority of the serving cell.
Regarding claim(s) 25,35, Jung discloses wherein the DCI format further includes a new data indicator and redundancy version, the new data indicator indicating whether each of the scheduled cells of the scheduled cell set has new data, the redundancy version indicating a redundancy version for each of the scheduled cells of the scheduled cell set (See ¶ 110, new data indicator of transport block 1; and/or 3) redundancy version of transport block 1.). Reasons for combining same as claim 24.
Regarding claim(s) 26,36, Jung discloses wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to decode a DCI format 1_3 scheduling multiple PDSCHs in multiple cells, the DCI 1_3 format indicating a second scheduled cell set and second scheduled cells in the second scheduled cell set, the second scheduled cell set being one of the cell sets configured to the UE in the ServingCellConfig IE (See ¶ 56, if the UE is configured to monitor PDCCH for DCI format 1_1 and DCI format 1_2 for serving cell c, K.sub.1 is provided by the union of dl-DataToUL-ACK and dl-DataToUL-ACK-ForDCIFormat1_2, the use of serving cell “c” is interpreted as possible cell 3 also for format DCI1_3). Reasons for combining same as claim 24.
Regarding claim(s) 27,37 Yan discloses wherein the processing circuitry is configured to schedule reception of a PDSCH in each of the second scheduled cells of the second scheduled cell set (See ¶ 26, See Fig(s). 4).
Claim(s) 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yan et al (US 12232125 B2) hereinafter as Yan in view of BARBIERIet al (US 20150098427 A1) hereinafter as BARBIERI.
Regarding claim(s) 30, BARBIERI discloses wherein the processing circuitry is configured to: refrain from scheduling a PUSCH for transmission in cells of the scheduled cell set that are not scheduled by the DCI format; and refrain from scheduling a PUSCH for transmission in cells of the cell sets configured to the UE in the ServingCellConfig information element (IE) other than the cell set that is scheduled by the DCI format (See ¶ 83, f the channel state information report transmission on the control channel to the aggressor cell overlaps with more than one subframe of the serving cell, the serving cell may refrain from scheduling the shared channel, such as PUSCH, on the overlapped subframes.).
Refraining from scheduling in cell overlaps helps prevent collision and/or interference amongst devices of interest.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the teachings of BARBIERI within Yan, so as to enhance overall network performance by avoiding collision and/or interference amongst devices of interest.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 28-29,38 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Raj Jain whose telephone number is (571) 272-3145. The examiner can normally be reached on M-Th ~8 ~6.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Derrick Ferris can be reached on 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 an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/RAJ JAIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2411