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 .
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1,6,7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Publication No. 2021/0126694 A1 to Abedini et al.
As to claim 1, Abedini discloses A wireless relay device comprising (see, e.g., Figs. 4-10, disclosing relay device 406x/506/706/806/106, teaching to a phosita all of the recited components of “wireless relay device”, e.g., communication unit, reception unit, control unit, below):
a communication unit configured to relay a downlink wireless signal or an uplink wireless signal (Figs. 7,8, 744, 856, paragraphs 118-120, 165-166, disclosing relay device 706/806 relaying UL and DL wireless signals);
a reception unit configured to receive control information indicating a beam to be applied for each of resources via a downlink (Figs. 7,8, 740,834,850, paragraphs 118-120, 147-157, 165-166,174,180,194-204, disclosing relay device 706/806 receiving “beamforming configuration information” comprising beamforming/beam information to be applied in the “backhaul link” or “access link” in Figs. 7-8, teaching “beam to be applied for each of resources”); and
a control unit configured to determine a beam to be applied to the downlink wireless signal or the uplink wireless signal to be relayed, based on the control information (Figs. 7,8, 740,834,850, paragraphs 118-120, 147-157, 165-166,174,180,194-204, disclosing relay device 706/806 receiving “beamforming configuration information” comprising beamforming/beam information to be applied in the “backhaul link” or “access link” in Figs. 7-8, teaching this limitation).
As to claims 6 and 7, see rejection for claim 1.
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.
Claim(s) 2-5,8-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication No. 2021/0126694 A1 to Abedini et al., in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2020/0059871 A1 to Ryu et al.
As to claim 2, Abedini discloses the device as in the parent claim 1.
Abedini discloses wherein the control unit determines a beam to be applied to the downlink wireless signal or the uplink wireless signal to be relayed for each of resources, based on the control information indicating a beam to be applied to a resource (Figs. 7,8, 740,834,850, paragraphs 118-120, 147-157, 165-166,174,180,194-204, disclosing relay device 706/806 receiving “beamforming configuration information” comprising beamforming/beam information to be applied in the “backhaul link” or “access link” in Figs. 7-8, teaching “beam to be applied to a resource”).
Abedini does not appear to explicitly disclose a scheduling configured resource.
Ryu discloses a scheduling configured resource (paragraphs 102, 112, disclosing “scheduling request”, thus teaching to a phosita resources scheduled through a scheduling request as well as resources through which the SR is transmitted, teaching this limitation).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the teachings as disclosed in Ryu above, in conjunction with the method as disclosed and taught by Abedini, to reject this claim, by recognizing that the resource to which the “beamforming configuration information” in Abedini is applicable, may obviously be the “scheduling configured resource” of Ryu, and therefore Abedini’s teaching of “based on the control information indicating a beam to be applied to a resource” and Ryu’s “scheduling configured resource” may be combined to reject “based on the control information indicating a beam to be applied to a scheduling configured resource”. The cited references are also in the same field of endeavor regarding control channel resource management and allocation. The suggestion/motivation would have been to optimize and improve the usage and management of network resources for control signaling (Ryu, paragraphs 1-15; Abedini, paragraphs 1-12). Furthermore, please note that the features of the limitations above have been shown to be known or disclosed in the cited references, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date.
As to claim 3, Abedini discloses the device as in the parent claim 1.
Abedini discloses wherein the control unit determines a beam to be applied to the downlink wireless signal or the uplink wireless signal to be relayed for each of resources, based on the control information indicating a beam to be applied to a resource (Figs. 7,8, 740,834,850, paragraphs 118-120, 147-157, 165-166,174,180,194-204, disclosing relay device 706/806 receiving “beamforming configuration information” comprising beamforming/beam information to be applied in the “backhaul link” or “access link” in Figs. 7-8, teaching “beam to be applied to a resource”).
Abedini does not appear to explicitly disclose semi-persistent resource.
Ryu discloses semi-persistent resource (paragraph 112, disclosing “semi-persistent grant”, thus teaching to a phosita semi-persistent resources).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the teachings as disclosed in Ryu above, in conjunction with the method as disclosed and taught by Abedini, to reject this claim, by recognizing that the resource to which the “beamforming configuration information” in Abedini is applicable, may obviously be the “semi-persistent resources” of Ryu, and therefore Abedini’s teaching of “based on the control information indicating a beam to be applied to a resource” and Ryu’s “semi-persistent resources” may be combined to reject “based on the control information indicating a beam to be applied to semi-persistent resources resource”. The cited references are also in the same field of endeavor regarding control channel resource management and allocation. The suggestion/motivation would have been to optimize and improve the usage and management of network resources for control signaling (Ryu, paragraphs 1-15; Abedini, paragraphs 1-12). Furthermore, please note that the features of the limitations above have been shown to be known or disclosed in the cited references, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date.
As to claim 4, Abedini discloses the device as in the parent claim 1.
Abedini discloses wherein the control unit determines a beam to be applied to the downlink wireless signal or the uplink wireless signal to be relayed for each of resources, based on the control information indicating a beam to be applied to a resource (Figs. 7,8, 740,834,850, paragraphs 118-120, 147-157, 165-166,174,180,194-204, disclosing relay device 706/806 receiving “beamforming configuration information” comprising beamforming/beam information to be applied in the “backhaul link” or “access link” in Figs. 7-8, teaching “beam to be applied to a resource”).
Abedini does not appear to explicitly disclose dynamically scheduled resource.
Ryu discloses dynamically scheduled resource (paragraph 112, disclosing “dynamically scheduled grant”, thus teaching to a phosita dynamically scheduled resources).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the teachings as disclosed in Ryu above, in conjunction with the method as disclosed and taught by Abedini, to reject this claim, by recognizing that the resource to which the “beamforming configuration information” in Abedini is applicable, may obviously be the “dynamically scheduled resources” of Ryu, and therefore Abedini’s teaching of “based on the control information indicating a beam to be applied to a resource” and Ryu’s “dynamically scheduled resources” may be combined to reject “based on the control information indicating a beam to be applied to dynamically scheduled resources”. The cited references are also in the same field of endeavor regarding control channel resource management and allocation. The suggestion/motivation would have been to optimize and improve the usage and management of network resources for control signaling (Ryu, paragraphs 1-15; Abedini, paragraphs 1-12). Furthermore, please note that the features of the limitations above have been shown to be known or disclosed in the cited references, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date.
As to claim 5, Abedini discloses the device as in the parent claim 1.
Abedini discloses wherein the control unit determines a beam to be applied to the downlink wireless signal or the uplink wireless signal to be relayed for each of resources, based on the control information indicating a beam to be applied to a resource (Figs. 7,8, 740,834,850, paragraphs 118-120, 147-157, 165-166,174,180,194-204, disclosing relay device 706/806 receiving “beamforming configuration information” comprising beamforming/beam information to be applied in the “backhaul link” or “access link” in Figs. 7-8, teaching “beam to be applied to a resource”).
Abedini does not appear to explicitly disclose control information indicating an indication of scheduling to a terminal.
Ryu discloses control information indicating an indication of scheduling to a terminal (paragraph 112, disclosing “SR”,“semi-persistent grant”, “dynamically scheduled grant”, thus teaching to a phosita control information indicating an indication of scheduling to a terminal).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the teachings as disclosed in Ryu above, in conjunction with the method as disclosed and taught by Abedini, to reject this claim, by recognizing that the control signaling in Abedini may obviously correspond to, be incorporated in/with, or be substituted by, the “control information indicating an indication of scheduling to a terminal” of Ryu, and therefore Abedini’s teaching of “based on the control information indicating a beam to be applied to a resource” and Ryu’s “control information indicating an indication of scheduling to a terminal” may be combined to reject “based on the control information indicating an indication of scheduling to a terminal”. The cited references are also in the same field of endeavor regarding control channel resource management and allocation. The suggestion/motivation would have been to optimize and improve the usage and management of network resources for control signaling (Ryu, paragraphs 1-15; Abedini, paragraphs 1-12). Furthermore, please note that the features of the limitations above have been shown to be known or disclosed in the cited references, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date.
As to claim 8, Abedini and Ryu teach the device as in the parent claim 2.
Abedini discloses wherein the control unit determines a beam to be applied to the downlink wireless signal or the uplink wireless signal to be relayed for each of resources, based on the control information indicating a beam to be applied to a resource (Figs. 7,8, 740,834,850, paragraphs 118-120, 147-157, 165-166,174,180,194-204, disclosing relay device 706/806 receiving “beamforming configuration information” comprising beamforming/beam information to be applied in the “backhaul link” or “access link” in Figs. 7-8, teaching “beam to be applied to a resource”).
Abedini does not appear to explicitly disclose semi-persistent resource.
Ryu discloses semi-persistent resource (paragraph 112, disclosing “semi-persistent grant”, thus teaching to a phosita semi-persistent resources).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the teachings as disclosed in Ryu above, in conjunction with the method as disclosed and taught by Abedini, to reject this claim, by recognizing that the resource to which the “beamforming configuration information” in Abedini is applicable, may obviously be the “semi-persistent resources” of Ryu, and therefore Abedini’s teaching of “based on the control information indicating a beam to be applied to a resource” and Ryu’s “semi-persistent resources” may be combined to reject “based on the control information indicating a beam to be applied to semi-persistent resources resource”. The cited references are also in the same field of endeavor regarding control channel resource management and allocation. The suggestion/motivation would have been to optimize and improve the usage and management of network resources for control signaling (Ryu, paragraphs 1-15; Abedini, paragraphs 1-12). Furthermore, please note that the features of the limitations above have been shown to be known or disclosed in the cited references, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date.
As to claim 9, Abedini and Ryu teach the device as in the parent claim 2.
Abedini discloses wherein the control unit determines a beam to be applied to the downlink wireless signal or the uplink wireless signal to be relayed for each of resources, based on the control information indicating a beam to be applied to a resource (Figs. 7,8, 740,834,850, paragraphs 118-120, 147-157, 165-166,174,180,194-204, disclosing relay device 706/806 receiving “beamforming configuration information” comprising beamforming/beam information to be applied in the “backhaul link” or “access link” in Figs. 7-8, teaching “beam to be applied to a resource”).
Abedini does not appear to explicitly disclose dynamically scheduled resource.
Ryu discloses dynamically scheduled resource (paragraph 112, disclosing “dynamically scheduled grant”, thus teaching to a phosita dynamically scheduled resources).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the teachings as disclosed in Ryu above, in conjunction with the method as disclosed and taught by Abedini, to reject this claim, by recognizing that the resource to which the “beamforming configuration information” in Abedini is applicable, may obviously be the “dynamically scheduled resources” of Ryu, and therefore Abedini’s teaching of “based on the control information indicating a beam to be applied to a resource” and Ryu’s “dynamically scheduled resources” may be combined to reject “based on the control information indicating a beam to be applied to dynamically scheduled resources”. The cited references are also in the same field of endeavor regarding control channel resource management and allocation. The suggestion/motivation would have been to optimize and improve the usage and management of network resources for control signaling (Ryu, paragraphs 1-15; Abedini, paragraphs 1-12). Furthermore, please note that the features of the limitations above have been shown to be known or disclosed in the cited references, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date.
As to claim 10, Abedini and Ryu teach the device as in the parent claim 3.
Abedini discloses wherein the control unit determines a beam to be applied to the downlink wireless signal or the uplink wireless signal to be relayed for each of resources, based on the control information indicating a beam to be applied to a resource (Figs. 7,8, 740,834,850, paragraphs 118-120, 147-157, 165-166,174,180,194-204, disclosing relay device 706/806 receiving “beamforming configuration information” comprising beamforming/beam information to be applied in the “backhaul link” or “access link” in Figs. 7-8, teaching “beam to be applied to a resource”).
Abedini does not appear to explicitly disclose dynamically scheduled resource.
Ryu discloses dynamically scheduled resource (paragraph 112, disclosing “dynamically scheduled grant”, thus teaching to a phosita dynamically scheduled resources).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the teachings as disclosed in Ryu above, in conjunction with the method as disclosed and taught by Abedini, to reject this claim, by recognizing that the resource to which the “beamforming configuration information” in Abedini is applicable, may obviously be the “dynamically scheduled resources” of Ryu, and therefore Abedini’s teaching of “based on the control information indicating a beam to be applied to a resource” and Ryu’s “dynamically scheduled resources” may be combined to reject “based on the control information indicating a beam to be applied to dynamically scheduled resources”. The cited references are also in the same field of endeavor regarding control channel resource management and allocation. The suggestion/motivation would have been to optimize and improve the usage and management of network resources for control signaling (Ryu, paragraphs 1-15; Abedini, paragraphs 1-12). Furthermore, please note that the features of the limitations above have been shown to be known or disclosed in the cited references, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date.
As to claim 11, Abedini and Ryu teach the device as in the parent claim 2.
Abedini discloses wherein the control unit determines a beam to be applied to the downlink wireless signal or the uplink wireless signal to be relayed for each of resources, based on the control information indicating a beam to be applied to a resource (Figs. 7,8, 740,834,850, paragraphs 118-120, 147-157, 165-166,174,180,194-204, disclosing relay device 706/806 receiving “beamforming configuration information” comprising beamforming/beam information to be applied in the “backhaul link” or “access link” in Figs. 7-8, teaching “beam to be applied to a resource”).
Abedini does not appear to explicitly disclose control information indicating an indication of scheduling to a terminal.
Ryu discloses control information indicating an indication of scheduling to a terminal (paragraph 112, disclosing “SR”,“semi-persistent grant”, “dynamically scheduled grant”, thus teaching to a phosita control information indicating an indication of scheduling to a terminal).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the teachings as disclosed in Ryu above, in conjunction with the method as disclosed and taught by Abedini, to reject this claim, by recognizing that the control signaling in Abedini may obviously correspond to, be incorporated in/with, or be substituted by, the “control information indicating an indication of scheduling to a terminal” of Ryu, and therefore Abedini’s teaching of “based on the control information indicating a beam to be applied to a resource” and Ryu’s “control information indicating an indication of scheduling to a terminal” may be combined to reject “based on the control information indicating an indication of scheduling to a terminal”. The cited references are also in the same field of endeavor regarding control channel resource management and allocation. The suggestion/motivation would have been to optimize and improve the usage and management of network resources for control signaling (Ryu, paragraphs 1-15; Abedini, paragraphs 1-12). Furthermore, please note that the features of the limitations above have been shown to be known or disclosed in the cited references, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date.
As to claim 12, Abedini and Ryu teach the device as in the parent claim 3.
Abedini discloses wherein the control unit determines a beam to be applied to the downlink wireless signal or the uplink wireless signal to be relayed for each of resources, based on the control information indicating a beam to be applied to a resource (Figs. 7,8, 740,834,850, paragraphs 118-120, 147-157, 165-166,174,180,194-204, disclosing relay device 706/806 receiving “beamforming configuration information” comprising beamforming/beam information to be applied in the “backhaul link” or “access link” in Figs. 7-8, teaching “beam to be applied to a resource”).
Abedini does not appear to explicitly disclose control information indicating an indication of scheduling to a terminal.
Ryu discloses control information indicating an indication of scheduling to a terminal (paragraph 112, disclosing “SR”,“semi-persistent grant”, “dynamically scheduled grant”, thus teaching to a phosita control information indicating an indication of scheduling to a terminal).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the teachings as disclosed in Ryu above, in conjunction with the method as disclosed and taught by Abedini, to reject this claim, by recognizing that the control signaling in Abedini may obviously correspond to, be incorporated in/with, or be substituted by, the “control information indicating an indication of scheduling to a terminal” of Ryu, and therefore Abedini’s teaching of “based on the control information indicating a beam to be applied to a resource” and Ryu’s “control information indicating an indication of scheduling to a terminal” may be combined to reject “based on the control information indicating an indication of scheduling to a terminal”. The cited references are also in the same field of endeavor regarding control channel resource management and allocation. The suggestion/motivation would have been to optimize and improve the usage and management of network resources for control signaling (Ryu, paragraphs 1-15; Abedini, paragraphs 1-12). Furthermore, please note that the features of the limitations above have been shown to be known or disclosed in the cited references, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date.
As to claim 13, Abedini and Ryu teach the device as in the parent claim 4.
Abedini discloses wherein the control unit determines a beam to be applied to the downlink wireless signal or the uplink wireless signal to be relayed for each of resources, based on the control information indicating a beam to be applied to a resource (Figs. 7,8, 740,834,850, paragraphs 118-120, 147-157, 165-166,174,180,194-204, disclosing relay device 706/806 receiving “beamforming configuration information” comprising beamforming/beam information to be applied in the “backhaul link” or “access link” in Figs. 7-8, teaching “beam to be applied to a resource”).
Abedini does not appear to explicitly disclose control information indicating an indication of scheduling to a terminal.
Ryu discloses control information indicating an indication of scheduling to a terminal (paragraph 112, disclosing “SR”,“semi-persistent grant”, “dynamically scheduled grant”, thus teaching to a phosita control information indicating an indication of scheduling to a terminal).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the teachings as disclosed in Ryu above, in conjunction with the method as disclosed and taught by Abedini, to reject this claim, by recognizing that the control signaling in Abedini may obviously correspond to, be incorporated in/with, or be substituted by, the “control information indicating an indication of scheduling to a terminal” of Ryu, and therefore Abedini’s teaching of “based on the control information indicating a beam to be applied to a resource” and Ryu’s “control information indicating an indication of scheduling to a terminal” may be combined to reject “based on the control information indicating an indication of scheduling to a terminal”. The cited references are also in the same field of endeavor regarding control channel resource management and allocation. The suggestion/motivation would have been to optimize and improve the usage and management of network resources for control signaling (Ryu, paragraphs 1-15; Abedini, paragraphs 1-12). Furthermore, please note that the features of the limitations above have been shown to be known or disclosed in the cited references, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. 2022/0400478 A1 to Du.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHI TANG P CHENG whose telephone number is (571)272-9021. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9:30AM - 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, Asad M Nawaz can be reached at (571)272-3988. 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.
/CHI TANG P CHENG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2463
Prosecution Insights