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 filed 7/28/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues in substance that Abotabl fails to disclose certain features of claims 1, 17, 19
In response to argument, Examiner respectfully disagree. Newly cited prior art, Noh, teaches all limitations in claims 1, 17, 19 as claimed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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, 10, 14-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) as being anticipated by Noh et al (USPN 20220272744).
Regarding claim 17, Noh discloses
a terminal comprising: (UE, FIG. 25, comprising
at least one transceiver (communication module/transceiver, FIG. 25 #120, [0254, 0286]
at least on processor connected to the at least one transceiver (processor, FIG. 25 #110, connected to transceiver [0252-0254]
wherein the at least one processor is configured to: (processor operable to [0253]
receive, through the at least one transceiver, from a network, configuration information related to a first frequency unit and a second frequency unit (receives configuration from base station related to BWPs [0185], FIG. 17 b
based on a channel related resource for identifying a channel being common for the first frequency unit and the second frequency unit (a CORESET for one BWP overlaps PRBs occupied by the other BWP [0187], FIG. 18 b #CORESET #2
perform, through the at least on transceiver, a simultaneous uplink transmission of at least one channel on the first frequency unit and the second frequency unit or (UE performs uplink transmission in multiple BWPs at same time [0190]
perform, through the at least one transceiver, a simultaneous downlink reception of at least one channel on the first frequency unit and the second frequency unit (UE monitors PDCCH in each of multiple BWPs to receive [0190, 0192]
wherein the first frequency unit and the second frequency unit at least partially overlap on a frequency domain (BWPs configured to be overlapped frequency resource [0193]
Claim 1 is rejected based on similar ground(s) provided in rejection of claim 17.
Regarding claim 19, Noh discloses
a base station comprising: (base station, FIG. 25 #200, comprising
at least one transceiver (transceiver, FIG. 25 #220 [0261-0263, 0268]
at least one processor connected to the at least one transceiver (processor, FIG. 25 #210, connected to transceiver [0261-0263]
wherein the at least one processor is configured to: (processor operable to perform [0262]
transmit, through the at least one transceiver, to a terminal, configuration information related to a first frequency unit and a second frequency unit (transmit configuration to UE related to BWPs [0185], FIG. 17 b
based on a channel related resource for identifying a channel being common for the first frequency unit and the second frequency unit: (a CORESET for one BWP overlaps PRBs occupied by the other BWP [0187], FIG. 18 b #CORESET #2
perform, through the at least one transceiver, a simultaneous uplink reception of at least one channel on the first frequency unit and the second frequency unit (uplink reception in multiple BWPs at same time [0190]
perform, through the at least one transceiver, a simultaneous downlink transmission of at least one channel on the first frequency unit and the second frequency unit (simultaneous transmit PDCCH in each of multiple BWPs to receive [0190, 0192]
wherein the first frequency unit and the second frequency unit at least partially overlap on a frequency domain (BWPs configured to be overlapped frequency resource [0193]
Regarding claim 10, Noh discloses “the first frequency unit and the second frequency unit are configured in separate way for an uplink or a downlink” UE is configured with 4 DL BWPs and 4 UL BWPs and may activate one DL BWP and one UL BWP for each carrier [0107]
Regarding claim 14, Noh discloses “the first frequency unit and the second frequency unit are activated simultaneously” multiple BWPs are activated for UL/DL reception/transmission [0192, 0190]
Regarding claim 15, Noh discloses “a frequency unit corresponds to at least one of a cell, or a bandwidth part (BWP)” frequency unit being BWP [0184, 0185]
Regarding claim 16, Noh discloses “the first frequency unit and the second frequency unit correspond to a first BWP and a second BWP of a same cell, or correspond to a first BWP and a second BWP of a second cell” both BWPs are configured with one carrier/cell [0185-0187]
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.
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.
Claims 2, 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Noh in view of Zhou et al (USPN 20190357215).
Regarding claim 2, Noh does not expressly disclose “for an overlapping resource of the first frequency unit and the second frequency unit, based on a downlink channel-related resource for the first frequency unit and the second frequency unit being common, one specific frequency unit identification information related to information included in the downlink channel is applied”
Zhou discloses when DL channel resource for the first and second frequency unit is common, one specific BWP indicator in that common DCI identifies one or the other DL BWP/identification information [0402, 0403, 0287, 0332].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement “for an overlapping resource of the first frequency unit and the second frequency unit, based on a downlink channel-related resource for the first frequency unit and the second frequency unit being common, one specific frequency unit identification information related to information included in the downlink channel is applied” as taught by Zhou into Noh’s system with the motivation to allow cross-BWP scheduling using BWP ID (Zhou, paragraph [0402, 0403, 0287, 0332]).
Regarding claim 4, Noh does not expressly disclose “for an overlapping resource of the first frequency unit and the second frequency unit, based on a downlink channel-related resource related to the first frequency unit and the second frequency unit being common, single hybrid automatic repeat request-acknowledgement (HARQ-ACK) information is applied to the downlink channel”.
Zhou discloses cross-BWP scheduling where a single PDCCH on BWP1 schedules PDSCHs on both BPW1 and BWP2 simultaneously, single DCI carries HARQ feedback information [0285, 0329, 0403, 0421].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement “for the overlapping resource of a group of downlink frequency units, based on a downlink channel-related resource related to the first frequency unit and the second frequency unit being common, single hybrid automatic repeat request-acknowledgement (HARQ-ACK) information is applied to the downlink channel” as taught by Zhou into Noh’s system with the motivation to allow cross-BWP scheduling and provide HARQ information for feedback (Zhou, paragraph [0285, 0329, 0403, 0421]).
Regarding claim 5, Noh does not expressly disclose “for an overlapping resource of the first frequency unit and the second frequency unit, based on an uplink channel-related resource related to the first frequency unit and the second frequency unit being common, identification information for a downlink frequency unit related to information included in the uplink channel is applied”.
Zhou discloses single DCI sent via the first BWP indicates UL grants for a second BWP - PUSCH/PUCCH on the UL BWP is identified by the DCI. When UL channel resources for the first and second BWP are common, identification in DCI includes identification of the paired DL frequency [0253, 0381, 0421, 0537, 0538].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement “for the overlapping resource of a group of uplink frequency units, based on an uplink channel-related resource related to the first frequency unit and the second frequency unit being common, identification information for a downlink frequency unit related to information included in the uplink channel is applied” as taught by Zhou into Noh’s system with the motivation to allow cross-BWP scheduling using BWP ID (Zhou, paragraph [0402, 0403, 0287, 0332]).
Regarding claim 6, Noh does not expressly disclose “for an overlapping resource of the first frequency unit and the second frequency unit, based on an uplink channel-related resource related to the first frequency unit and the second frequency unit being common, identification information for a downlink frequency unit related to information included in the uplink channel is reported from the terminal to the network”
Zhou discloses PUCCH carries UCI from UE to the base station which contains CQI/PMI/RI/CRI and beam identification/frequency unit identification [0253, 0278, 0352].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement “for the overlapping resource of a group of uplink frequency units, based on an uplink channel-related resource related to the first frequency unit and the second frequency unit being common, identification information for a downlink frequency unit related to information included in the uplink channel is reported from the terminal to the network” as taught by Zhou into Noh’s system with the motivation to allow cross-BWP scheduling using BWP ID (Zhou, paragraph [0402, 0403, 0287, 0332]).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Noh in view of Abotabl et al (USPN 20210307010).
Regarding claim 11, Noh does not expressly disclose “the first frequency unit belongs to a first frequency unit pool, and the second frequency unit belongs to a second frequency unit pool”
Abotabl discloses “the first frequency unit belongs to a first frequency unit pool, and the second frequency unit belongs to a second frequency unit pool” multiple DL bands (FIG. 7 #715a-730c) and multiple UL bands (FIG. 7 #720a-736c) configured across different time slots effectively showing a pool of DL frequency units and a pool of UL frequency units from which individual frequency units are selected per slot [0138, 0139, 0067].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement “the first frequency unit belongs to a first frequency unit pool, and the second frequency unit belongs to a second frequency unit pool”” as taught by Abotabl into Noh’s system with the motivation to allow UE to transmit UL transmission on multiple frequency units (Abotabl, paragraph [0005, 0012, 0110, 0111]), FIGs. 3A-5.
Claims 12, 13 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Noh in view of Yi et al (USPN 20200169375).
Regarding claim 12, Noh does not expressly disclose “wherein: a separate synchronization parameter is applied to each of the first frequency unit and the second frequency unit”
Yi discloses each FRG/BWP is defined with its own numerology set and has its own synchronization signal [0098, 0116, 0179, 0216], FIG. 12
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement “a separate synchronization parameter is applied to each of the first frequency unit and the second frequency unit”” as taught by Yi into Noh’s system with the motivation to allow FRGs/BWPs being to same cell comprising frequency units to be used simultaneously (Yi, paragraph [0098, 0330, 0113, 0119-0120]).
Regarding claim 13, Noh does not expressly disclose “the synchronization parameter includes at least one of a timing advance (TA) value for the uplink, or fast Fourier transform (FFT) window timing-related information for the downlink”
Yi discloses synchronization parameter includes TA [0216, 0084], FIG. 13, and FFT window timing
[0162-0165], Tables 2-3
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement “the synchronization parameter includes at least one of a timing advance (TA) value for the uplink, or fast Fourier transform (FFT) window timing-related information for the downlink” as taught by Yi into Noh’s system with the motivation to allow FRGs/BWPs being to same cell comprising frequency units to be used simultaneously (Yi, paragraph [0098, 0330, 0113, 0119-0120]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Lim et al (USPN 20230057558) FIG. 18
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 THAI NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7632. The examiner can normally be reached M-F campus 10:30-5pm, telework 6pm-8pm| Telework count days.
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, Ian N Moore can be reached at (571)272-3085. 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.
/THAI NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2469
Prosecution Insights