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 .
The Examiner thanks the Applicant for the well-prepared amendment. The Examiner appreciates the Applicant’s effort to carefully analyze the Office action and make appropriate arguments and amendments.
Status of Claims
Claims 1-2, 4, 7, 9-16, 18, 21, 23-24, 27-28, and 31-32 responded on July 21, 2026 are pending, claims 1-2, 4, 7, 9-16, 18, 21, 23-24, 27-28, and 31-32 are amended.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pg. 11, filed July 21, 2026, with respect to claim 9 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection of claim 9 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "the preset rule" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 13 depends on claim 4 and recites the limitation "wherein the default BWP is the second downlink BWP" in line 1-2. However, the default BWP is one of … "a second downlink BWP "…is being deleted. It is not clear the dependency of claim 13.
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.
Claims 1-2, 4, 7, 9-13, 15-16, 18, 21, 23-24, 27 and 31-32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jin et al. (US 2019/0149421 A1, hereinafter "Jin") in view of Wang et al. (US 2023/0209542 A1, hereinafter "Wang").
Regarding claim 1, Jin discloses a bandwidth part (BWP) fallback method, performed by a first type of terminal, comprising:
determining that a first timer associated with a BWP that is currently monitored is expired, and determining a default BWP (Jin, [0174, 0176] starts the DL BWP timer valid in the corresponding cell (2g-65) and switches to the configured BWP; When the BWP timer expires, the UE falls back to the second BWP (i.e., the default BWP) configured by the gNB);
wherein the default BWP is a target BWP to which the first type of terminal switches from the BWP that is currently monitored (Jin, [0171] The UE receives a PDCCH indicating an activation of a specific BWP (DCI indicates index information of the BWP to be activated) in operation 2f-35, and then starts the DL BWP timer valid in the corresponding cell (2f-40) and switches to the configured BWP (2f-45)).
Jin does not explicitly disclose wherein in a case that the default BWP is configured via a system information block (SIB), determining the default BWP comprises determining a second downlink BWP that supports to be used by the first type of terminal but does not support to be used by a second type of terminal and is used for at least one of random access or paging as the default BWP, wherein a capability of the first type of terminal is less than a capability of the second type of terminal.
Wang from the same field of endeavor discloses wherein in a case that the default BWP is configured via a system information block (SIB), determining the default BWP comprises determining a second downlink BWP that supports to be used by the first type of terminal but does not support to be used by a second type of terminal and is used for at least one of random access or paging as the default BWP, wherein a capability of the first type of terminal is less than a capability of the second type of terminal (Wang, [0097-98] the associated Type 2 common search space in each DL BWP that is used for a random access procedure and paging are configured via SIB1 if SIB1-RC is not provided to RedCap UEs; Type 2 common search space may not have a specific relation with the initial DL BWP configured for legacy NR UEs. For better resource utilization, the configurations may have the following restrictions. In some examples, the DL BWP may be confined in an initial DL BWP configured via SIB 1 for legacy NR UEs. To avoid PDCCH blocking between legacy NR UEs and RedCap UEs, the CORESET 0-RC of the DL BWP does not overlap or partially overlap the CORESET 0 or a CORESET configured via commonControlResourceSet that is configured for legacy NR UEs in frequency domain. The initial DL BWP #1 is configured for the legacy NR UE, and initial DL BWP #2 and initial DL BWP #3 are configured for RedCap UEs).
It would have been obvious for one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified BWP disclosed by Jin and BWP support legacy and redcap terminal disclosed by Wang with a motivation to make this modification in order to improve different aspects of wireless communication for the next-generation wireless communication system (Wang, [0003]).
Regarding claim 2, Jin does not explicitly disclose wherein the preset rule comprises at least one of following information:
a relation between a first uplink BWP and a bandwidth supported by the first type of terminal, a relation between a first downlink BWP and the bandwidth supported by the first type of terminal (not given patentable weight due to not selected option), or a function of the second downlink BWP; wherein the first type of terminal and the second type of terminal are supported to use the first downlink BWP.
Wang from the same field of endeavor discloses wherein the preset rule comprises a function of the second downlink BWP; wherein the first type of terminal and the second type of terminal are supported to use the first downlink BWP (Wang, [0032] the frequency resources of the first initial DL BWP is that of CORESET 0 and since the CORESET configured by commonControlResourceSet is confined in CORESET 0 in frequency domain, all normal UEs (e.g. legacy NR UEs) and RedCap UEs in a cell receive messages such as SI, paging, RAR).
It would have been obvious for one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified BWP disclosed by Jin and BWP support legacy and redcap terminal disclosed by Wang with a motivation to make this modification in order to improve different aspects of wireless communication for the next-generation wireless communication system (Wang, [0003]).
Regarding claim 4, Jin discloses wherein in case that the network device does not configure the default BWP through a terminal-specific signaling, the default BWP is one of:
a first downlink BWP configured by a system information block (SIB) (not given patentable weight due to not selected option);
a first downlink BWP configured by a master information block (MIB) (not given patentable weight due to not selected option); or
a common BWP configured by the network device (Jin, [0176] the UE falls back to the second BWP (i.e., the default BWP) configured by the gNB).
Regarding claim 7, Jin discloses wherein the default BWP is a BWP indicated by configuration information of the network device (Jin, [0159] A bandwidth part (BWP) newly adopted for next-generation mobile communication systems may be configured in two types, e.g., an initially configured default BWP and a dynamically configurable BWP), the BWP is any one of the second downlink BWP (Jin, [0176] the UE falls back to the second BWP (i.e., the default BWP) configured by the gNB), a first downlink BWP configured by the SIB or a first downlink BWP configured by an MIB (not given patentable weight due to not selected option).
Regarding claims 9-12, does not given patentable weight due to depend on the not selected option.
Regarding claim 13, Jin discloses wherein the default BWP is the second downlink BWP, and one of the following conditions is met:
the first downlink BWP being less than a bandwidth supported by the first type of terminal, a first uplink BWP being less than the bandwidth supported by the first type of terminal, and the second downlink BWP being at least used in a connected state (Jin, [0163, 0176] to configure a BWP for the UE supporting only a small bandwidth 2e-10 that is less than a system bandwidth 2e-05 used by a cell. To reduce manufacturing costs, a specific UE may be developed to support only a limited bandwidth. This UE needs to report to the base station that only a limited bandwidth is supported, and thus the base station configures a BWP equal to or less than the maximum bandwidth supported by the UE; after the timer expires, the UL BWP falls back to the default BWP to perform communication (i.e. connected state)),
the first downlink BWP being less than a bandwidth supported by the first type of terminal, a first uplink BWP being greater than the bandwidth supported by the first type of terminal, and the second downlink BWP being at least used in a connected state (not given patentable weight due to not selected option),
the first downlink BWP configured by the SIB being greater than a bandwidth supported by the first type of terminal, a first uplink BWP being less than the bandwidth supported by the first type of terminal, and the second downlink BWP being at least used in a connected state (not given patentable weight due to not selected option); or,
the first downlink BWP configured by the SIB being greater than a bandwidth supported by the terminal, a first uplink BWP being greater than the bandwidth supported by the terminal, and the second downlink BWP being at least used in a connected state (not given patentable weight due to not selected option).
Regarding claims 15-16, 18, 21, 23-24, 27 and 32, these claims recite "a bandwidth part (BWP) fallback method, performed by a network device" and "a network device" that disclose similar steps as recited by the method of claims 1-2, 4, 7, 9-10 and 13, thus are rejected with the same rationale applied against claims 1-2, 4, 7, 9-10 as presented above.
Regarding claim 31, Jin discloses a terminal (Jin Fig. 27), comprising:
a processor (Jin Fig. 27 1j-40); and
a transceiver coupled to the processor (Jin Fig. 27 1j-10);
wherein the processor is configured to determine that a first timer associated with a BWP that is currently monitored is expired, and determine a default BWP (Jin, [0174, 0176] starts the DL BWP timer valid in the corresponding cell (2g-65) and switches to the configured BWP; When the BWP timer expires, the UE falls back to the second BWP (i.e., the default BWP) configured by the gNB); wherein the default BWP is a target BWP to which a first type of terminal switches from the BWP that is currently monitored (Jin, [0171] The UE receives a PDCCH indicating an activation of a specific BWP (DCI indicates index information of the BWP to be activated) in operation 2f-35, and then starts the DL BWP timer valid in the corresponding cell (2f-40) and switches to the configured BWP (2f-45)).
Jin does not explicitly disclose wherein in a case that the default BWP is configured via a system information block (SIB), determining the default BWP comprises determining a second downlink BWP that supports to be used by the first type of terminal but does not support to be used by a second type of terminal and is used for at least one of random access or paging as the default BWP, wherein a capability of the first type of terminal is less than a capability of the second type of terminal.
Wang from the same field of endeavor discloses wherein in a case that the default BWP is configured via a system information block (SIB), determining the default BWP comprises determining a second downlink BWP that supports to be used by the first type of terminal but does not support to be used by a second type of terminal and is used for at least one of random access or paging as the default BWP, wherein a capability of the first type of terminal is less than a capability of the second type of terminal (Wang, [0097-98] the associated Type 2 common search space in each DL BWP that is used for a random access procedure and paging are configured via SIB1 if SIB1-RC is not provided to RedCap UEs; Type 2 common search space may not have a specific relation with the initial DL BWP configured for legacy NR UEs. For better resource utilization, the configurations may have the following restrictions. For example, a DL BWP that is selected as an initial DL BWP may overlap the initial DL BWP configured for legacy NR UEs. In some examples, the DL BWP may be confined in an initial DL BWP configured via SIB 1 for legacy NR UEs. To avoid PDCCH blocking between legacy NR UEs and RedCap UEs, the CORESET 0-RC of the DL BWP does not overlap or partially overlap the CORESET 0 or a CORESET configured via commonControlResourceSet that is configured for legacy NR UEs in frequency domain. FIG. 3 is a timing/frequency diagram illustrating configurations of DL BWPs, according to an implementation of the present disclosure. The initial DL BWP #1 is configured for the legacy NR UE, and initial DL BWP #2 and initial DL BWP #3 are configured for RedCap UEs).
It would have been obvious for one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified BWP disclosed by Jin and BWP support legacy and redcap terminal disclosed by Wang with a motivation to make this modification in order to improve different aspects of wireless communication for the next-generation wireless communication system (Wang, [0003]).
Claims 14 and 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jin et al. (US 2019/0149421 A1, hereinafter "Jin") in view of Wang et al. (US 2023/0209542 A1, hereinafter "Wang") as applied to claim above, and further in view of Ohara et al. (US 2023/0129299 A1, hereinafter "Ohara").
Regarding claims 14 and 28, Jin does not explicitly disclose wherein, the default BWP is the common BWP configured by the network device, and one of the following conditions is met:
the first downlink BWP being less than a bandwidth supported by the first type of terminal, a first uplink BWP being greater than the bandwidth supported by the first type of terminal;
the first downlink BWP configured by the SIB being greater than a bandwidth supported by the first type of terminal, a first uplink BWP being less than the bandwidth supported by the first type of terminal (not given patentable weight due to not selected option); or,
the first downlink BWP configured by the SIB being greater than a bandwidth supported by the first type of terminal, a first uplink BWP being greater than the bandwidth supported by the first type of terminal (not given patentable weight due to not selected option).
Ohara from the same field of endeavor discloses wherein, the default BWP is the common BWP configured by the network device, and one of the following conditions is met:
the first downlink BWP being less than a bandwidth supported by the first type of terminal, a first uplink BWP being greater than the bandwidth supported by the first type of terminal (Ohara, [0085] can configure an active UL BWP having a wider bandwidth than the reduced bandwidth of the terminal 10 when transmitting the random access preamble, the reduced capability terminal 10 can configure an active DL BWP having a wider bandwidth than the reduced bandwidth of the terminal 10, also for the DL BWP. If the reduced capability terminal 10 can configure an active UL BWP having a wider bandwidth than the reduced bandwidth of the terminal 10 at a time of transmitting a random access preamble, the reduced capability terminal 10 may configure the DL BWP independently of the configured UL BWP, or may configure the DL BWP in common with the UL BWP).
It would have been obvious for one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified common BWP disclosed by Jin and common BWP disclosed by Ohara with a motivation to make this modification in order to support a wide range of frequencies and use cases in 5G (Ohara, [0032]).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 LUNA WEISSBERGER whose telephone number is (571)272-3315. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00am-5:30pm.
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, Jeffrey Rutkowski can be reached at (571)270-1215. 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.
/LUNA WEISSBERGER/Examiner, Art Unit 2415
Prosecution Insights