DETAILED OFFICE 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 .
This action is responsive to the communication received February 22, 2024. Claims 1-50 have been canceled. Claims 51-70 have been newly added. Claims 51-70 have been entered and are presented for examination.
Application 18/685,786 is a 371 of PCT/US2021/071314 08/31/2021.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on May 15th, 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 § 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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 51-54, 56, 58, 60-66, 68, 70 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin et al. (A Primer on Bandwidth Parts in 5G New Radio – 04/2020 ) in view of Weber et al. (US 20160094253).
Regarding claims 51, 62-63, Lin et al. discloses an apparatus (see Introduction [User Equipment]) comprising: at least one processor (see Introduction [User Equipment, inherent processor, memory, and instructions]); and at least one non-transitory memory including computer program code (see Introduction [User Equipment, inherent processor, memory, and instructions]); the at least one memory and the computer program code configured to, with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus at least to:
perform initial access according to a first bandwidth part configuration (page 3 [UE then performs random-access procedure with the small initial DL and UL BWPs]);
indicate, to a base station, a capability (page 3 [the UE reports that it is capable of supporting multiple BWPs]) for performing communication with a higher resolution than a resolution associated with the first bandwidth part configuration (MPEP 2111.04 [Claim scope is not limited by claim language that suggests or makes optional but does not require steps to be performed]);
receive, from the base station, an indication to perform communication according to a second bandwidth part configuration (page 3 [With dedicated RRC signaling, the network configures the UE with large DL/UL BWP #1]);
and perform communication according to the second bandwidth part configuration (page 5 [UE received switch request and the first slot in which the UE shall be able to receive PDSCH (for DL active BWP switch) or transmit PUSCH (for UL active BWP switch) on the new BWP.]).
Lin et al. does not explicitly disclose a capability for performing communication with a higher resolution than a resolution associated with the first bandwidth part configuration.
However, Weber et al. suggests a capability for performing communication with a higher resolution than a resolution associated with the first bandwidth part configuration (paragraph 0069 [Note that the required sampling rate of the ADC 337 is governed by the bandwidth of the bandpass filter 336]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to recognize if the UE is switched to a larger BWP, the UE could increase the sampling rate of the ADC which allows for a finer granularity.
Regarding claims 52, 64, the references as combined above disclose all the subject matter in claims 51, 63.
Lin et al. further discloses wherein the received indication comprises at least one of: one or more configuration parameters for a downlink high resolution bandwidth part configuration; one or more configuration parameters for an uplink high resolution bandwidth part configuration; or a trigger configured to instruct the apparatus to switch from use of the first bandwidth part configuration to use of the second bandwidth part configuration (page 5 [UE received switch request and the first slot in which the UE shall be able to receive PDSCH (for DL active BWP switch) or transmit PUSCH (for UL active BWP switch) on the new BWP.]); wherein the second bandwidth part configuration comprises at least one of: the downlink high resolution configuration, or the uplink high resolution bandwidth part configuration (page 3 [With dedicated RRC signaling, the network configures the UE with large DL/UL BWP #1 (270 RBs)]).
Regarding claims 53, 65, the references as combined above disclose all the subject matter in claims 51, 63.
Lin et al. further discloses wherein the at least one memory and the computer program code are configured to, with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to: switch from use of the second bandwidth part configuration to use of the first bandwidth part configuration based on one of: an explicit indication received via one of radio resource control signaling (page 3 [With dedicated RRC signaling, the network configures the UE with large DL/UL BWP #1 (270 RBs)]), medium access control signaling, or downlink control information signaling, or an implicit indication, wherein the implicit indication is based, at least partially, on a predefined inactivity timer; and perform communication according to the first bandwidth part configuration.
Regarding claims 54, 66, the references as combined above disclose all the subject matter in claims 53, 63.
Lin et al. further discloses wherein performing communication according to the second bandwidth part configuration comprises the at least one memory and the computer program code are configured to, with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus at least to: receive at least one physical downlink shared channel message according to the second bandwidth part configuration (page 3, 5 [With dedicated RRC signaling, the network configures the UE with large DL/UL BWP #1 (270 RBs); UE shall be able to receive PDSCH (for DL active BWP switch) or transmit PUSCH (for UL active BWP switch) on the new BWP]), or transmit at least one physical uplink shared channel message according to the second bandwidth part configuration.
Regarding claim 56, 68, the references as combined above disclose all the subject matter in claims 51, 63.
Lin et al. further discloses wherein the first bandwidth part configuration comprises at least one of: a default range (see Figure 2 [default BWP]), operation according to a single carrier waveform, operation according to spectrum shaping, operation according to spectrum extension, operation according to a limited maximum modulation order, operation according to time division multiplexing, operation according to a first set of radio frequency requirements, or operation according to a first set of demodulation requirements.
Regarding claim 58, 70, the references as combined above disclose all the subject matter in claim 51, 63.
Lin et al. further discloses wherein the second bandwidth part configuration comprises at least one of: a dedicated bandwidth part configuration (page 3 [DL/UL BWP configurations are divided into common and dedicated parameters; BWP-dedicated parameters are UE specific]), operation according to a multi-carrier waveform, operation according to a plurality of supported modulation orders, operation according to frequency division multiplexing, operation according to a first set of radio frequency requirements, or operation according to a first set of demodulation requirements.
Regarding claim 60, the references as combined above disclose all the subject matter in claim 51.
Lin et al. further discloses wherein the at least one memory and the computer program code are configured to, with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to perform at least one of: carrier aggregation (page 6 [carrier aggregation]), or multiple in, multiple out communication.
Regarding claim 61, the references as combined above disclose all the subject matter in claim 51.
Lin et al. further discloses wherein the apparatus is configured with a plurality of bandwidth part configurations, wherein the plurality of bandwidth part configurations comprises, at least, the first bandwidth part configuration and the second bandwidth part configuration (page 3 [the network configures the UE with large DL/UL BWP #1 (270 RBs), small DL/UL BWP#2 (52 RBs)]),
Lin et al. does not explicitly disclose wherein the plurality of bandwidth part configurations are associated with respective different resolutions.
However, Weber et al. makes obvious wherein the plurality of bandwidth part configurations are associated with respective different resolutions (paragraph 0069 [Note that the required sampling rate of the ADC 337 is governed by the bandwidth of the bandpass filter 336]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to recognize if the UE is switched to a larger BWP, the UE could increase the sampling rate of the ADC which allows for a finer granularity.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 55, 57, 59, 67, 69 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art of record does not disclose or make obvious:
wherein the first bandwidth part configuration comprises a low dynamic range for at least one of: analog to digital conversion, or digital to analog conversion; and wherein the indicated capability comprises at least one parameter indicative of a number of bits for at least one of: analog to digital conversion, or digital to analog conversion or
wherein the indicated capability comprises at least one parameter indicative of a number of bits for at least one of: analog to digital conversion, or digital to analog conversion or
wherein the number of bits associated with the first bandwidth part configuration is based on one of: an actual resolution, or an effective resolution, of one of: analog to digital conversion, or digital to analog conversion; and wherein the number of bits associated with the second bandwidth part configuration is based on one of: an actual resolution, or an effective resolution, of one of: analog to digital conversion, or digital to analog conversion.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER T WYLLIE whose telephone number is (571)270-3937. The examiner can normally be reached 4pm-11:30pm. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER T WYLLIE/Examiner, Art Unit 2465