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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-15, 17-18, 37-38, and 43 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.
Newly discovered prior art Lei et al. (US 2022/0007395), hereinafter Lei teaches the newly added claim limitations of the independent claims: wherein adjusting the subband configuration corresponding to the carrier according to the measurement value of the subband comprises at least one of: adding a subband with a null type between subbands corresponding to a plurality of UEs; or unifying types of subbands corresponding to a plurality of UEs; wherein the plurality of UEs correspond to different types of subbands, respectively, and the types of the subbands comprise an uplink type, a downlink type and a flexible type, as Lei teaches: adjusting the subband configuration corresponding to the carrier according to the measurement value of the subband comprises at least one of: unifying types of subbands corresponding to a plurality of UEs: “In some examples, the SFI may change a set of resources (e.g., one or more sub-bands and/or symbols) in the slot from UL resources to DL resources. When a UE that is pre-configured for UL transmission (e.g., a periodic or semi-persistently scheduled SRS, PUSCH, or PUCCH) in the set of resources misses the SFI, the UL transmission by the UE may interfere with DL reception by other UEs that successfully detected the SFI. To further avoid or mitigate the CLI incurred by the missed SFI, the base station may prioritize transmission of the SFI towards a group of UEs that have semi-persistently or periodically scheduled UL transmissions within the set of resources. In some examples, the base station may prioritize transmission of the SFI towards those UEs that may be strong interferers (e.g., the UEs having transmit beams more likely to interfere with the intended DL pre-emption resulting from the SFI)” (Lei ¶ 0113-0134); wherein the plurality of UEs correspond to different types of subbands, respectively, and the types of the subbands comprise an uplink type, a downlink type and a flexible type: “the base station may select a slot format of a slot. The slot may include a carrier bandwidth and communications in the slot with a plurality of UEs may occur across the carrier bandwidth or within one or more active bandwidth part (BWPs) of the carrier bandwidth. The slot format can include one of a half-duplex slot configured for uplink transmission or downlink transmission, a sub-band full-duplex slot configured for simultaneous uplink transmission and downlink transmission, or a flexible slot including at least one flexible symbol configurable as a half-duplex symbol or a sub-band full-duplex symbol” (Lei ¶ 0196).
From these citations, Lei teaches half-duplex UEs that are capable of receiving an uplink, downlink, or flexible slot type, and Lei teaches the unification of UEs when interference between a first UE among other UEs receiving opposite slots (in the example an interfering Uplink slot of an interfering UE is changed to be unified with other proximal UEs receiving a Downlink slot).
Further, prior art of record Yi et al. (US 2019/0260530), hereinafter Yi, teaches the claim limitation of a distance between the plurality of UEs is close such that an interference exists between the plurality of UEs: “different bandwidth may lead high interference from emission from other UEs, when different UEs are utilizing different portions of bandwidth within a system bandwidth. To address this issue, the following mechanisms may be considered. Based on network scheduling: The network may not schedule to create guard-band between two UEs. For example, UE2 may not be scheduled in PRBs where high interference from UE1 is expected. If RB level or RBG level indication is supported, scheduling indication may be sufficient. If contiguous resource allocation is used, explicit data rate matching may be indicated” (Yi ¶ 0247-0249). These paragraphs show Yi is concerned with the interference caused by UEs in close proximity.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 05/28/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-2, 10-11, 15, and 37 are amended. Claim 16 is canceled. Claim 43 is newly added.
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.
Claims 1, 5-6, 8-10, 17-18, and 37-38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yi et al. (US 2019/0260530), hereinafter Yi, in further view of Lei et al. (US 2022/0007395), hereinafter Lei.
Regarding Claim 1, Yi teaches: A communication method, performed by a network device and comprising: configuring a measurement bandwidth and a subband of a carrier: “UE-specific bandwidth for DL/UL according to an embodiment of the present invention is described. Control subband used for Msg4 may be used for UE-specific search space (USS), until it is reconfigured. In Msg3, necessary channel state information (CSI) feedback may be delivered for supporting localized mapping. If any feedback is not sufficient, first distributed mapping may be used for search space for Msg4 and default USS. Default data subband for USS may be defined in M-SB in which Msg4 control subband is configured until it is reconfigured” (Yi ¶ 0100), and communicating with a user equipment (UE) via the subband: “In step S120, the UE performs communication with the network via the at least one data subband. One data subband consists of contiguous or non-contiguous PRBs” (Yi ¶ 0319); receiving a measurement value of the subband fed back by the UE: “Aperiodic CSI request may be requested on one or more configured subbands, and for the deactivated subbands, only wideband CSI measurement within the subband (i.e. wideband channel quality indictor (CQI)/precoding matrix indicator (PMI) over the entire subband) may be reported” (Yi ¶ 0174); and adjusting subband configuration corresponding to the carrier according to the measurement value of the subband: “when bandwidth adaptation is applied, first, a UE may be activated or deactivated with secondary RF (It may also be possible to activate/deactivate third or fourth RF as well). In terms of activation/deactivation, MAC CE and/or RRC and/or dynamic signaling via DCI or separate signaling may be used. Another approach is to leave this up to UE implementation and no explicit activation/deactivation of RF procedure is supported. Depending on monitoring bandwidth, a UE may switch off or on some of RFs. In this case, depending on UE capability signaling on bandwidth, the network may determine the bandwidth that the UE can support/can be configured with” (Yi ¶ 0230); and a distance between the plurality of UEs is close such that an interference exists between the plurality of UEs: “different bandwidth may lead high interference from emission from other UEs, when different UEs are utilizing different portions of bandwidth within a system bandwidth. To address this issue, the following mechanisms may be considered. Based on network scheduling: The network may not schedule to create guard-band between two UEs. For example, UE2 may not be scheduled in PRBs where high interference from UE1 is expected. If RB level or RBG level indication is supported, scheduling indication may be sufficient. If contiguous resource allocation is used, explicit data rate matching may be indicated” (Yi ¶ 0247-0249).
Yi does not teach: wherein adjusting the subband configuration corresponding to the carrier according to the measurement value of the subband comprises at least one of: adding a subband with a null type between subbands corresponding to a plurality of UEs; or unifying types of subbands corresponding to a plurality of UEs; wherein the plurality of UEs correspond to different types of subbands, respectively, and the types of the subbands comprise an uplink type, a downlink type and a flexible type.
Regarding Claim 1, Lei teaches: wherein adjusting the subband configuration corresponding to the carrier according to the measurement value of the subband comprises at least one of: unifying types of subbands corresponding to a plurality of UEs: “In some examples, the SFI may change a set of resources (e.g., one or more sub-bands and/or symbols) in the slot from UL resources to DL resources. When a UE that is pre-configured for UL transmission (e.g., a periodic or semi-persistently scheduled SRS, PUSCH, or PUCCH) in the set of resources misses the SFI, the UL transmission by the UE may interfere with DL reception by other UEs that successfully detected the SFI. To further avoid or mitigate the CLI incurred by the missed SFI, the base station may prioritize transmission of the SFI towards a group of UEs that have semi-persistently or periodically scheduled UL transmissions within the set of resources. In some examples, the base station may prioritize transmission of the SFI towards those UEs that may be strong interferers (e.g., the UEs having transmit beams more likely to interfere with the intended DL pre-emption resulting from the SFI)” (Lei ¶ 0113-0134); wherein the plurality of UEs correspond to different types of subbands, respectively, and the types of the subbands comprise an uplink type, a downlink type and a flexible type: “the base station may select a slot format of a slot. The slot may include a carrier bandwidth and communications in the slot with a plurality of UEs may occur across the carrier bandwidth or within one or more active bandwidth part (BWPs) of the carrier bandwidth. The slot format can include one of a half-duplex slot configured for uplink transmission or downlink transmission, a sub-band full-duplex slot configured for simultaneous uplink transmission and downlink transmission, or a flexible slot including at least one flexible symbol configurable as a half-duplex symbol or a sub-band full-duplex symbol” (Lei ¶ 0196).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the disclosure of Yi with Lei for the purpose of reducing the number of mobility messages exchanged between UE and base stations. According to Lei: “The use of zones in 5G networks or other next generation communication networks enables the uplink-based mobility framework and improves the efficiency of both the UE and the network, since the number of mobility messages that need to be exchanged between the UE and the network may be reduced” (Lei ¶ 0068).
Regarding Claim 5, Yi teaches: The method according to claim 1, wherein the network device receives a plurality of the measurement values fed back by the UE: “Wideband measurement across multiple RF may also be considered and aggregated/average RRM measurement over multiple RF may be reported, or separate/individual RRM measurement may be reported per RF” (Yi ¶ 0235), meaning Yi’s disclosure supports both aggregated reporting as well as reporting each RRM measurement per subband; wherein adjusting the subband configuration corresponding to the carrier according to the measurement value of the subband comprises: making a decision based on one measurement value in the plurality of the measurement values, or making a comprehensive decision based on the plurality of the measurement values to adjust the subband configuration: “Regardless of which options are considered, for better management, the candidate RF bandwidth may be constructed in a nested manner, e.g. {M MHz, M*2 MHz, M*4 MHz . . . }. The idea is to construct minimum system bandwidth subband, and support different UE RF bandwidth by aggregating multiple minimum system bandwidth subbands . . . UEs with different bandwidth may be treated differently. For example, RRM measurement requirement may be different based on UE supported bandwidth. For example, RRM measurement duration or the required duration to report RRM measurement may be relaxed based on the supported bandwidth. Overall RRM measurement requirement may be based on the nominal bandwidth” (Yi ¶ 0267 and 0270).
Regarding Claim 6, Yi teaches: The method according to claim 1, further comprising: sending the subband configuration adjusted to the UE: “In terms of bandwidth adaptation, based on the knowledge of UE RFs, the network may also indicate the required number of RFs and its intended center frequency. In other words, when bandwidth adaptation is applied, first, a UE may be activated or deactivated with secondary RF (It may also be possible to activate/deactivate third or fourth RF as well). In terms of activation/deactivation, MAC CE and/or RRC and/or dynamic signaling via DCI or separate signaling may be used. Another approach is to leave this up to UE implementation and no explicit activation/deactivation of RF procedure is supported. Depending on monitoring bandwidth, a UE may switch off or on some of RFs. In this case, depending on UE capability signaling on bandwidth, the network may determine the bandwidth that the UE can support/can be configured with” (Yi ¶ 0230).
Regarding Claim 8, Yi teaches: The method according to claim 1, further comprising: sending the subband configuration to the UE via a configuration signaling: “for each control subband, a set of data subbands which control subband may schedule may be indicated. If there is only one data subband, in resource allocation or additional field on data subband index may be omitted. If there are more than one data subbands, some indication on subband may be necessary. However, this may lead variable DCI size depending on the configured data subband. To address this, alternative approach is to assume that any control subband can schedule any data subband, and thus, the number of configured data subband to the UE is assumed for all resource allocation” (Yi ¶ 0125).
Regarding Claim 9, Yi teaches: The method according to claim 8, wherein the configuration signaling is a radio resource control (RRC) common signaling, a RRC dedicated signaling: “When a UE is reconfigured with control region for USS, control subband for Msg4 may be used as a fallback purpose. In the configuration, search space split between new USS and default USS may be indicated, or a UE may need to search both until radio resource control (RRC) reconfiguration is completed where search space is split equally between two search space” (Yi ¶ 0100) or a downlink control information (DCI) signaling: “for each control subband, a set of data subbands which control subband may schedule may be indicated. If there is only one data subband, in resource allocation or additional field on data subband index may be omitted. If there are more than one data subbands, some indication on subband may be necessary. However, this may lead variable DCI size depending on the configured data subband. To address this, alternative approach is to assume that any control subband can schedule any data subband, and thus, the number of configured data subband to the UE is assumed for all resource allocation” (Yi ¶ 0125).
Regarding Claim 10, Yi teaches: : A communication method, applied to UE and comprising: receiving signals sent by a network device via subbands in a measurement bandwidth based on subband configuration; measuring communication quality according to the signals received to generate a measurement value of each subband corresponding to the UE: “UE-specific bandwidth for DL/UL according to an embodiment of the present invention is described. Control subband used for Msg4 may be used for UE-specific search space (USS), until it is reconfigured. In Msg3, necessary channel state information (CSI) feedback may be delivered for supporting localized mapping. If any feedback is not sufficient, first distributed mapping may be used for search space for Msg4 and default USS. Default data subband for USS may be defined in M-SB in which Msg4 control subband is configured until it is reconfigured” (Yi ¶ 0100); sending the measurement value of the subband to the network device: “Aperiodic CSI request may be requested on one or more configured subbands, and for the deactivated subbands, only wideband CSI measurement within the subband (i.e. wideband channel quality indictor (CQI)/precoding matrix indicator (PMI) over the entire subband) may be reported” (Yi ¶ 0174); and a distance between the plurality of UEs is close such that an interference exists between the plurality of UEs: “different bandwidth may lead high interference from emission from other UEs, when different UEs are utilizing different portions of bandwidth within a system bandwidth. To address this issue, the following mechanisms may be considered. Based on network scheduling: The network may not schedule to create guard-band between two UEs. For example, UE2 may not be scheduled in PRBs where high interference from UE1 is expected. If RB level or RBG level indication is supported, scheduling indication may be sufficient. If contiguous resource allocation is used, explicit data rate matching may be indicated” (Yi ¶ 0247-0249).
Yi does not teach: allowing the network device to add a subband with a null type between subbands corresponding to a plurality of UEs and/or unify types of subbands corresponding to a plurality of UEs; wherein the plurality of UEs correspond to different types of subbands, respectively, and the types of the subbands comprise an uplink type, a downlink type and a flexible type.
Regarding Claim 10, Lei teaches: allowing the network device to unify types of subbands corresponding to a plurality of UEs: “In some examples, the SFI may change a set of resources (e.g., one or more sub-bands and/or symbols) in the slot from UL resources to DL resources. When a UE that is pre-configured for UL transmission (e.g., a periodic or semi-persistently scheduled SRS, PUSCH, or PUCCH) in the set of resources misses the SFI, the UL transmission by the UE may interfere with DL reception by other UEs that successfully detected the SFI. To further avoid or mitigate the CLI incurred by the missed SFI, the base station may prioritize transmission of the SFI towards a group of UEs that have semi-persistently or periodically scheduled UL transmissions within the set of resources. In some examples, the base station may prioritize transmission of the SFI towards those UEs that may be strong interferers (e.g., the UEs having transmit beams more likely to interfere with the intended DL pre-emption resulting from the SFI)” (Lei ¶ 0113-0134); wherein the plurality of UEs correspond to different types of subbands, respectively, and the types of the subbands comprise an uplink type, a downlink type and a flexible type: “the base station may select a slot format of a slot. The slot may include a carrier bandwidth and communications in the slot with a plurality of UEs may occur across the carrier bandwidth or within one or more active bandwidth part (BWPs) of the carrier bandwidth. The slot format can include one of a half-duplex slot configured for uplink transmission or downlink transmission, a sub-band full-duplex slot configured for simultaneous uplink transmission and downlink transmission, or a flexible slot including at least one flexible symbol configurable as a half-duplex symbol or a sub-band full-duplex symbol” (Lei ¶ 0196).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the disclosure of Yi with Lei for the purpose of reducing the number of mobility messages exchanged between UE and base stations. According to Lei: “The use of zones in 5G networks or other next generation communication networks enables the uplink-based mobility framework and improves the efficiency of both the UE and the network, since the number of mobility messages that need to be exchanged between the UE and the network may be reduced” (Lei ¶ 0068).
Regarding Claim 15, Yi teaches: The method according to claim 10, further comprising: sending an identifier of the measurement bandwidth and an identifier of the subband to the network device: “if a UE can aggregate baseband capability for different carriers to one carrier, the UE may report the aggregated baseband capability per baseband. For inter/intra-band CA, the total baseband capability may be indicated which may be divided to aggregated carriers by the network. If a UE cannot support flexible partitioning of capabilities between carriers, the UE may also indicate baseband capability per band for each band combination. For each band combination, supported RF bandwidth on each band may also be indicated” (Yi ¶ 0139).
Regarding Claim 17, Yi teaches: The method according to claim 10, further comprising: receiving the subband configuration sent by the network device via a configuration signaling: “for each control subband, a set of data subbands which control subband may schedule may be indicated. If there is only one data subband, in resource allocation or additional field on data subband index may be omitted. If there are more than one data subbands, some indication on subband may be necessary. However, this may lead variable DCI size depending on the configured data subband. To address this, alternative approach is to assume that any control subband can schedule any data subband, and thus, the number of configured data subband to the UE is assumed for all resource allocation” (Yi ¶ 0125).
Regarding Claim 18, Yi teaches: The method according to claim 17, wherein the configuration signaling is a radio resource control (RRC) common signaling, a RRC dedicated signaling: “When a UE is reconfigured with control region for USS, control subband for Msg4 may be used as a fallback purpose. In the configuration, search space split between new USS and default USS may be indicated, or a UE may need to search both until radio resource control (RRC) reconfiguration is completed where search space is split equally between two search space” (Yi ¶ 0100) or a downlink control information (DCI) signaling: “for each control subband, a set of data subbands which control subband may schedule may be indicated. If there is only one data subband, in resource allocation or additional field on data subband index may be omitted. If there are more than one data subbands, some indication on subband may be necessary. However, this may lead variable DCI size depending on the configured data subband. To address this, alternative approach is to assume that any control subband can schedule any data subband, and thus, the number of configured data subband to the UE is assumed for all resource allocation” (Yi ¶ 0125).
Regarding Claim 37, Yi teaches: A communication device, comprising: a processor; and a memory; wherein a computer program is stored in the memory, and the processor executes the computer program stored in the memory to cause the device: “A network node 800 includes a processor 810, a memory 820 and a transceiver 830. The processor 810 may be configured to implement proposed functions, procedures and/or methods described in this description. Layers of the radio interface protocol may be implemented in the processor 810. The memory 820 is operatively coupled with the processor 810 and stores a variety of information to operate the processor 810” (Yi ¶ 0325) to: configure a measurement bandwidth and a subband of a carrier: “UE-specific bandwidth for DL/UL according to an embodiment of the present invention is described. Control subband used for Msg4 may be used for UE-specific search space (USS), until it is reconfigured. In Msg3, necessary channel state information (CSI) feedback may be delivered for supporting localized mapping. If any feedback is not sufficient, first distributed mapping may be used for search space for Msg4 and default USS. Default data subband for USS may be defined in M-SB in which Msg4 control subband is configured until it is reconfigured” (Yi ¶ 0100), and communicate with a user equipment (UE) via the subband: “In step S120, the UE performs communication with the network via the at least one data subband. One data subband consists of contiguous or non-contiguous PRBs” (Yi ¶ 0319); receiving a measurement value of the subband fed back by the UE: “Aperiodic CSI request may be requested on one or more configured subbands, and for the deactivated subbands, only wideband CSI measurement within the subband (i.e. wideband channel quality indictor (CQI)/precoding matrix indicator (PMI) over the entire subband) may be reported” (Yi ¶ 0174); adjusting subband configuration corresponding to the carrier according to the measurement value of the subband: “when bandwidth adaptation is applied, first, a UE may be activated or deactivated with secondary RF (It may also be possible to activate/deactivate third or fourth RF as well). In terms of activation/deactivation, MAC CE and/or RRC and/or dynamic signaling via DCI or separate signaling may be used. Another approach is to leave this up to UE implementation and no explicit activation/deactivation of RF procedure is supported. Depending on monitoring bandwidth, a UE may switch off or on some of RFs. In this case, depending on UE capability signaling on bandwidth, the network may determine the bandwidth that the UE can support/can be configured with” (Yi ¶ 0230).
Yi does not teach: wherein adjusting the subband configuration corresponding to the carrier according to the measurement value of the subband comprises at least one of: adding a subband with a null type between subbands corresponding to a plurality of UEs; or unifying types of subbands corresponding to a plurality of UEs; wherein the plurality of UEs correspond to different types of subbands, respectively, and the types of the subbands comprise an uplink type, a downlink type and a flexible type.
Regarding Claim 37, Lei teaches: wherein adjusting the subband configuration corresponding to the carrier according to the measurement value of the subband comprises at least one of: unifying types of subbands corresponding to a plurality of UEs: “In some examples, the SFI may change a set of resources (e.g., one or more sub-bands and/or symbols) in the slot from UL resources to DL resources. When a UE that is pre-configured for UL transmission (e.g., a periodic or semi-persistently scheduled SRS, PUSCH, or PUCCH) in the set of resources misses the SFI, the UL transmission by the UE may interfere with DL reception by other UEs that successfully detected the SFI. To further avoid or mitigate the CLI incurred by the missed SFI, the base station may prioritize transmission of the SFI towards a group of UEs that have semi-persistently or periodically scheduled UL transmissions within the set of resources. In some examples, the base station may prioritize transmission of the SFI towards those UEs that may be strong interferers (e.g., the UEs having transmit beams more likely to interfere with the intended DL pre-emption resulting from the SFI)” (Lei ¶ 0113-0134); wherein the plurality of UEs correspond to different types of subbands, respectively, and the types of the subbands comprise an uplink type, a downlink type and a flexible type: “the base station may select a slot format of a slot. The slot may include a carrier bandwidth and communications in the slot with a plurality of UEs may occur across the carrier bandwidth or within one or more active bandwidth part (BWPs) of the carrier bandwidth. The slot format can include one of a half-duplex slot configured for uplink transmission or downlink transmission, a sub-band full-duplex slot configured for simultaneous uplink transmission and downlink transmission, or a flexible slot including at least one flexible symbol configurable as a half-duplex symbol or a sub-band full-duplex symbol” (Lei ¶ 0196).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the disclosure of Yi with Lei for the purpose of reducing the number of mobility messages exchanged between UE and base stations. According to Lei: “The use of zones in 5G networks or other next generation communication networks enables the uplink-based mobility framework and improves the efficiency of both the UE and the network, since the number of mobility messages that need to be exchanged between the UE and the network may be reduced” (Lei ¶ 0068).
Regarding Claim 38, Yi teaches: A communication device, comprising: a processor; and a memory; wherein a computer program is stored in the memory, and the processor executes the computer program stored in the memory to cause the device to execute the method according to claim 10: “A UE 900 includes a processor 910, a memory 920 and a transceiver 930. The processor 910 may be configured to implement proposed functions, procedures and/or methods described in this description. Layers of the radio interface protocol may be implemented in the processor 910. The memory 920 is operatively coupled with the processor 910 and stores a variety of information to operate the processor 910” (Yi ¶ 0326).
Claims 2-3 and 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yi and Lei as applied to claims 1 and 10 above, and further in view of Abdelghaffar et al. (US 2022/0022183), hereinafter Abdelghaffar.
Regarding Claim 2, Yi and Lei teaches: The method according to claim 1.
Yi and Lei does not teach: the subband configuration is used to configure the types of a plurality of the subbands in the carrier.
Regarding Claim 2, Abdelghaffar teaches: the subband configuration is used to configure the types of a plurality of the subbands in the carrier: “The flexible slot within the flexible part of the frame structure may have separate subband resources where the bandwidth of each subband may be different and/or the subband type being UL, DL, or flexible” (Abdelghaffar ¶ 0074).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the disclosure of Yi and Lei with Abdelghaffar for the purpose of reducing interference. According to Abdelghaffar: “It may also be beneficial to split the channel bandwidth to uplink and downlink bands and utilize part of the available bandwidth to reduce and/or control interference. Moreover, it may be beneficial to partition flexible slots” (Abdelghaffar ¶ 0068).
Regarding Claim 3, Yi and Lei teaches: The method according to claim 2.
Yi and Lei does not teach: wherein when the type of the subband is the downlink type, the network device transmits data to the UE on the subband; or when the type of the subband is the uplink type, the network device receives data transmitted by the UE on the subband; or when the type of the subband is the flexible type, the network device configures the subband for uplink transmission, downlink transmission, or null transmission via a configuration signaling.
Regarding Claim 3, Abdelghaffar teaches: wherein when the type of the subband is the downlink type, the network device transmits data to the UE on the subband; or when the type of the subband is the uplink type, the network device receives data transmitted by the UE on the subband; or when the type of the subband is the flexible type, the network device configures the subband for uplink transmission, downlink transmission, or null transmission via a configuration signaling: “a common frame structure may include downlink transmissions at a certain time and uplink transmissions at a certain time. For instance, each slot over a certain time period may be downlink transmissions, and each slot over another time period may be uplink transmissions. An operator may align the slots to the baseline direction or blank a flexible portion” (Abdelghaffar ¶ 0060), meaning the DL slots correspond to downlink transmissions, the UL slots correspond to uplink transmissions, and blank slots correspond to null transmissions: “downlink blanking is when a downlink slot is blanked or left empty to avoid interference. So in an attempt to avoid cross interference, one network or base station may blank a slot or not send data in the slot. In some aspects, one or more symbols in the slot in the frame may be blanked, such as in an ‘S’ slot structure” (Abdelghaffar ¶ 0065).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the disclosure of Yi and Lei with Abdelghaffar for the purpose of reducing interference. According to Abdelghaffar: “It may also be beneficial to split the channel bandwidth to uplink and downlink bands and utilize part of the available bandwidth to reduce and/or control interference. Moreover, it may be beneficial to partition flexible slots” (Abdelghaffar ¶ 0068).
Regarding Claim 11, Yi and Lei teaches: The method according to claim 10.
Yi and Lei does not teach: the subband configuration is used to configure the types of a plurality of the subbands in the carrier.
Regarding Claim 11, Abdelghaffar teaches: the subband configuration is used to configure the types of a plurality of the subbands in the carrier: “The flexible slot within the flexible part of the frame structure may have separate subband resources where the bandwidth of each subband may be different and/or the subband type being UL, DL, or flexible” (Abdelghaffar ¶ 0074).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the disclosure of Yi and Lei with Abdelghaffar for the purpose of reducing interference. According to Abdelghaffar: “It may also be beneficial to split the channel bandwidth to uplink and downlink bands and utilize part of the available bandwidth to reduce and/or control interference. Moreover, it may be beneficial to partition flexible slots” (Abdelghaffar ¶ 0068).
Regarding Claim 12, Yi and Lei teaches: The method according to claim 11.
Yi and Lei does not teach: when the type of the subband is the downlink type, the UE receives data transmitted by the network device on the subband; or when the type of the subband is the uplink type, the UE transmits data to the network device on the subband; or when the type of the subband is the flexible type, the network device configures the subband for uplink transmission, downlink transmission, or null transmission via a configuration signaling.
Regarding Claim 12, Abdelghaffar teaches: when the type of the subband is the downlink type, the UE receives data transmitted by the network device on the subband; or when the type of the subband is the uplink type, the UE transmits data to the network device on the subband; or when the type of the subband is the flexible type, the network device configures the subband for uplink transmission, downlink transmission, or null transmission via a configuration signaling: “a common frame structure may include downlink transmissions at a certain time and uplink transmissions at a certain time. For instance, each slot over a certain time period may be downlink transmissions, and each slot over another time period may be uplink transmissions. An operator may align the slots to the baseline direction or blank a flexible portion” (Abdelghaffar ¶ 0060), meaning the DL slots correspond to downlink transmissions, the UL slots correspond to uplink transmissions, and blank slots correspond to null transmissions: “downlink blanking is when a downlink slot is blanked or left empty to avoid interference. So in an attempt to avoid cross interference, one network or base station may blank a slot or not send data in the slot. In some aspects, one or more symbols in the slot in the frame may be blanked, such as in an ‘S’ slot structure” (Abdelghaffar ¶ 0065).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the disclosure of Yi and Lei with Abdelghaffar for the purpose of reducing interference. According to Abdelghaffar: “It may also be beneficial to split the channel bandwidth to uplink and downlink bands and utilize part of the available bandwidth to reduce and/or control interference. Moreover, it may be beneficial to partition flexible slots” (Abdelghaffar ¶ 0068).
Claims 4, 7, 16, and 37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yi and Lei as applied to claims 1 and 10 above, and further in view of Pezeshki et al. (US 2021/0176654), hereinafter Pezeshki.
Regarding Claim 4, Yi and Lei teaches: The method according to claim 1.
Yi and Lei does not teach: adjusting the subband configuration corresponding to the carrier according to the measurement value of the subband comprises: determining whether the measurement value of the subband reaches a first threshold corresponding to the subband; in case that the first threshold corresponding to the subband is reached, adjusting the subband configuration according to the measurement value of the subband.
Regarding Claim 4, Pezeshki teaches: adjusting the subband configuration corresponding to the carrier according to the measurement value of the subband comprises: determining whether the measurement value of the subband reaches a first threshold corresponding to the subband: “The UE may identify an interference level for an interference measurement by determining which interference range the interference measurement falls within. For example, the UE may identify a low interference level for an interference measurement that falls within the interference range associated with the low interference level. As another example, the UE may identify a medium interference level for an interference measurement that falls within the interference range associated with the medium interference level. As another example, the UE may identify a high interference level for an interference measurement that falls within the interference range associated with the high interference level” (Pezeshki ¶ 0060); in case that the first threshold corresponding to the subband is reached, adjusting the subband configuration according to the measurement value of the subband: “the BS may schedule a retransmission occasion for a PDSCH communication. The BS may receive the SRSs from the UE on the plurality of subbands, and may determine that reception of the SRSs indicates a NACK for the PDSCH communication. The BS may schedule the retransmission occasion based at least in part on the interference levels in each of the plurality of subbands. For example, the BS may schedule the retransmission occasion to be in the subband with the lowest interference level, to be in a subband with an interference level that satisfies an interference level threshold (e.g., to be in a subband with a low interference level), and/or the like” (Pezeshki ¶ 0066).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the disclosure of Yi and Lei with Pezeshki for the purpose of allowing the base station to reallocate resources depending on the interference levels at different subbands. According to Pezeshki: “the BS may receive the SRSs in each of the plurality of subbands, may identify the interference level in each of the plurality of subbands based at least in part on the SRS sequences of the SRSs, and may perform one or more actions based at least in part on the interference levels in each of the plurality of subbands. For example, the BS may schedule a retransmission of a PDSCH communication from a subband having a high interference level to another subband having a low interference level” (Pezeshki ¶ 0024).
Regarding Claim 7, Yi and Lei teaches: The method according to claim 1.
Yi and Lei does not teach: the measurement value of the subband comprises one or more of a reference signal received power (RSRP), a reference signal received quality (RSRQ), a received signal strength indication (RSSI), or a signal-to-noise and interference ratio (SINR).
Regarding Claim 7, Pezeshki teaches: the measurement value of the subband comprises one or more of a reference signal received power (RSRP), a reference signal received quality (RSRQ), a received signal strength indication (RSSI): “On the uplink, at UE 120, a transmit processor 264 may receive and process data from a data source 262 and control information (e.g., for reports comprising RSRP, RSSI, RSRQ, CQI, etc.) from controller/processor 280” (Pezeshki ¶ 0045).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the disclosure of Yi and Lei with Pezeshki for the purpose of allowing the base station to reallocate resources depending on the interference levels at different subbands. According to Pezeshki: “the BS may receive the SRSs in each of the plurality of subbands, may identify the interference level in each of the plurality of subbands based at least in part on the SRS sequences of the SRSs, and may perform one or more actions based at least in part on the interference levels in each of the plurality of subbands. For example, the BS may schedule a retransmission of a PDSCH communication from a subband having a high interference level to another subband having a low interference level” (Pezeshki ¶ 0024).
Regarding Claim 16, Yi and Lei teaches: The method according to claim 10.
Yi and Lei does not teach: the measurement value of the subband comprises one or more of a reference signal received power (RSRP), a reference signal received quality (RSRQ), a received signal strength indication (RSSI), or a signal-to-noise and interference ratio (SINR).
Regarding Claim 16, Pezeshki teaches: the measurement value of the subband comprises one or more of a reference signal received power (RSRP), a reference signal received quality (RSRQ), a received signal strength indication (RSSI): “On the uplink, at UE 120, a transmit processor 264 may receive and process data from a data source 262 and control information (e.g., for reports comprising RSRP, RSSI, RSRQ, CQI, etc.) from controller/processor 280” (Pezeshki ¶ 0045).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the disclosure of Yi and Lei with Pezeshki for the purpose of allowing the base station to reallocate resources depending on the interference levels at different subbands. According to Pezeshki: “the BS may receive the SRSs in each of the plurality of subbands, may identify the interference level in each of the plurality of subbands based at least in part on the SRS sequences of the SRSs, and may perform one or more actions based at least in part on the interference levels in each of the plurality of subbands. For example, the BS may schedule a retransmission of a PDSCH communication from a subband having a high interference level to another subband having a low interference level” (Pezeshki ¶ 0024).
Claims 2-3, 11-12, 15, and 43 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yi and Lei as applied to claims 1 and 10 above, and further in view of Liu et al. (US 2018/0234896), hereinafter Liu.
Regarding Claim 13, Yi and Lei teaches: The method according to claim 10.
Yi and Lei does not teach: sending the measurement value of the subband to the network device comprises: determining whether the measurement value of the subband is greater than or equal to a second threshold corresponding to the subband; in case that the measurement value of the subband is greater than or equal to the second threshold corresponding to the subband, sending the measurement value of the subband to the network device; in case that the measurement value of the subband is less than the second threshold corresponding to the subband, not sending the measurement value of the subband to the network device.
Regarding Claim 13, Liu teaches: sending the measurement value of the subband to the network device comprises: determining whether the measurement value of the subband is greater than or equal to a second threshold corresponding to the subband; in case that the measurement value of the subband is greater than or equal to the second threshold corresponding to the subband, sending the measurement value of the subband to the network device; in case that the measurement value of the subband is less than the second threshold corresponding to the subband, not sending the measurement value of the subband to the network device: “There may be various trigger conditions for reporting a measurement report of a subband. For example, a measurement report is reported when a subband with a strongest signal changes, or a measurement report is reported when signal strength of a subband reaches a threshold” (Liu ¶ 0169). In other words, when the UE detects signal strength of a subband has reached a threshold, the measurement value is reported. Otherwise a measurement report is not sent.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the disclosure of Yi and Lei with Liu for the purpose of allowing a UE to trigger a subband switch when a requirement of the UE is not met. According to Liu: “To resolve a prior-art problem that switching between different subbands by UE is not defined, embodiments of the present application provide a subband switching method, so that UE can switch to a different subband, and a current requirement of the UE is met” (Liu ¶ 0005).
Regarding Claim 14, Yi and Lei teaches: The method according to claim 13, wherein the UE corresponds to a plurality of subbands : “for each control subband, a set of data subbands which control subband may schedule may be indicated. If there is only one data subband, in resource allocation or additional field on data subband index may be omitted. If there are more than one data subbands, some indication on subband may be necessary. However, this may lead variable DCI size depending on the configured data subband. To address this, alternative approach is to assume that any control subband can schedule any data subband, and thus, the number of configured data subband to the UE is assumed for all resource allocation” (Yi and Lei ¶ 0125), in other words, the UE of Yi and Lei is concerned with multiple subbands.
Yi and Lei does not teach:, and sending the measurement value of the subband to the network device comprises: determining whether the measurement value of the subband is greater than or equal to a second threshold corresponding to the subband; in case that the measurement value of the subband is greater than or equal to the second threshold corresponding to the subband, sending the measurement value of the subband to the network device; in case that the measurement value of the subband is less than the second threshold corresponding to the subband, not sending the measurement value of the subband to the network device.
Regarding Claim 14, Liu teaches: wherein the UE corresponds to a plurality of subbands, sending the measurement value of the subband to the network device comprises: determining whether the measurement value of the subband is greater than or equal to a second threshold corresponding to the subband; in case that the measurement value of the subband is greater than or equal to the second threshold corresponding to the subband, sending the measurement value of the subband to the network device; in case that the measurement value of the subband is less than the second threshold corresponding to the subband, not sending the measurement value of the subband to the network device: “There may be various trigger conditions for reporting a measurement report of a subband. For example, a measurement report is reported when a subband with a strongest signal changes, or a measurement report is reported when signal strength of a subband reaches a threshold” (Liu ¶ 0169). In other words, when the UE detects signal strength of a subband has reached a threshold, the measurement value is reported. Otherwise a measurement report is not sent.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the disclosure of Yi and Lei with Liu for the purpose of allowing a UE to trigger a subband switch when a requirement of the UE is not met. According to Liu: “To resolve a prior-art problem that switching between different subbands by UE is not defined, embodiments of the present application provide a subband switching method, so that UE can switch to a different subband, and a current requirement of the UE is met” (Liu ¶ 0005).
Regarding Claim 15, Yi and Lei teach: The method according to Claim 10.
Yi and Lei do not teach: sending the measurement value of the subband to the network device comprises: sending the measurement value of the subband and an identifier of the subband to the network device.
Regarding Claim 15, Liu teaches: sending the measurement value of the subband to the network device comprises: sending the measurement value of the subband and an identifier of the subband to the network device: “The network device instructs, by using a subBandID, the user equipment to measure a corresponding subband. A MeasObjectToAddModifyList may include multiple measurement objects MeasObjectFOFDM, and each measurement object corresponds to a measurement configuration of one subband. A ReportConfigToAddModifyList indicates a trigger condition for reporting a measurement report by the user equipment. The ReportConfigToAddModifyList includes multiple ReportConfigFOFDM objects. Each ReportConfigFOFDM object includes a subBandID of one subband and a trigger and configuration condition for reporting a measurement report of the subband” (Liu ¶ 0169).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the disclosure of Yi and Lei with Liu for the purpose of allowing a UE to trigger a subband switch when a requirement of the UE is not met. According to Liu: “To resolve a prior-art problem that switching between different subbands by UE is not defined, embodiments of the present application provide a subband switching method, so that UE can switch to a different subband, and a current requirement of the UE is met” (Liu ¶ 0005).
Regarding Claim 43, Yi and Lei teach: The method according to claim 1.
Yi and Lei do not teach: receiving the measurement value of the subband fed back by the UE comprises: receiving the measurement value of the subband and an identifier of the subband from the UE in a form of a list, wherein the measurement value of each subband corresponds to one identifier in the list.
Regarding Claim 43, Liu teaches: receiving the measurement value of the subband fed back by the UE comprises: receiving the measurement value of the subband and an identifier of the subband from the UE in a form of a list, wherein the measurement value of each subband corresponds to one identifier in the list: “In the method described in this embodiment, the network device instructs the user equipment to measure signal quality of a subband in F-OFDM and report a measurement report of signal quality of each subband, so that the network device can determine, according to the measurement report reported by the user equipment, a subband for communication by the user equipment . . . when measurement performed by the user equipment on a designated measurement object MeasObjectFOFDM meets a trigger condition of a measurement report triggering configuration ReportConfigFOFDM, the user equipment reports the measurement report to the network device. The measurement report includes the measurement result MeasResultListFOFDM of the designated subband of the neighboring cell. The measurement result MeasResultListFOFDM is related to a subBandID of the subband of the cell physicalCellIdentity” (Liu ¶ 0173 and 0202).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the disclosure of Yi and Lei with Liu for the purpose of allowing a UE to trigger a subband switch when a requirement of the UE is not met. According to Liu: “To resolve a prior-art problem that switching between different subbands by UE is not defined, embodiments of the present application provide a subband switching method, so that UE can switch to a different subband, and a current requirement of the UE is met” (Liu ¶ 0005).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 BRADLEY DAVIS LYTLE whose telephone number is (703)756-4593. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 AM - 4:00 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, Kwang bin Yao can be reached at 571-272-3182. 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.
/B.D.L./Examiner, Art Unit 2473
/BRADLEY D LYTLE JR./Examiner, Art Unit 2473
/KWANG B YAO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2473
Prosecution Insights