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 1-20 have been considered and found to be not persuasive. The reasons are set forth below:
The applicant’s Arguments and the examiner’s response:
Applicant’s Arguments: Applicant’s Arguments recites, in page 8-10 of the remarks, “Appellant respectfully submits that the cited combination fails to teach or suggest, or otherwise motivate, all of the elements of claim 1. In particular, the cited combination fails to teach or suggest at least "sending, to a base station, an indication of a constraint on KO and K2 values."
Examiner’s response: the examiner respectfully disagrees. The examiner’s rejections are based on the recited claim limitations and the examiner must interpret the claim limitations under the broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI). Ang does not explicitly teach: sending, to a base station, an indication of a constraint on KO and K2 values. However, Li in the same field of endeavor teaches: sending, to a base station, an indication of a constraint on KO and K2 values (Li, para (82), where, the UE sends an one-bit indication in the DCI indicates whether or not the restriction of the TDRA table according to the configured minimum K0/K2 value is to be applied or not. In a case where two values are configured, the 1-bit indication indicates which one of the two configured values is to be used for TDRA table restriction). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the teaching of Li into Ang in order to provide large coverage in harsh environments, and extremely long-life battery for low cost devices (Li para [17]). Hence Li teaches the argued limitation and thereby traverse the argument maintaining the rejection.
All the remaining arguments are based on the arguments above and are responded to in full.
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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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 nonobviousness.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ang et al. (US PRO 62/710,474 for PGPUB: US 2019/0261405 A1), hereinafter, “Ang” in view of Li et all (US 12,289,736 B2), hereinafter, “Li”.
Regarding claim 1, Ang discloses: A method (para [0006], a method of wireless communications), comprising: a user equipment device (UE) (fig 2-3, the UE 115, para [0114], where, UE 115-a monitor PDCCH following receipt of DCI that includes an indication of a BWP switch),
wherein K0 defines a number of slots between a slot scheduled for a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) and a slot scheduled for a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) (fig 4D, para [0140]-[0144], illustrating fig 400-d, where, K0 is configured and assigned number slots between DCI 405-k (the Slotn – Slotn-1 carried by PDCCH) and PDSCH 410-g); and
wherein K2 defines a number of slots between a slot scheduled for the PDCCH and a slot scheduled for a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) (fig 4D, para [0140]-[0141], illustrating fig 400-c, where, K2 is configured and assigned number slots between DCI 405-l (carried by PDCCH) and PUSCH 425-e);
receiving, from the base station, (fig 2-3, para [0116], where, transmitting from base station 105 and received at a UE 115),
the base station a slot configuration schedule with scheduled K0 and K2 values (fig 4A-E, para [0124]-[0125], where, slot configuration is scheduled based on the value of K, i.e., K0 indicating data transmission in PDSCH i.e., downlink data and for K2 indicating uplink transmission in PUSCH, see fig 4B, para [0130]); and
performing communications with the base station based on the scheduled K0 and K2 values (fig 4A-4E, para [0135]-[0140], where, the UE 115 wish (proposal) to exchange uplink communication with a desired power-mode (Low-power mode or high-power mode) with the BS 105);
Ang does not explicitly teach: sending, to a base station, an indication of a constraint on K0 and K2 values.
Li teaches: sending, to a base station, an indication of a constraint on K0 and K2 values (fig 9, para (82), col 14, and lines 14-25, where, “According to current 3GPP discussions, the DCI format 0_1/1_1 will support an additional field with 1 bit to support cross-slot scheduling adapting allowing for power saving in BR. In particular, one or two values of minimum K0/K2 values for restricting a TDRA table are configured by RRC. In a case where one value is configured, the 1-bit indication in the DCI indicates whether or not the restriction of the TDRA table according to the configured minimum K0/K2 value is to be applied or not. In a case where two values are configured, the 1-bit indication indicates which one of the two configured values is to be used for TDRA table restriction”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use “wherein the communications include a UE proposal of a scheduling power profile; and transmit, to the UE, a slot configuration schedule based on the UE proposed scheduling-power profile” as taught by Li into Ang in order to provide large coverage in harsh environments, and extremely long-life battery for low cost devices (Li para [17]).
Regarding claim 8, the claim includes features identical to the subject matter mentioned in the rejection to claim 1 above. The claims are mere reformulation of claim 1 in order to define the corresponding method for UE configuration for scheduling power profile, and the rejection to claim 1 is applied hereto.
Regarding claim 15, the claim includes features identical to the subject matter mentioned in the rejection to claim 1 above. The claims are mere reformulation of claim 1 in order to define the corresponding UE configuration for scheduling power profile, and the rejection to claim 1 is applied hereto. Additionally, Ang teaches, processor and memory (para [0027]).
Regarding claims 2, 9 and 16, Ang modified by Li discloses: wherein the slot configuration schedule is based, at least in part, on the indication (Li: fig 9, para (61), col 10, lines 1-5, where, “the scheduling timing (e.g., for the scheduling of resources described above) may be indicated within the DCI by using a Time Domain Resource Allocation (TDRA) table. In particular, a UE may be notified of allocated resources by indicating one entry (typically a row of the table) of said TDRA table in the DCI”).
Regarding claims 3, 10 and 17, Ang modified by Li discloses: wherein the indication of the constraint of on the K0 and K2 values is carried in a radio resource control (RRC) message (Ang: fig 4A-C, para [0127], where, the K0 and K2 constraint are transmitted using DCI and “DCI fields is received via high-layer signaling (e.g., RRC signaling)”, para [0208]).
Regarding claims 4, 11 and 18, Ang modified by Li discloses: wherein the indication of the constraint on the K0 and k2 values is included in a scheduling-power profile (Ang: fig 4A, para [0129], using K0 and K2 parameters for scheduling delay the conflict of power profile can be controlled).
Regarding claims 5, 12 and 19, Ang modified by Li discloses: wherein the scheduling-power profile further includes one or more parameters that include at least one of: a first parameter (Ang: fig 4A-C, para [0137], where, “the BWP timer 457 may provide for monitoring a number of slots (e.g., five slots) for a PDCCH in a particular BWP mode (e.g., a BWP2 mode, or a wider BWP mode). A UE 115 may monitor the PDCCH in, for example, a BWP1 mode optimized for a larger k0 (or, k2)) value during the duration of defining a set of values for search space monitoring periodicity (Ang: fig 4A, para [0129], using K0 and K2 parameters for scheduling delay the conflict of power profile can be controlled);
a second parameter defining a number of slots between a slot scheduled for reception on a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) and a slot scheduled for reception on a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH);
a third parameter defining a number of slots between a slot scheduled for reception on the PDSCH and a slot scheduled for an acknowledgment;
a fourth parameter defining a number of slots between a slot scheduled for reception on the PDCCH and a slot scheduled for transmission on a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH); a fifth parameter defining minimum and/or maximum bandwidth values and/or constraints in large bandwidth parts (BWPs); or a sixth parameter defining a set of supported number of multiple-input-multiple-output (MIMO) layers.
Regarding claims 6, 13 and 20, Ang modified by Li discloses: wherein the scheduling-power profile does not conflict with one or more other scheduling-power profiles (Ang: para [0139], where, “the UE 115 may restrict a BWP switching DCI to slot-based scheduling only, similarly facilitating eliminating such conflicts”).
Regarding claims 7 and 14, Ang modified by Li discloses: wherein the one or more other scheduling-power profiles comprise a profile constraining the base station to schedule transmission of an acknowledgment of data received on a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) to a first slot immediately preceding a second slot scheduled for PDCCH monitoring (ANG: para [0137], where, “FIG. 4C, the BWP timer 457 may provide for monitoring a number of slots (e.g., five slots) for a PDCCH in a particular BWP mode (e.g., a BWP2 mode, or a wider BWP mode). A UE 115 may monitor the PDCCH in, for example, a BWP1 mode optimized for a larger k0 (or, k2) value during the duration of, or until the expiration of, the inactivity timer 458”).
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 NIZAM U AHMED whose telephone number is (571)272-9561. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fry, 7:00 AM-6:00 PM PST.
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, Huy Vu can be reached at 571-272-3155. 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.
/NIZAM U AHMED/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2461
Prosecution Insights