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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim(s) 1-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 1, recites “the search space set configuration or the PDCCH candidate quantity configuration of the first cell indicates ... a linking between a search space set of the first cell and a search space set of the second cell, wherein the linking is indicated by a search space set identity (ID) of the search space set of the first cell that is the same as a search space set ID of the search space set of the second cell.” However, the Examiner cannot find any written support for the underlined feature.
Claims 6 and 12 are rejected for the same reason as stated above.
Claims depend on claim 1, 6, and 12 do not cure the deficiency.
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.
Claim(s) 6-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Cheng (US 20190313390).
With respect to independent claims:
Regarding claim(s) 6, Cheng teaches A terminal ([Fig.9], wireless node), comprising a processor, a memory, and a computer program that is stored in the memory and capable of running on the processor, wherein when the computer program is executed by the processor, a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) candidate allocation ([0089], “UE monitoring PDCCH candidates”) method for cross-carrier scheduling ([0090], “the cell #2 (scheduled cell) is configured to be cross-carrier scheduled on the cell #1 (scheduling cell).”) is implemented, the method comprises:
when configuration of a first cell comprises search space set configuration or PDCCH candidate quantity configuration of the first cell ([0089], “the UE may receive, on the cell #1, a plurality of search space configurations from the base station. The plurality of search space configurations may include a first search space configuration and a second search space configuration.”), determining a PDCCH candidate quantity of the first cell ([0079], “the search space configuration may include at least one of 1) a number of Physical Resource Blocks (PRBs), 2) a number of symbols, and 3) a Control Channel Element (CCE) to Resource Element Group (REG) mapping.”) based on the configuration of the first cell ([0089], “The UE may then monitor, on the cell #1, the PDCCH(s) of the scheduling cell and the PDCCH(s) of the scheduled cell (e.g., the cell #2) based on the first search space configuration and the second search space configuration.”);
the search space set configuration ([0089], “UE may receive, on the cell #1, a plurality of search space configurations from the base station.”) or the PDCCH candidate quantity configuration of the first cell indicates:
PDCCH search space set configuration ([0093], “based on the search space configuration ... the UE may monitor the search space for the cell #2 in the CORESET #2 in every two time slots.”) or a PDCCH candidate quantity ([0079], “the search space configuration may include at least one of 1) a number of Physical Resource Blocks (PRBs), 2) a number of symbols, and 3) a Control Channel Element (CCE) to Resource Element Group (REG) mapping.”) allocated to the first cell ([0093], “cell#2”) from a control resource set (CORESET) ([0090], “the cell #2 (scheduled cell) is configured to be cross-carrier scheduled on the cell #1 (scheduling cell). Since the cell #2 is the scheduled cell, the cell #2 may not be configured with any CORESET configuration by the base station. On the other hand, the cell #1 may be configured with two CORESETs: CORESET 703 and CORESET 705, by the base station.” ) of a second cell ([0093], “cell#1”); and
a linking between a search space set of the first cell and a search space set of the second cell ([0089], “the first search space configuration and the second search space may be associated with the same search space ID.” Search space configurations received from a base stations indicate scheduling cell and scheduled cell may have a same search space ID.); wherein the linking is indicated by a search space set identity (ID) of the se arch space set of the first cell that is the same as a search space set ID of the search space set of the second cell ([0089], “the first search space configuration and the second search space may be associated with the same search space ID.” So, it would have suggested that the search space ID for the scheduled cell is the same as the search space ID for the scheduling cell.);
wherein the first cell is a cell ([0090], “the cell #2 (scheduled cell)”) that is cross-carrier scheduled ([0090], “the cell #2 (scheduled cell) is configured to be cross-carrier scheduled on the cell #1 (scheduling cell)”) by the second cell ([0090], “cell #1 (scheduling cell)”).
With respect to dependent claims:
Regarding claim(s) 7, Cheng teaches wherein the search space set configuration or the PDCCH candidate quantity configuration of the first cell is applied to some or all CORESETs or search space sets in an active bandwidth part (BWP) of the second cell ([0092], “the UE may monitor the search space #3 in the CORESET #2 (e.g., the CORESET 705 in FIG. 7) in every time slot (e.g., time slots n, n+1, n+2 and n+3.”).
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.
Claim(s) 1-2 and 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (US 20200022119) in view of Cheng (US 20190313390).
With respect to independent claims:
Regarding claim(s) 1/12, Wang teaches A physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) candidate allocation method ([0090], “A first base station determines, in a first search space, a first resource occupied by a first PDCCH.”) ... performed by a network-side device ([Fig.2], First base station), wherein the method comprises:
when configuration of a first cell comprises search space set configuration or PDCCH candidate quantity configuration of the first cell, determining a PDCCH candidate quantity of the first cell based on the configuration of the first cell ([0105], “the first base station and the second base station may use a smaller one of the quantities of symbols of the two base stations, as a quantity of symbols for determining a quantity of CCEs.” And [0103], “a quantity of CCEs corresponding to the ...PDCCH search space.” The first base station determines quantity of symbols for PDDCH.).
However, Wang does not specifically disclose cross-carrier scheduling, and the search space set configuration or the PDCCH candidate quantity configuration of the first cell indicates: PDCCH search space set configuration or a PDCCH candidate quantity allocated to the first cell from a control resource set (CORESET) of a second cell; and a linking between a search space set of the first cell and a search space set of the second cell, wherein the linking is indicated by a search space set identity (ID) of the search space set of the first cell that is the same as a search space set ID of the search space set of the second cell; wherein the first cell is a cell that is cross-carrier scheduled by the second cell.
In an analogous art, Cheng discloses cross-carrier scheduling ([0101], “the UE may monitor, on the first cell, a second PDCCH of a second cell (e.g., a scheduled cell) cross-carrier scheduled by the first cell, based on the second search space configuration.”) ...
the search space set configuration ([0089], “UE may receive, on the cell #1, a plurality of search space configurations from the base station.”) or the PDCCH candidate quantity configuration of the first cell indicates:
PDCCH search space set configuration ([0093], “based on the search space configuration ... the UE may monitor the search space for the cell #2 in the CORESET #2 in every two time slots.”) or a PDCCH candidate quantity ([0079], “the search space configuration may include at least one of 1) a number of Physical Resource Blocks (PRBs), 2) a number of symbols, and 3) a Control Channel Element (CCE) to Resource Element Group (REG) mapping.”) allocated to the first cell ([0093], “cell#2”) from a control resource set (CORESET) ([0090], “the cell #2 (scheduled cell) is configured to be cross-carrier scheduled on the cell #1 (scheduling cell). Since the cell #2 is the scheduled cell, the cell #2 may not be configured with any CORESET configuration by the base station. On the other hand, the cell #1 may be configured with two CORESETs: CORESET 703 and CORESET 705, by the base station.” ) of a second cell ([0093], “cell#1”); and
a linking between a search space set of the first cell and a search space set of the second cell ([0089], “the first search space configuration and the second search space may be associated with the same search space ID.” Search space configurations received from a base stations indicate scheduling cell and scheduled cell may have a same search space ID.); wherein the linking is indicated by a search space set identity (ID) of the se arch space set of the first cell that is the same as a search space set ID of the search space set of the second cell ([0089], “the first search space configuration and the second search space may be associated with the same search space ID.” So, it would have suggested that the search space ID for the scheduled cell is the same as the search space ID for the scheduling cell.);
wherein the first cell is a cell ([0090], “the cell #2 (scheduled cell)”) that is cross-carrier scheduled ([0090], “the cell #2 (scheduled cell) is configured to be cross-carrier scheduled on the cell #1 (scheduling cell)”) by the second cell ([0090], “cell #1 (scheduling cell)”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claim invention to have modified the method of Wang to specify cross carrier scheduling as taught by Cheng. The motivation/suggestion would have been because there is a need to reduce complexity ([0004]).
With respect to dependent claims:
Regarding claim(s) 2/13, Cheng teaches wherein the search space set configuration or the PDCCH candidate quantity configuration of the first cell is applied to some or all CORESETs or search space sets in an active bandwidth part (BWP) of the second cell ([0092], “the UE may monitor the search space #3 in the CORESET #2 (e.g., the CORESET 705 in FIG. 7) in every time slot (e.g., time slots n, n+1, n+2 and n+3.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claim invention to have modified the method of Wang to specify cross carrier scheduling as taught by Cheng. The motivation/suggestion would have been because there is a need to reduce complexity ([0004]).
Claim(s) 3, 5, 14 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang in view of Cheng, and further in view of Huang (US 20190342907).
Regarding claim(s) 3/14, Huang teaches wherein BWP configuration of the first cell comprises the search space set configuration of the first cell or PDCCH candidate quantity configuration of each aggregation level (AL) of the first cell, and a correspondence between CORESETs or search space sets of the first cell and CORESETs or search space sets of the second cell; or,
the BWP configuration of the first cell comprises ([0409], “each DL BWP of a serving cell where a UE is configured to monitor PDCCH in a search space.”): the search space set configuration of the first cell or PDCCH candidate quantity configuration of each aggregation level (AL) of the first cell ([0415], “a number of PDCCH candidates M.sub.p,s.sup.(L) per CCE aggregation level L by higher layer parameters aggregationLevel1, aggregationLevel2, aggregationLevel4, aggregationLevel8, and aggregationLevel16, for CCE aggregation level 1, CCE aggregation level 2, CCE aggregation level 4, CCE aggregation level 8, and CCE aggregation level 16, respectively.”); or,
the BWP configuration of the first cell comprises: a correspondence between CORESETs or search space sets of the first cell and CORESETs or search space sets of the second cell. .
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claim invention to have modified the method of Wang to specify aggregation level as taught by Huang. The motivation/suggestion would have been because there is a need to determine number of CCE elements for each aggregation level.
Regarding claim(s) 5/16, Huang teaches wherein that the search space set configuration or the PDCCH candidate quantity configuration of the first cell is applied to some or all CORESETs or search space sets in an active BWP of the second cell comprises any of the following items:
search space set configuration or PDCCH candidate quantity configuration of each AL comprised in cross-carrier scheduling configuration of the first cell is applied to some or all CORESETs or search space sets in a BWP of the second cell; and
search space set configuration or PDCCH candidate quantity configuration of each AL comprised in serving cell configuration ([0415], “a number of PDCCH candidates M.sub.p,s.sup.(L) per CCE aggregation level L by higher layer parameters aggregationLevel1, aggregationLevel2, aggregationLevel4, aggregationLevel8, and aggregationLevel16, for CCE aggregation level 1, CCE aggregation level 2, CCE aggregation level 4, CCE aggregation level 8, and CCE aggregation level 16, respectively.”) of the first cell ([0409], “each DL BWP of a serving cell where a UE is configured to monitor PDCCH in a search space.”) is applied to some or all CORESETs or search space sets in a BWP of the second cell.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claim invention to have modified the method of Wang to specify aggregation level as taught by Huang. The motivation/suggestion would have been because there is a need to determine number of CCE elements for each aggregation level.
Claim(s) 4 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang in view of Cheng, and further in view of Pan (US 20120307777).
Regarding claim(s) 4/15, Wang teaches determining the PDCCH candidate quantity of the first cell based on the PDCCH configuration of the first cell ([0105], “the first base station and the second base station may use a smaller one of the quantities of symbols of the two base stations, as a quantity of symbols for determining a quantity of CCEs.”).
However, Cheng does not teach rest of the claim limitations.
In an analogous art, Pan teaches when a search space set of the second cell is configured to monitor or perform blind detection for a third downlink control information (DCI) format ([0115], “LTE-A UE configured in an cross-carrier scheduling mode detects blindly the DCI format 1A generated in the first approach in the UE-specific search space.”) ...
the third DCI format comprises a carrier indicator field ([0120], “set a CIF field at a fixed location in the DCI signaling for scheduling the user equipment to perform a non-contention based random access.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claim invention to have modified the method of Wang to specify Blind detection as taught by Pan. The motivation/suggestion would have been because there is a need to determine PDCCH
Claim(s) 8 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheng in view of Huang (US 20190342907).
Regarding claim(s) 8, Huang teaches wherein BWP configuration of the first cell comprises the search space set configuration of the first cell or PDCCH candidate quantity configuration of each aggregation level (AL) of the first cell, and a correspondence between CORESETs or search space sets of the first cell and CORESETs or search space sets of the second cell; or, the BWP configuration of the first cell comprises: the search space set configuration of the first cell or PDCCH candidate quantity configuration of each aggregation level (AL) of the first cell ([0415], “a number of PDCCH candidates M.sub.p,s.sup.(L) per CCE aggregation level L by higher layer parameters aggregationLevel1, aggregationLevel2, aggregationLevel4, aggregationLevel8, and aggregationLevel16, for CCE aggregation level 1, CCE aggregation level 2, CCE aggregation level 4, CCE aggregation level 8, and CCE aggregation level 16, respectively.”); or, the BWP configuration of the first cell comprises: a correspondence between CORESETs or search space sets of the first cell and CORESETs or search space sets of the second cell.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claim invention to have modified the method of Wang to specify aggregation level as taught by Huang. The motivation/suggestion would have been because there is a need to determine number of CCE elements for each aggregation level.
Regarding claim(s) 10, Huang teaches wherein that the search space set configuration or the PDCCH candidate quantity configuration of the first cell is applied to some or all CORESETs or search space sets in an active BWP of the second cell comprises any of the following items:
search space set configuration or PDCCH candidate quantity configuration of each AL comprised in cross-carrier scheduling configuration of the first cell is applied to some or all CORESETs or search space sets in a BWP of the second cell; and
search space set configuration or PDCCH candidate quantity configuration of each AL comprised in serving cell configuration ([0415], “a number of PDCCH candidates M.sub.p,s.sup.(L) per CCE aggregation level L by higher layer parameters aggregationLevel1, aggregationLevel2, aggregationLevel4, aggregationLevel8, and aggregationLevel16, for CCE aggregation level 1, CCE aggregation level 2, CCE aggregation level 4, CCE aggregation level 8, and CCE aggregation level 16, respectively.”) of the first cell ([0409], “each DL BWP of a serving cell where a UE is configured to monitor PDCCH in a search space.”) is applied to some or all CORESETs or search space sets in a BWP of the second cell.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claim invention to have modified the method of Wang to specify aggregation level as taught by Huang. The motivation/suggestion would have been because there is a need to determine number of CCE elements for each aggregation level.
Claim(s) 9 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang in view of Cheng, and further in view of Pan (US 20120307777).
Regarding claim(s) 9/11, Cheng teaches determining the PDCCH candidate quantity of the first cell based on the PDCCH configuration of the first cell ([0079], “the search space configuration may include at least one of 1) a number of Physical Resource Blocks (PRBs), 2) a number of symbols, and 3) a Control Channel Element (CCE) to Resource Element Group (REG) mapping.”).
However, Cheng does not teach rest of the claim limitations.
In an analogous art, Pan teaches when a search space set of the second cell is configured to monitor or perform blind detection for a third downlink control information (DCI) format ([0115], “LTE-A UE configured in an cross-carrier scheduling mode detects blindly the DCI format 1A generated in the first approach in the UE-specific search space.”) ...
the third DCI format comprises a carrier indicator field ([0120], “set a CIF field at a fixed location in the DCI signaling for scheduling the user equipment to perform a non-contention based random access.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claim invention to have modified the method of Wang to specify Blind detection as taught by Pan. The motivation/suggestion would have been because there is a need to determine PDCCH
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 07/06/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claim 1, Applicant argues (Remark page 12, last paragraph)
“Cheng fails to explicitly teach configuring the same search space ID in both the first search space configuration and the second search space configuration.”
Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Examiner cited teaching [0089, Cheng], which discloses scheduling cell and scheduled cell are associated with a same space search ID based on search space configurations received from a BS, see updated mapping in claim 1.
Based on the foregoing reasoning, the rejections are sustained.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZHIREN QIN whose telephone number is (571) 272-5444. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9-6 PM.
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 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). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ZHIREN QIN/Examiner, Art Unit 2411
Prosecution Insights