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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the application filed on 03/19/2024.
Claims 7-12 are currently pending.
Claims 7-12 are rejected.
Claims 7 and 10-12 are independent claims.
- Claim Objection
5. Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities: “a UE” in line 4 should be “a UE (User Equipment)”, “UE (User Equipment)” in line 6 should be “UE”, “HARQ-ACK” in line 12 should be “HARQ-ACK (Hybrid automatic repeat request – Acknowledgement)”. Appropriate corrections are required.
6. Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: “a UE” in line 4 should be “a UE (User Equipment)”, “UE (User Equipment)” in line 6 should be “UE”, “HARQ-ACK” in line 12 should be “HARQ-ACK (Hybrid automatic repeat request – Acknowledgement)”. Appropriate corrections are required.
7. Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities: “a UE” in line 5 should be “a UE (User Equipment)”, “UE (User Equipment)” in lines 7 and 23 should be “UE”, “HARQ-ACK” in line 12 should be “HARQ-ACK (Hybrid automatic repeat request – Acknowledgement)”. Appropriate corrections are required.
8. Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities: “a UE” in line 5 should be “a UE (User Equipment)”, “UE (User Equipment)” in line 6 should be “UE”, “HARQ-ACK” in line 12 should be “HARQ-ACK (Hybrid automatic repeat request – Acknowledgement)”. Appropriate corrections are required.
Claim Interpretation
9. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
10. The claims 7 and 10-11 in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
11. This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitations are: reception unit, control unit and transmission unit in claim 7; transmission unit, control unit and reception unit in claim 10; transmission unit, control unit and reception unit in claim 11.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to conclude that the transmission unit is a transmitter and the reception unit is a receiver. Therefore, the transmission unit and reception unit are definite.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
12. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
13. Claim limitations “control unit in claims 7 and 10-11” invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function and/or there is no algorithm for each and every step of the above limitations. Therefore, the claims 7 and 10-11 are indefinite and are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Claims 8-9 depend on claim 7, thus they are rejected for the same reason.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
14. 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 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.
15. 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.
16. The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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.
17. Claims 7-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sechang MYUNG et al. (US 2019/0261356 A1), hereinafter MYUNG, in view of Mohammad Mozaffari et al. (US 2024/0195591 A1), hereinafter Mozaffari.
For claim 7, MYUNG teaches a terminal (MYUNG, Fig. 14) comprising:
a reception unit (MYUNG, Fig. 14 item 1410.) configured to receive system information from a base station (MYUNG, Fig. 17 and paragraph 239.);
a control unit (MYUNG, Fig. 14 item 1400.) configured to determine an uplink control channel resource (MYUNG, Fig. 17 and paragraph 240.); and
a transmission unit (MYUNG, Fig. 14 item 1420.) configured to transmit an indication during a random access procedure, and to transmit an uplink control channel including HARQ-ACK corresponding to an indication from the base station after the indication during the random access procedure to the base station by using the uplink control channel resource (MYUNG, Fig. 17 and paragraph 242. See also paragraph 59).
Mozaffari further teaches to determine an uplink control channel resource that is different from an uplink control channel resource used by a UE that is not a function-reduced UE in a case where an initial UL-BWP (Uplink Bandwidth part) for a reduced- function UE (User Equipment) is configured by the system information (Mozaffari, Fig. 5 and paragraph 73. See also paragraphs 74-84.), where the UL-BWP is configured within the maximum bandwidth for the function-reduced UE by the system information (Mozaffari, Fig. 5 and paragraph 73. See also paragraphs 74-84.), and where frequency hopping is configured to be disabled by the system information (Mozaffari, Fig. 5 and paragraphs 92-94.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method taught in MYUNG with to determine an uplink control channel resource that is different from an uplink control channel resource used by a UE that is not a function-reduced UE in a case where an initial UL-BWP (Uplink Bandwidth part) for a reduced- function UE (User Equipment) is configured by the system information, where the UL-BWP is configured within the maximum bandwidth for the function-reduced UE by the system information, and where frequency hopping is configured to be disabled by the system information taught in Mozaffari thereby provide benefits such as reduced user waiting time, relaxed restriction on a file size, better responsiveness, extended battery life [Mozaffari: paragraph 161].
For claim 8, MYUNG and Mozaffari further teach the terminal as claimed in claim 7, wherein the control unit determines the different uplink control channel resource by adding a PRB (Physical resource block) offset configured by RRC (Radio Resource Control) signaling to a PRB offset used by the UE that is not a function-reduced UE (MYUNG, Fig. 12 and paragraph 116.).
For claim 9, MYUNG and Mozaffari further teach the terminal as claimed in claim 7, wherein the transmission unit transmits the indication indicating that the terminal is a function- reduced UE to the base station via Msg. 1 or Msg.A during the random access procedure (Mozaffari, Fig. 2 and paragraph 24.), and transmits an uplink control channel including HARQ-ACK corresponding to Msg.4 or Msg.B in the random access procedure by using the different uplink channel resource (Mozaffari, Fig. 2 and paragraph 73.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method taught in MYUNG with Mozaffari to have the transmission unit transmits the indication indicating that the terminal is a function- reduced UE to the base station via Msg. 1 or Msg.A during the random access procedure, and transmits an uplink control channel including HARQ-ACK corresponding to Msg.4 or Msg.B in the random access procedure by using the different uplink channel resource thereby provide benefits such as reduced user waiting time, relaxed restriction on a file size, better responsiveness, extended battery life [Mozaffari: paragraph 161].
For claim 10, MYUNG teaches a base station (MYUNG, Fig. 16) comprising:
a transmission unit (MYUNG, Fig. 16 item 1610.) configured to transmit system information to a terminal (MYUNG, Fig. 17 and paragraph 239.);
a control unit (MYUNG, Fig. 16 item 1600.) configured to determine an uplink control channel resource (MYUNG, Fig. 17 and paragraph 240.); and
a reception unit (MYUNG, Fig. 16 item 1620.) configured to receive an indication indicating that the terminal is a function-reduced UE from the terminal during a random access procedure, and to receive an uplink control channel including HARQ-ACK corresponding to an indication from the base station after the indication during the random access procedure from the terminal by using the different uplink control channel resource (MYUNG, Fig. 17 and paragraph 242. See also paragraph 59).
Mozaffari further teaches to determine an uplink control channel resource that is different from an uplink control channel resource used by a UE that is not a function-reduced UE in a case where an initial UL-BWP (Uplink Bandwidth part) for a reduced- function UE (User Equipment) is configured by the system information (Mozaffari, Fig. 5 and paragraph 73. See also paragraphs 74-84.), where the UL-BWP is configured within the maximum bandwidth for the function-reduced UE by the system information (Mozaffari, Fig. 5 and paragraph 73. See also paragraphs 74-84.), and where frequency hopping is configured to be disabled by the system information (Mozaffari, Fig. 5 and paragraphs 92-94.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method taught in MYUNG with to determine an uplink control channel resource that is different from an uplink control channel resource used by a UE that is not a function-reduced UE in a case where an initial UL-BWP (Uplink Bandwidth part) for a reduced- function UE (User Equipment) is configured by the system information, where the UL-BWP is configured within the maximum bandwidth for the function-reduced UE by the system information, and where frequency hopping is configured to be disabled by the system information taught in Mozaffari thereby provide benefits such as reduced user waiting time, relaxed restriction on a file size, better responsiveness, extended battery life [Mozaffari: paragraph 161].
For claim 11, MYUNG teaches a communication system (MYUNG, Fig. 17) comprising: a base station (MYUNG, Fig. 16); and a terminal (MYUNG, Fig. 14), wherein
the base station includes:
a transmission unit (MYUNG, Fig. 16 item 1610.) configured to transmit system information to a terminal (MYUNG, Fig. 17 and paragraph 239.);
a control unit (MYUNG, Fig. 16 item 1600.) configured to determine an uplink control channel resource (MYUNG, Fig. 17 and paragraph 240.); and
a reception unit (MYUNG, Fig. 16 item 1620.) configured to receive an indication indicating that the terminal is a function-reduced UE from the terminal during a random access procedure, and to receive an uplink control channel including HARQ-ACK corresponding to an indication from the base station after the indication during the random access procedure from the terminal by using the different uplink control channel resource (MYUNG, Fig. 17 and paragraph 242. See also paragraph 59).
Mozaffari further teaches to determine an uplink control channel resource that is different from an uplink control channel resource used by a UE that is not a function-reduced UE in a case where an initial UL-BWP (Uplink Bandwidth part) for a reduced- function UE (User Equipment) is configured by the system information (Mozaffari, Fig. 5 and paragraph 73. See also paragraphs 74-84.), where the UL-BWP is configured within the maximum bandwidth for the function-reduced UE by the system information (Mozaffari, Fig. 5 and paragraph 73. See also paragraphs 74-84.), and where frequency hopping is configured to be disabled by the system information (Mozaffari, Fig. 5 and paragraphs 92-94.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method taught in MYUNG with to determine an uplink control channel resource that is different from an uplink control channel resource used by a UE that is not a function-reduced UE in a case where an initial UL-BWP (Uplink Bandwidth part) for a reduced- function UE (User Equipment) is configured by the system information, where the UL-BWP is configured within the maximum bandwidth for the function-reduced UE by the system information, and where frequency hopping is configured to be disabled by the system information taught in Mozaffari thereby provide benefits such as reduced user waiting time, relaxed restriction on a file size, better responsiveness, extended battery life [Mozaffari: paragraph 161]. and
the terminal includes:
a reception unit (MYUNG, Fig. 14 item 1410.) configured to receive system information from a base station (MYUNG, Fig. 17 and paragraph 239.);
a control unit (MYUNG, Fig. 14 item 1400.) configured to determine an uplink control channel resource (MYUNG, Fig. 17 and paragraph 240.); and
a transmission unit (MYUNG, Fig. 14 item 1420.) configured to transmit an indication during a random access procedure, and to transmit an uplink control channel including HARQ-ACK corresponding to an indication from the base station after the indication during the random access procedure to the base station by using the uplink control channel resource (MYUNG, Fig. 17 and paragraph 242. See also paragraph 59).
Mozaffari further teaches to determine an uplink control channel resource that is different from an uplink control channel resource used by a UE that is not a function-reduced UE in a case where an initial UL-BWP (Uplink Bandwidth part) for a reduced- function UE (User Equipment) is configured by the system information (Mozaffari, Fig. 5 and paragraph 73. See also paragraphs 74-84.), where the UL-BWP is configured within the maximum bandwidth for the function-reduced UE by the system information (Mozaffari, Fig. 5 and paragraph 73. See also paragraphs 74-84.), and where frequency hopping is configured to be disabled by the system information (Mozaffari, Fig. 5 and paragraphs 92-94.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method taught in MYUNG with to determine an uplink control channel resource that is different from an uplink control channel resource used by a UE that is not a function-reduced UE in a case where an initial UL-BWP (Uplink Bandwidth part) for a reduced- function UE (User Equipment) is configured by the system information, where the UL-BWP is configured within the maximum bandwidth for the function-reduced UE by the system information, and where frequency hopping is configured to be disabled by the system information taught in Mozaffari thereby provide benefits such as reduced user waiting time, relaxed restriction on a file size, better responsiveness, extended battery life [Mozaffari: paragraph 161].
For claim 12, MYUNG teaches a communication method performed by a terminal, the communication method comprising:
receiving system information from a base station (MYUNG, Fig. 17 and paragraph 239.);
determining an uplink control channel resource (MYUNG, Fig. 17 and paragraph 240.); and
transmitting an indication during a random access procedure, and to transmit an uplink control channel including HARQ-ACK corresponding to an indication from the base station after the indication during the random access procedure to the base station by using the uplink control channel resource (MYUNG, Fig. 17 and paragraph 242. See also paragraph 59).
Mozaffari further teaches to determine an uplink control channel resource that is different from an uplink control channel resource used by a UE that is not a function-reduced UE in a case where an initial UL-BWP (Uplink Bandwidth part) for a reduced- function UE (User Equipment) is configured by the system information (Mozaffari, Fig. 5 and paragraph 73. See also paragraphs 74-84.), where the UL-BWP is configured within the maximum bandwidth for the function-reduced UE by the system information (Mozaffari, Fig. 5 and paragraph 73. See also paragraphs 74-84.), and where frequency hopping is configured to be disabled by the system information (Mozaffari, Fig. 5 and paragraphs 92-94.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method taught in MYUNG with to determine an uplink control channel resource that is different from an uplink control channel resource used by a UE that is not a function-reduced UE in a case where an initial UL-BWP (Uplink Bandwidth part) for a reduced- function UE (User Equipment) is configured by the system information, where the UL-BWP is configured within the maximum bandwidth for the function-reduced UE by the system information, and where frequency hopping is configured to be disabled by the system information taught in Mozaffari thereby provide benefits such as reduced user waiting time, relaxed restriction on a file size, better responsiveness, extended battery life [Mozaffari: paragraph 161].
Conclusion
18. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILL W LIN whose telephone number is (571)272-8749. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:00.
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, Charles Jiang can be reached at 571-270-7191. 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.
/WILL W LIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2412