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/Amendments
Applicant's arguments filed 7/14/26 have been fully considered but they are moot due to new ground rejection as shown below.
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, 6, 14 ,17-19 and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1 (US 20180270772 A1) in view of in view of Islam (US 20200205102 A1).
`For claims 1 and 18, D1 discloses apparatus for a wireless communication system comprising a base station and a UE (FIG. 1, wireless communication system 100 comprising BS 105, UE 110):
the base station (claim 1) comprising: a memory, and at least one processor coupled to the memory (FIGs. 1-12 and the associated text, such as FIG. 12 shows BS 105 that includes at least one processor 1212 coupled to a memory 1216) and configured to:
configure each synchronization signal block (SSB) in a set of SSBs with an SSB transmission periodicity for a time period (FIGs. 1-12 and the associated text, such as FIGs. 2 and 5, SS burst set 202, SS periodicity 502), the time period including multiple SSB burst set transmission occasions (FIG. 5 shows multiple SSB burst set transmission occasions, such as 504, or 514); and
transmit the set of SSBs based on a corresponding SSB transmission periodicity of each SSB over the time period (FIGs. 1-12 and the associated text, such as “[0069] … base station 105 may transmit synchronization signal burst sets with a periodicity that depends on a state of UE 110. …”);
the UE (claim 18) comprising: a memory, and at least one processor coupled to the memory (FIG. 1, UE 1110 includes at least one processor coupled to a memory) and configured to:
receive, from a base station, information indicative of a synchronization signal block (SSB) (FIGs. 1-12 and the associated text, such as “[0069] … base station 105 may transmit synchronization signal burst sets with a periodicity that depends on a state of UE 110. …”)
transmission periodicity configured for each SSB in a set of SSBs for a time period, the time period including multiple SSB burst set transmission occasions, wherein at least a first SSB and a second SSB in the set of SSBs are configured with different SSB transmission periodicities (FIGs. 1-12 and the associated text, such as such as “[0066] Referring to FIG. 2, … the synchronization signal hierarchy 200 includes a synchronization signal burst set 202, similar to burst set 182, that includes a plurality of synchronization signal bursts 204 (e.g., SS burst 0, SS burst 1, SS burst [b−1]). …. [0069] … When UE 110 is in initial access … the synchronization signal transmission periodicity may be fixed. … the periodicity may be either 10 ms or 20 ms. In other UE states (e.g., idle or connected), … UE 110 may assume a synchronization signal periodicity of 5 ms”, suggesting UE transmits to the BS periodicity regarding updated UE state);
configure an SSB transmission pattern for each of the multiple SSB burst set transmission occasions, wherein at least one of the multiple SSB burst set transmission occasions is associated with a transmission of a subset of the set of SSBs (FIGs. 1-12 and the associated text, such as FIG. 5 shows SSB burst sets 504, each 504 being a transmission occasion, and associated with a set of its SS blocks 506; note that the set of SSBs is a subset by definition).and
receive, from the base station, at least one SSB in the set of SSBs based on a corresponding SSB transmission periodicity for the at least one SSB (“[0069] … base station 105 may transmit synchronization signal burst sets with a periodicity that depends on a state of UE 110. …”).
D1 is silent but Islam, in the same field of endeavor of wireless communication, discloses: wherein at least a first SSB and a second SSB in the set of SSBs are configured with different SSB transmission periodicities (“[0080] … the base station 110 may configure different SSBs to have different periodicities. …). OOSA would have been motivated to apply the teaching of Islam above to the configuration of SSBs by D1 to yield a predictable result of energy saving.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to OOSA before the effective filing date of the application to combine D1 in view of Islam and Islam for the benefit of energy saving ([0045] of Islam, or [0040] of the specification).
Claim 14 is rejected because it is a claim of a method that is performed by the base station of claim 1 and has the same subject matter as claim 1.
Claim 28 is rejected because it is a claim of a method that is performed by the UE of claim 18 and has the same subject matter as claim 18.
As to claims 6 and 17, D1 in view of Islam discloses claims 1 and 18, D1 further discloses: wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: transmit information indicative of the SSB transmission periodicity configured for each SSB in the set of SSBs (suggested by “[0031] In an example, synchronization signal transmission periodicity depends on UE states. … The periodicity may be either 10 milliseconds (ms) or 20 ms. In other UE states (e.g., idle or connected mode states), if the network provides one synchronization signal burst set periodicity information per frequency carrier to a UE and information to derive measurement timing and/or duration, then 5G/NR may support different sets of synchronization signal burst set periodicity values for adaptation and network indication. For example, candidate periodicity values may include, but are not limited to, 5, 10, 20, 40, 80 and/or 160 ms” …).
As to claim 19, D1 in view of Islam discloses claim 18, D1 further discloses: wherein at least one of the multiple SSB burst set transmission occasions transmits a subset of the set of SSBs (FIG. 5 shows a pattern for SSB burst set, with a SS block being a transmission occasion), wherein at least one of the multiple SSB burst set transmission occasions transmits a subset of the set of SSBs (“[0067] … base station 105 may transmit a subset of signals (e.g., PSS, SSS, TSS, PBCH) over the same antenna ports”).
Claims 3-4, 7, 10-11, 16, 20-21, 23 and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1 in view of Islam, further in view of Sakhnini (US 20230044718 A1).
As to claims 3, 16, 20 and 29, D1 in view of Islam discloses claims 1, 14, 18 and 28, and is silent but Sakhnini, in the same field of endeavor of wireless communication, discloses: wherein if one or more SSB resources in an SSB burst set transmission occasion of the multiple SSB burst set transmission occasions are not used for transmitting SSBs in that SSB burst set transmission occasion (“[0107] In a seventh aspect, the indication identifies a first set of SSBs for which the UE is to transmit the HARQ-ACK for the SPS downlink communication in the configured uplink resource in connection with detecting the collision between the uplink resource and the candidate SSB position, and a second set of SSBs for which the UE is to transmit the HARQ-ACK for the SPS downlink communication in the deferred uplink resource in connection with detecting the collision between the uplink resource and the candidate SSB position.”; note that collision with SSB position suggests “not used for transmitting SSBs”), the at least one processor is further configured to: transmit a downlink transmission or receive an uplink transmission using the one or more SSB resources in that SSB burst set transmission occasion (“[0107] … a second set of SSBs for which the UE is to transmit the HARQ-ACK for the SPS downlink communication in the deferred uplink resource …”. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to OOSA to use SSB resources that are not used for downlink/uplink transmission based on design incentives according to MEPE 2143(F), or based on “obvious to try” according to MEPE 2143(E)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to OOSA before the effective filing date of the application to combine D1 in view of Islam with Sakhnini for the benefit of effectively using network resources ([0107] of Sakhnini)
As to claims 4 and 21, D1 in view of Islam and Sakhnini discloses claims 3 and 20, Sakhnini further discloses: wherein the downlink transmission or the uplink transmission is periodic or semi-persistent (“[0005] … The one or more processors may be configured to receive a semi-persistent scheduling (SPS) downlink communication. …”). The motivation of combining D1 in view of Islam and Sakhnini is to reduce collision (0023] of Sakhnini).
As to claims 7 and 23, D1 in view of Islam discloses claims 6 and 18, and is silent but Sakhnini, in the same field of endeavor of wireless communication, discloses: wherein the information is at least partially transmitted via a system information block type 1 (SIB 1) message (“[0047] … A receive processor 258 may process (e.g., demodulate and decode) the detected symbols, may provide decoded data for the UE 120 to a data sink 260, and may provide decoded control information and system information to a controller/processor 280. …”; note that SIB 1 is a common system information, Examiner takes an official notice on this statement. For example, Li (US 20240008097 A1) discloses it in “[0109] A process in which the terminal device switches from an idle mode to a connected mode when accessing a cell in an NR system mainly includes three steps: synchronization signal and PBCH block (SSB) detection, system information block 1 (SIB1) reception … [0111] Through SSB detection, the terminal device obtains a cell identity (ID), completes downlink timing synchronization, and determines a time-frequency location of downlink control information (DCI) for scheduling an SIB1, to receive other system information …). OOSA would have been motivated to apply the teaching of Jeon above to the wireless system by D1 in view of Islam and Sakhnini to yield a predictable result of providing system information to a controller.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the application to combine D1 in view of Islam and Sakhnini with Jeon for the benefit of providing system information to a controller ([0047] of Sakhnini).
As to claim 10, D1 in view of Islam discloses claim 1, and is silent but Sakhnini, in the same field of wireless communication, discloses: wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: sequentially map SSBs transmitted in each of the multiple SSB burst set transmission occasions to a same number of random-access channel (RACH) occasions (“[0060] … The base station and the UE may use the one or more indicated SSBs to select one or more beams to be used for communication between the base station and the UE (e.g., for a random access channel (RACH) procedure). …”). OOSA would have been motivated to apply the teaching of Sakhnini above to the system information by D1 to yield a predictable result of selecting beams used the base station and the UE.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to OOSA before the effective filing date of the application to combine D1 in view of Islam and Sakhnini for the benefit of selecting beams used the base station and the UE ([0060] of Sakhnini).
As to claim 11, D1 in view of Islam discloses claim 1, and is silent but Sakhnini, in the same field of wireless communication, discloses: wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: sequentially map each SSB in the set of SSBs to a same number of random-access channel (RACH) occasions for each of the multiple SSB burst set transmission occasions (“[0060] … The base station and the UE may use the one or more indicated SSBs to select one or more beams to be used for communication between the base station and the UE (e.g., for a random access channel (RACH) procedure). …”; note that sequentially map each SSB to RACH occasions would have been an obvious try at the start because it is the easiest way of mapping). OOSA would have been motivated to apply the teaching of Sakhnini above to the system information by D1 to yield a predictable result of selecting beams used the base station and the UE.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to OOSA before the effective filing date of the application to combine D1 in view of Islam and Sakhnini for the benefit of selecting beams used the base station and the UE ([0060] of Sakhnini).
Claims 5 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1 in view of Islam and Sakhnini, further in view of Jeon (US 20220110184 A1).
As to claims 5 and 22, D1 in view of Islam and Sakhnini discloses claims 4 and 21, Sakhnini further discloses: wherein the downlink transmission or the uplink transmission includes at least one of: a channel state information (CSI)-reference signal (RS) (CSI-RS), a sounding reference signal (SRS) (“[0005] … The one or more processors may be configured to receive a semi-persistent scheduling (SPS) downlink communication. …”).
D1 in view of Islam and Sakhnini is silent but Jeon, in the same field of wireless communication, discloses a configured grant (CG) physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH), or a semi persistent scheduling (SPS) physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) (“[0240] … the one or more UL radio resources (e.g., PUSCH occasions) may be configured periodically, e.g., a periodic resources of configured grant Type 1 or Type 2.” or “[0078] … a base station may configure a UE with periodically reoccurring SPS physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) occasions …”). Jeon also discloses CSI-RS (“[0016] FIG. 11B illustrates an example of CSI-RSs that are mapped in the time and frequency domains.”). OOSA would have been motivated to apply the teaching of Jeon above to the wireless system by D1 in view of Islam and Sakhnini to yield a predictable result of allocating UL radio resource.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the application to combine D1 in view of Islam and Sakhnini with Jeon for the benefit of allocating UL radio resource ([0240] of Jeon).
Claims 8-9, 24-25 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1 in view of Islam and Sakhnini, further in view of Jeon (US 20220110184 A1).
As to claims 8 and 24, D1 in view of Islam discloses claim 1, and is silent but Jeon, in the same field of wireless communication, discloses: wherein a portion of the information is transmitted via an other system information (OSI) message (“[0284] … The UE may initiate the random access procedure to request one or more system information blocks (SIBs) (e.g., other system information such as SIB2, SIB3, and/or the like). The UE may initiate the random access procedure for a beam failure recovery request. …”). OOSA would have been motivated to apply the teaching of Jeon above to the system information by D1 to yield a predictable result of requesting SIBs.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to OOSA before the effective filing date of the application to combine D1 in view of Islam and Jeon for the benefit of effectively using network resources ([0284] of Jeon).
As to claim 9, D1 in view of Islam discloses claim, D1 further discloses the SSB burst set transmission occasion transmits a subset of the set of SSBs (“[0067] … base station 105 may transmit a subset of signals (e.g., PSS, SSS, TSS, PBCH) over the same antenna ports”).
D1 is silent but Jeon, in the same field of wireless communication, discloses: wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: transmit, to one or more UEs, an indication not to monitor for a control resource set #0 (CORESET #0) in an SSB burst set transmission occasion of the multiple SSB burst set transmission occasions (“[0265] The one or more system information may comprise at least one information element … the one or more control parameters comprises the parameters indicating a first common CORESET #0 (e.g., controlResourceSetZero), and/or a second common CORESET (e.g., commonControlResourceSet).”, suggesting not to monitor CORESET #0, instead using a second CORESET). OOSA would have been motivated to apply the teaching of Jeon above to the system information by D1 to yield a predictable result of using proper control parameters.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to OOSA before the effective filing date of the application to combine D1 in view of Islam and Jeon for the benefit of using proper control parameters ([0265] of Jeon).
As to claims 25 and 30, D1 in view of Islam discloses claims 18 and 28, D1 further discloses: the SSB burst set transmission occasion transmits a subset of the set of SSBs (“[0067] … base station 105 may transmit a subset of signals (e.g., PSS, SSS, TSS, PBCH) over the same antenna ports”).
D1 in view of Islam is silent but Jeon, in the same field of wireless communication, discloses: receiving, from the base station, an indication not to monitor for a control resource set #0 (CORESET #0) in an SSB burst set transmission occasion of the multiple SSB burst set transmission occasions (“[0265] The one or more system information may comprise at least one information element … the one or more control parameters comprises the parameters indicating a first common CORESET #0 (e.g., controlResourceSetZero) …”); and
skipping monitoring the CORESET #0 for one or more SSB burst set transmission occasions that do not transmit the set of SSBs (“[0265] The one or more system information may comprise at least one information element … the one or more control parameters comprises the parameters indicating a first common CORESET #0 (e.g., controlResourceSetZero), and/or a second common CORESET (e.g., commonControlResourceSet).”; suggesting monitoring the CORESET #0 is not needed). OOSA would have been motivated to apply the teaching of Jeon above to the system information by D1 in view of Islam to yield a predictable result of using proper control parameters.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to OOSA before the effective filing date of the application to combine D1 in view of Islam with Jeon for the benefit of using proper control parameters ([0265] of Jeon).
Claims 12-13 and 26-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1 in view of Islam, further in view of Molavianjazi (US 20210058971 A1).
As to claims 12 and 26, D1 in view of Islam discloses claims 1 and 18, and is silent but Molavianjazi, in the same field of endeavor of wireless communication, discloses: wherein each SSB in the set of SSBs is transmitted via a corresponding SSB beam (“[0241] … beam from a SSB when the UE 116 used a narrow beam to establish RRC connection. …”), and wherein the SSB transmission periodicity configured for each SSB in the set of SSBs is based at least in part on a probability or statistic associated with a number of user equipments (UEs) communicating with the base station via the corresponding SSB beam during the time period (“[0206] … a new PRACH design and/or structure is considered to avoid increasing a collision probability when a number of UEs accessing a serving gNB can be large. …”, suggesting the number of UEs depends on a probability and statistic associated collision). OOSA would have be motivated to apply the teaching of Molavianjazi above to the SSBs by D1 to yield a predictable result of serving large number of UEs while keep collision within a desired level.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to OOSA before the effective filing date of the application to combine D1 in view of Islam and Molavianjazi for the benefit of using proper control parameters ([0206] of Molavianjazi).
As to claims 13 and 27, D1 in view of Islam and Molavianjazi discloses claims 12 and 26, Molavianjazi further discloses: wherein the probability or the statistic associated with the number of UEs communicating with the base station via the corresponding SSB beam during the time period includes the number of UEs performing random-access channel (RACH) procedures with the base station via the corresponding SSB beam during the time period (“[0241] …a spatial transmission filter/beam for PRACH is specified in the system operation, or indicated in SIB/UE-specific RRC or a spatial transmission filter/beam for Msg3 is indicated to the U, … beam from a SSB when the UE 116 used a narrow beam to establish RRC connection. …” and “[0206] … a new PRACH design and/or structure is considered to avoid increasing a collision probability when a number of UEs accessing a serving gNB can be large. …”).
The motivation to combine D1 in view of Islam and Molavianjazi is the same as stated in the parent claims.
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 JIANYE WU whose telephone number is (571)270-1665. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH 8am-6pm.
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, Yemane Mesfin can be reached at (571) 272-3927. 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.
/JIANYE WU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2462
Prosecution Insights