DETAILED ACTION
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 of this title, 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, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15, 17, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Luo et al. (US 2021/0227544, “Luo”) in view of Huang et al. (US 2024/0064671, “Huang”).
Regarding claim 1, Luo discloses a guard symbol configuration method, comprising:
- sending, by a first node, a first medium access control control element (MAC CE) to a second node, wherein the first MAC CE indicates a number of guard symbols used in a first subcarrier spacing (See 1310 or 1312 Fig.13,
PNG
media_image1.png
328
767
media_image1.png
Greyscale
See ¶.115, the child IAB node may generate and transmit the guard symbols desired message to the parent IAB node requesting the parent IAB node provide the determined number of guard symbols at transitions between transmission/reception by the MT unit of the child IAB node and transmission/reception by the DU of the child IAB node. In some examples, the guard symbols desired message may be transmitted within a MAC-CE; See 1310 Fig.13 and ¶.134, the child IAB node may generate and transmit an inter-slot guard symbols desired message to the parent IAB node requesting the parent IAB node provide the determined number of inter-slot guard symbols at slot boundary transitions between transmission/reception by the MT unit of the child IAB node and transmission/reception by the DU of the child IAB node. The child IAB node may further include an SCS (Sub-Carrier Spacing) requested for the inter-slot guard symbols. In some examples, the requested SCS is the second SCS utilized by the child IAB node for communication on the respective second links with child nodes of the child IAB node. In some examples, the inter-slot guard symbols desired message, together with the requested SCS, may be transmitted within a MAC-CE).
Luo discloses the method of sending the first MAC CE and the second MAC CE for inter-slot GS provided message with SCS and intra-slot GS provided message with SCS, respectively (See Fig.13), but does not explicitly disclose what Huang discloses,
- sending, by the first node, a second MAC CE to the second node (Luo and Huang disclose the method of sending the second MAC CE), wherein the first MAC CE and the second MAC CE are to be jointly used to determine a number of guard symbols used or expected to be used in a second subcarrier spacing (Huang, See 1120 Fig.11,
PNG
media_image2.png
205
451
media_image2.png
Greyscale
See ¶.235, optionally, the IAB node 902-2 may send a signal of updating the sets of desired numbers of guard symbols to the parent IAB node 902-1 (step 1120). Optionally, the parent IAB node 902-1 may send a signal of updating the sets of provided numbers of guard symbols to the IAB node 902-2 (step 1122); See ¶.236, the switching or transition can be made from one slot (e.g., slot (k−1)) to the next slot (e.g., slot k). In one embodiment, each set of desired numbers of guard symbols per each timing switching group (Group-1 to Group-4) contains at least 8 non-negative values which represent the number of guard symbols corresponding to a plurality of timing alignment cases, as illustrated in FIG. 10; See Fig.8B,
PNG
media_image3.png
544
520
media_image3.png
Greyscale
See ¶.34, a new parameter Guard Symbol-SCS (Sub-Carrier Spacing) is also provided which indicates the reference SCS (FR1: {15 kHz, 30 kHz, 60 kHz}, FR2: {60 kHz, 120 kHz}) to be used for the guard symbols; See ¶.54-55, sub-carrier spacing (SCS): This field indicates the subcarrier spacing used as reference for the guard spacing. The length of this field is 2bits. The values for the SCS field are shown in Table 6.1.3.22-2; [0055] Number of Guard Symbols (NmbGS): This field indicates the number of guard symbols for the switching scenario shown in Table 5.18.19-1. The number of guard symbols can take values within the range of 0 . . . 4. Higher values 5-7 are reserved; See ¶.138, each MAC CE of the one or more MAC CEs comprises one or more of sub-carrier spacing, SCS, bits to indicate that the one or more sets of desired numbers of guard symbols correspond to one or more of Group-2, Group-3, or Group-4, respectively; Examiner’s Note: the updated procedure is associated with the number of guard symbols in the first MAC CE and the second MAC CE).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to apply the method of “the first MAC CE and the second MAC CE are to be jointly used to determine a number of guard symbols used or expected to be used in a second subcarrier spacing” as taught by Huang into the system of Luo, so that it provides a way of receiving updated the sets of provided number of guard symbols from the parent IAB node (Huang, See ¶.235) and indicating new parameter guard symbol sub-carrier spacing to be used for the updated guard symbols (Huang, See ¶.34).
Regarding claim 3, Luo discloses “the first node comprises an integrated access and backhaul mobile terminal (IAB MT), and the second node comprises an integrated access and backhaul distributed unit (IAB DU) or a donor distributed unit (DU); or the first node comprises an IAB DU or a donor DU, and the second node comprises an IAB MT (See 1302 & 1304 Fig.13, child IAB-MT and parent IAB-DU).”
Regarding claim 5, Luo do not explicitly disclose what Huang discloses “the second MAC CE comprises a subcarrier spacing (SCS) field, and a value of the SCS field indicates the second subcarrier spacing (Huang, See Fig.8B and ¶.34, SCS value).” Therefore, this claim is rejected with the similar reasons and motivation set forth in the rejection of claim 1.
Regarding claim 7, Luo does not explicitly disclose what Huang discloses “a reserved bit in the first MAC CE indicates that the first MAC CE is a first-type MAC CE, and a reserved bit in the second MAC CE indicates that the second MAC CE is a second-type MAC CE (Huang, See ¶.137, each MAC CE of the one or more MAC CEs comprises a reserved bit to indicate that one of the two or more timing switching groups).” Therefore, this claim is rejected with the similar reasons and motivation set forth in the rejection of claim 1.
Regarding claim 9, it is a guard symbol configuration method claim corresponding to the claim 1 and is therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of the claim.
Regarding claims 11, 13, and 15, they are claims corresponding to claims 3, 4, & 7, respectively and are therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of the claims.
Regarding claim 17, it is an apparatus claim corresponding to the method claim 1, except the limitation “a transceiver (See Fig.15)” and is therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of the claim.
Regarding claim 19, it is a claim corresponding to the claim 3 and is therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of the claim.
Claims 4, 12, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Luo in view of Huang and further in view of Harada et al. (US 2023/0292150, “Harada”).
Regarding claim 4, Huang discloses “the first subcarrier spacing is 15 kHz, 30 kHz, 60 kHz, or 120 kHz (Huang, See ¶.34), but Luo and Huang do not explicitly disclose what Harada discloses “the second subcarrier spacing is 480 kHz or 960 kHz (Harada, See Fig.3 and ¶.151, an SCS of 960 kHz and an SCS of 480 kHz).” Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to apply “the second subcarrier spacing is 480 kHz or 960 kHz” as taught by Harada into the system of Luo and Huang, so that it provides a way of satisfying the required application of a wider SCS (Harada, See ¶.37).
Regarding claims 12 and 20, they are claims corresponding to claims 4 & 4, respectively and are therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of the claims.
Claims 8 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Luo in view of Huang and further in view of Lee et al. (US 2023/0083274, “Lee”).
Regarding claim 8, Luo and Huang do not explicitly disclose what Lee discloses “mapping, by the first node, the first MAC CE to a first logical channel, and mapping the second MAC CE to a second logical channel, wherein the first MAC CE mapped to the first logical channel is a first-type MAC CE, and the second MAC CE mapped to the second logical channel is a second-type MAC CE; the sending the first MAC CE comprises: sending, by the first node, the first MAC CE to the second node through the first logical channel; and the sending the second MAC CE comprises: sending, by the first node, the second MAC CE to the second node through the second logical channel (Lee, ¶.510, the highest priority of logical channels and MAC CE(s) that can be mapped to the configured grant in logical channel prioritization; Examiner’s Note: the priority is used for a different type of MAC CE).”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to apply “mapping, by the first node, the first MAC CE to a first logical channel, and mapping the second MAC CE to a second logical channel, wherein the first MAC CE mapped to the first logical channel is a first-type MAC CE, and the second MAC CE mapped to the second logical channel is a second-type MAC CE; the sending the first MAC CE comprises: sending, by the first node, the first MAC CE to the second node through the first logical channel; and the sending the second MAC CE comprises: sending, by the first node, the second MAC CE to the second node through the second logical channel” as taught by Lee into the system of Luo and Huang, so that it provides a way of determining the priority of each configured grant by itself based on the highest priority of logical channels and a MAC CE carried in a MAC PDU over the configured grant (Lee, See ¶.479).
Regarding claim 16, it is a claim corresponding to the claim 8 and is therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of the claim.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 6, 10, 14, and 18 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.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jung H Park whose telephone number is 571-272-8565. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 7:00 AM-3:00 PM.
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 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 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.
/JUNG H PARK/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2411