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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/12/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 9, 10, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nayeb et. al (US 2020/0067680 A1), hereafter Nayeb.
Regarding Claim 1:
Nayeb discloses a Radio Access Network (RAN) system comprising:
a radio unit (RU) coupled to a plurality of user equipment (UE), the RU having a plurality of sectors (see paragraph [0032], Fig. 1A; “The base station 114a may be part of the RAN… [and] may be configured to transmit and/or receive wireless signals…”; “The cell may further be divided into cell sectors… [and] may be divided into three sectors;” Fig. 1A paragraph [0045 ], thereby teaching an RU communicating with a plurality of UEs and having a plurality of sectors);
a radio resource controller (RRC) in a control unit (CU) server controlling physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) resources for the plurality of sectors (see paragraph [0055]; “handle radio resource management decisions… scheduling of users…”; paragraph [0099]; “PUCCH resources… [are] configured via higher-layer signaling… this resource index may indicate…”; paragraph [0167]; “a WTRU may determine the PUCCH resource… through higher layer configuration and/or DCI… PUCCH HARQ resources are allocated…”, thereby teaching control of PUCCH resources via higher-layer signaling and/or DCI corresponding to RRC-controlled resource allocation across sectors);
a media access control (MAC) scheduler for each of the plurality of sectors allocating resources for PUCCH hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) transmissions in an orthogonal manner, which are separated in time, frequency, or cyclic shift to minimize inter-carrier interference across the plurality of sectors (see paragraph [0091] – [0094]; “HARQ ACK/NACK… on PUCCH”; paragraph [0099]; “resource index… indicates…”; paragraph [0112]; “different sequences may be separable at the receiver… cyclic shift sequences… [are] spaced… to minimize potential interference”; paragraph [0167]; “PUCCH HARQ resources are allocated… by utilizing orthogonal cyclic shifts… the main criteria is to minimize the interference…”; Fig. 2, wherein the use of cyclic shift spacing and resource indexing teaches orthogonal allocation separated in time, frequency, and/or cyclic shift, and in a sectorized system such scheduling necessarily applies across the plurality of sectors).
Accordingly, Nayeb teaches allocating PUCCH HARQ resources across the plurality of sectors in a sectorized system in an orthogonal manner, wherein the resources are separated in time, frequency, or cyclic shift to minimize inter-carrier interference.
Regarding claim 9 - Nayeb teaches the limitations of Claim 1.
Nayeb further teaches that wherein the RRC configures different PUCCH HARQ resources separated in frequency or cyclic shift to each sector in a RU (see paragraph [0099]; “PUCCH resources… [are] configured via higher-layer signaling… this resource index may indicate…”; paragraph [0112]; “cyclic shift sequences… [are] spaced… to minimize potential interference”; paragraph [0032]; “The cell may further be divided into cell sectors…”, thereby teaching configuring different PUCCH HARQ resources across sectors).
Accordingly, Nayeb teaches configuring different PUCCH HARQ resources across the plurality of sectors in a sectorized system to avoid inter-sector interference.
Regarding claim 10 – Nayeb teaches the limitations of claim 1.
Nayeb further teaches that wherein said RRC does not configure PUCCH HARQ resources on the same frequency or cyclic shift for adjacent sectors to avoid causing interference in uplink HARQ detection (see paragraph [0032]; “The cell may further be divided into cell sectors…”; paragraph [0096]; “uplink control resources are allocated”; paragraph [0112]; “cyclic shift sequences… [are] spaced… to minimize potential interference”; Figs. 2–3, thereby teaching separation of PUCCH resources such that identical frequency or cyclic shift resources are not assigned to adjacent sectors to avoid inter-sector interference).
Accordingly, Nayeb teaches that PUCCH HARQ resources are not configured on the same frequency or cyclic shift for adjacent sectors in a sectorized system to avoid interference in uplink HARQ detection.
Regarding claim 13 - Nayeb teaches the limitations of claim 1.
Nayeb further teaches that wherein said MAC Scheduler in each of the plurality of sectors assigns PUCCH HARQ resources through a resource indicator field in downlink control information (DCI) to transmit acknowledgement status for physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH), (see paragraph [0099]; “PUCCH resources… [are] configured via higher-layer signaling… this resource index may indicate…”; paragraph [0112]; “ACK/NACK… on PUCCH”; Figs. 2–3; paragraph [0032]; “The cell may further be divided into cell sectors…”, thereby teaching determination of PUCCH HARQ resources based on DCI, which necessarily corresponds to assignment of such resources by a MAC scheduler through resource indication in DCI across sectors).
Accordingly, Nayeb teaches assignment of PUCCH HARQ resources based on DCI across the plurality of sectors.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or non-obviousness.
Claims 2–4, 11-12, and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nayeb in view of Park et al. (US 2013/148617 A1), hereinafter Park.
Regarding Claim 2 – Nayeb discloses the limitations of Claim 1
Nayeb further teaches that wherein the allocation of resources is selected from the group (see paragraph [0032]; “The cell may further be divided into cell sectors…”; paragraph [0112]; “cyclic shift sequences… [are] spaced… to minimize potential interference”, thereby teaching allocation and separation of resources across sectors to minimize interference).
Nayeb does not explicitly disclose configuring a PRB index with an offset or configuring a cyclic shift index based on PCI.
Park teaches configuring PUCCH resources using indexed allocation including PRB and cyclic shift determination (see paragraphs [0102]–[0103]; “resource index… mapping… to PUCCH resources”; paragraph [0123]; “indicate resource indices for PUCCH”; paragraph [0142]; “RB and CS [are] based on respective resource indices”, thereby teaching indexed mapping defining relative PRB positioning within a resource pool (i.e., offsets) and corresponding cyclic shift indices for different transmission entities).
It would have been obvious to modify Nayeb in view of Park to configure a PRB index with an offset and/or cyclic shift indices based on system parameters including cell-specific identifiers (e.g., PCI), as such indexed selection from a finite set of available resource configurations represents a predictable design choice to achieve orthogonal and interference-reduced allocation across sectors.
Regarding Claim 3 – Nayeb discloses the limitations of Claim 1.
Nayeb further teaches wherein said RU comprises a plurality of RUs each RU having a plurality of sectors, said RRC controls PUCCH resources for all of the plurality of sectors, and the resources for PUCCH HARQ transmissions in an orthogonal manner across the plurality of sectors (see paragraph [0032]; “The cell may further be divided into cell sectors…”; paragraph [0099]; “PUCCH resources… [are] configured via higher-layer signaling”; paragraph [0112]; “cyclic shift sequences… [are] spaced… to minimize potential interference”; paragraph [0167]; “PUCCH HARQ resources are allocated… by utilizing orthogonal cyclic shifts…”, thereby teaching sectorized control and orthogonal allocation of PUCCH HARQ resources).
Nayeb does not explicitly disclose coordinated orthogonal allocation of PUCCH HARQ resources across the plurality of sectors using distinct resource assignments across transmission entities.
Park teaches the allocation of PUCCH resources across multiple transmission entities using indexed mapping (see paragraph [0045]–[0046]; “multiple transmission entities”; paragraph [0102]–[0103]; “resource index… mapping… to PUCCH resources”; paragraph [0117]; HARQ resource allocation, thereby teaching assignment of distinct resource indices resulting in non-overlapping (orthogonal) configurations across entities).
It would have been obvious to modify Nayeb in view of Park to allocate PUCCH HARQ resources in an orthogonal manner across the plurality of sectors in a sectorized system, as distributing resources across entities using distinct indices represents a predictable design choice within a finite set of available configurations to reduce interference and improve resource efficiency.
Regarding Claim 4 – Nayeb and Park disclose the limitations of Claim 3.
Nayeb further teaches that wherein when the plurality of sectors comprises three sectors, said RRC configures different PUCCH resources separated by frequency and cyclic shift to the three sectors (see paragraph [0032]; “The cell may further be divided into cell sectors… [and] may be divided into three sectors”; paragraph [0099]; “PUCCH resources… [are] configured via higher-layer signaling”; paragraph [0112]; “cyclic shift sequences… [are] spaced… to minimize potential interference”, thereby teaching configuration of PUCCH resources across multiple sectors, including three sectors, with separation in cyclic shift to minimize interference).
Nayeb does not explicitly disclose configuring different PUCCH resources for each sector separated in both frequency and cyclic shift.
Park teaches the indexed allocation of PUCCH resources defining both frequency-domain (RB) and cyclic shift separation, (see paragraph [0102]–[0103]; “resource index… mapping… to PUCCH resources”; paragraph [0123]; “indicate resource indices for PUCCH”; paragraph [0142]; “RB and CS [are] based on respective resource indices”, thereby teaching assignment of distinct resource locations across both frequency-domain (RB) and cyclic shift domains for different transmission entities).
It would have been obvious to modify Nayeb in view of Park to configure different PUCCH resources for each sector separated in both frequency and cyclic shift, as combining Nayeb’s sectorized interference-reduction with Park’s indexed RB and cyclic shift allocation represents a predictable design choice within a finite set of available configurations to achieve orthogonal allocation and reduce inter-sector interference.
Regarding Claim 11 – Nayeb discloses the limitations of Claim 1.
Nayeb further teaches that wherein PUCCH resources are configured via higher-layer signaling across sectors (see [0099]; “PUCCH resources… [are] configured via higher-layer signaling”; [0032]; “The cell may further be divided into cell sectors…”; [0112]; “cyclic shift sequences… [are] spaced… to minimize potential interference”, thereby teaching configuration of PUCCH HARQ resources across multiple sectors of a radio unit (RU).
Nayeb does not explicitly disclose configuring offsets for HARQ RBs based on PCI and available PUCCH resources.
Park teaches configuring offsets for HARQ RBs based on PCI and available PUCCH resources (see paragraph [0102]–[0103]; “resource index… mapping… to PUCCH resources”; paragraph [0142]; “RB and CS [are] based on respective resource indices”, thereby teaching relative positioning of resources (i.e., offsets) within a resource pool based on indexed parameters).
It would have been obvious to modify Nayeb in view of Park to configure offsets for HARQ RBs based on PCI and available PUCCH resources across sectors of the RU, as selecting parameter-based offsets from a finite set of resource positions represents a predictable design choice to distinguish allocations and reduce inter-sector interference.
Regarding Claim 12 – Nayeb discloses the limitations of Claim 1.
Nayeb further teaches that wherein configuring frequency positions of PUCCH HARQ resources using a PCI-based mathematical relationship including a modulo operation (see paragraph [0032]; “The cell may further be divided into cell sectors…”; paragraph [0099]; “PUCCH resources… [are] configured via higher-layer signaling”; paragraph [0112]; “cyclic shift sequences… [are] spaced…”, thereby teaching configuration of PUCCH HARQ resources across multiple sectors of a radio unit (RU)).
Nayeb does not explicitly disclose configuring resource positions using a PCI-based mathematical relationship including a modulo operation.
Park teaches indexed mapping of PUCCH resources and mapping such indices into resource positions using deterministic mathematical relationships including modulo-based operations (see paragraph [0102]–[0103]; “resource index… mapping… to PUCCH resources”; paragraph [0123]; “indicate resource indices for PUCCH”; paragraph [0142]; “RB and CS [are] based on respective resource indices”; thereby teaching mapping within a finite resource set using deterministic mathematical relationships including modulo-based operations).
It would have been obvious to modify Nayeb in view of Park to configure resource positions using a PCI-based mathematical relationship including a modulo operation, as applying indexed mapping within standardized LTE resource structures using a known identifier such as PCI represents a predictable design choice to achieve distributed, non-overlapping, and orthogonal allocation across sectors.
Regarding Claim 14 – Nayeb discloses the limitations of Claim 1
Nayeb further teaches that wherein reserving a symbol within a slot for PUCCH HARQ transmission, wherein the symbol is not used for PUSCH in any RU and is shared among adjacent RUs (see paragraph [0032]; “The cell may further be divided into cell sectors…”; paragraph [0099]; “PUCCH resources… [are] configured via higher-layer signaling”; paragraph [0112]; “cyclic shift sequences… [are] spaced… to minimize potential interference”, thereby teaching allocation of PUCCH HARQ resources across multiple sectors of a radio unit (RU).
Nayeb does not explicitly disclose reserving a symbol exclusive for PUCCH HARQ transmission that is not used for PUSCH and shared among adjacent RUs.
Park teaches reserving a symbol exclusive for PUCCH HARQ transmission that is not used for PUSCH and shared among adjacent RUs. (See paragraph [0045]–[0046]; “multiple transmission entities”; paragraph [0102]–[0103]; “resource index… mapping… to PUCCH resources”; paragraph [0123]; “indicate resource indices for PUCCH”; paragraph [0142]; “RB and CS [are] based on respective resource indices”, thereby teaching coordinated allocation and partitioning of uplink resources across multiple transmission entities.
It would have been obvious to modify Nayeb in view of Park to reserve a symbol within a slot for PUCCH HARQ transmission across adjacent RUs, not used for PUSCH, as partitioning time-domain resource between control and data transmissions across multiple transmission entities represents a predictable design choice to ensure orthogonality and reduce interference.
Regarding Claim 15 – Nayeb and Park discloses the limitations of Claim 14.
Nayeb further teaches that wherein the plurality of RUs comprises Cell 0, Cell 1, and Cell 2, and wherein Cell 0 uses a symbol in slot 0, Cell 1 uses a symbol in slot 1, and Cell 2 uses a symbol in slot 2 (see paragraph [0032]; “The cell may further be divided into cell sectors… [and] may be divided into three sectors”; paragraph [0099]; “PUCCH resources… [are] configured via higher-layer signaling”; paragraph [0112]; “cyclic shift sequences… [are] spaced… to minimize potential interference”, thereby teaching allocation of PUCCH HARQ resources across multiple sectors of a radio unit (RU) with interference-reducing separation).
Nayeb does not explicitly disclose assigning a reserved PUCCH HARQ symbol to specific time-domain slots on a per-cell basis (e.g., Cell 0 → slot 0, Cell 1 → slot 1, Cell 2 → slot 2).
Park teaches assigning a reserved PUCCH HARQ symbol to specific time-domain slots on a per-cell basis (e.g., Cell 0 → slot 0, Cell 1 → slot 1, Cell 2 → slot 2) (see paragraph [0045]–[0046]; “multiple transmission entities”; paragraph [0102]–[0103]; “resource index… mapping… to PUCCH resources”; paragraph [0123]; “indicate resource indices for PUCCH”; paragraph [0142]; “RB and CS [are] based on respective resource indices”, thereby teaching distributing PUCCH resource allocations across multiple transmission entities using indexed mapping over available resource locations, including time-domain positions.
It would have been obvious to modify Nayeb in view of Park to assign a reserved PUCCH HARQ symbol across specific time-domain slots for different cells (e.g., Cell 0, Cell 1, Cell 2), as distributing control resource allocations across available time-domain positions for different transmission entities represents a predictable design choice to achieve non-overlapping transmissions, maintain orthogonality, and reduce inter-cell interference.
Claims 5 - 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nayeb in view of Park in further view of (3rd Generation Partnership Project; Technical Specification Group Radio Access Network; Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access (E-UTRA); Physical channels and modulation), hereinafter 3GPP TS 36.211.
Regarding Claim 5 – Nayeb and Park discloses the limitations of Claim 4.
Nayeb further teaches the three sectors comprise first, second and third sectors (see paragraph [0032]; “The cell may further be divided into cell sectors… [and] may be divided into three sectors”; paragraph [0099]; “PUCCH resources… [are] configured via higher-layer signaling”; paragraph [0112]; “cyclic shift sequences… [are] spaced… to minimize potential interference”, thereby teaching a sectorized system including three sectors with coordinated PUCCH resource allocation).
Nayeb and Park do not explicitly teach 10 MHz system.
3GPP TS 36.211 discloses standardized LTE system bandwidth configurations including 10 MHz (see Section 6.2; Table 6.2.1-1, defining transmission bandwidth configurations including 10 MHz corresponding to 50 resource blocks), thereby teaching operation of uplink control resources within a 10 MHz system.
It would have been obvious to modify Nayeb in view of Park and 3GPP TS 36.211 to operate in a 10 MHz system, as implementing Nayeb’s sectorized PUCCH resource allocation within a standardized bandwidth selected from a finite set of predefined LTE system bandwidth configurations represents a predictable design choice to ensure compatibility and predictable system performance.
Regarding Claim 6 – Nayeb and Park and 3GPP TS 36.211 disclose the limitations of Claim 5
Nayeb further teaches that wherein configurations of PUCCH HARQ F0 resources, starts at index 11 for the first sector; starts at index 15 for the second sector; and starts at index 19 for the third sector (see paragraph [0032]; “The cell may further be divided into cell sectors…”; paragraph [0099]; “PUCCH resources… [are] configured via higher-layer signaling”; paragraph [0112]; “cyclic shift sequences… [are] spaced… to minimize potential interference”, thereby teaching configuration of PUCCH HARQ resources across multiple sectors of a radio unit (RU) with separation to reduce interference).
Nayeb does not explicitly disclose assigning sector-specific starting indices for PUCCH HARQ F0 resources.
Park teaches disclose assigning sector-specific starting indices for PUCCH HARQ F0 resources. (see paragraph [0102]–[0103]; “resource index… mapping… to PUCCH resources”; paragraph [0123]; “indicate resource indices for PUCCH”; paragraph [0142]; “RB and CS [are] based on respective resource indices”, thereby teaching assignment of distinct resource indices to different transmission entities to define non-overlapping PUCCH resource locations).
It would have been obvious to modify Nayeb in view of Park and 3GPP TS 36.211 to assign sector-specific starting indices (e.g., 13, 15, 17) for PUCCH HARQ F0 resources across sectors of the RU, as applying indexed or parameter-based selection of starting resource positions across sectors of the RU represents a predictable design choice to achieve non-overlapping, orthogonal allocation and reduce inter-sector interference.
Regarding Claim 7 – Nayeb and Park discloses the limitations of Claim 4
Nayeb further teaches that the system comprises first, second, and third sectors (see paragraph [0032]; “The cell may further be divided into cell sectors… [and] may be divided into three sectors”; paragraph [0099]; “PUCCH resources… [are] configured via higher-layer signaling”; paragraph [0112]; “cyclic shift sequences… [are] spaced… to minimize potential interference”, thereby teaching a sectorized system including three sectors with coordinated PUCCH resource allocation).
Nayeb and Park do not disclose operation in a 5 MHz system.
3GPP TS 36.211 discloses standardized LTE system bandwidth configurations including 5 MHz (see, e.g., Section 5.3.2; Table of transmission bandwidth configurations, defining bandwidths of 1.4, 3, 5, 10, 15, and 20 MHz corresponding to resource block allocations), thereby teaching operation of uplink control resources within a 5 MHz system.
It would have been obvious to modify Nayeb in view of Park and 3GPP TS 36.211 to operate in a 5 MHz system, as implementing Nayeb’s sectorized PUCCH resource allocation within a standardized bandwidth selected from a finite set of predefined LTE system bandwidth configurations represents a predictable design choice to ensure compatibility and predictable system performance.
Regarding Claim 8 – Nayeb and Park and 3GPP TS 36.211 disclose the limitations of Claim 7
Nayeb further teaches that wherein configurations of PUCCH HARQ resources are provided across multiple sectors of a radio unit (RU) (see paragraph [0032]; “The cell may further be divided into cell sectors… [and] may be divided into three sectors”; paragraph [0099]; “PUCCH resources… [are] configured via higher-layer signaling”; paragraph [0112]; “cyclic shift sequences… [are] spaced… to minimize potential interference”, thereby teaching configuration of PUCCH HARQ resources across multiple sectors of a radio unit (RU) with separation to reduce interference).
Nayeb does not explicitly disclose assigning sector-specific starting indices for PUCCH HARQ F0 resources.
Park teaches disclose assigning sector-specific starting indices for PUCCH HARQ F0 resources. (see paragraph [0102]–[0103]; “resource index… mapping… to PUCCH resources”; paragraph [0123]; “indicate resource indices for PUCCH”; paragraph [0142]; “RB and CS [are] based on respective resource indices”, thereby teaching assignment of distinct resource indices to different transmission entities to define non-overlapping PUCCH resource locations).
It would have been obvious to modify Nayeb in view of Park and 3GPP TS 36.211 to assign sector-specific starting indices (e.g., 13, 15, 17) for PUCCH HARQ F0 resources across sectors of the RU, as applying indexed or parameter-based selection of starting resource positions across sectors of the RU represents a predictable design choice to achieve non-overlapping, orthogonal allocation and reduce inter-sector interference.
Conclusion
References found but not used Rastegardoost et al. ( US-20260032702-A1) can be used to teach the standard bandwidth configurations.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HASAN CHEEMA whose telephone number is (571)272-8722. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00-5:00 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, Ayman Abaza can be reached at (571) 270-0422. 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.
/H.A.C./Examiner, Art Unit 2465
/AYMAN A ABAZA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2465
Prosecution Insights