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 .
Preliminary Amendment
Preliminary Amendment that was filed on 06/06/2024 is entered.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 06/06/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Applicant should note that the large number of references in the attached IDSs have been considered by the examiner in the same manner as other documents in Office search files are considered by the examiner while conducting a search of the prior art in a proper field of search. See MPEP 609.05(b). Applicant is invited to point out any particular reference(s) in the IDS that they believe may be of particular relevance to the instant claimed invention in response to this Office Action. It is desirable to avoid the submission of long lists of documents if it can be avoided. If a long list is submitted, highlight those documents which have been specifically brought to applicant’s attention and/or are known to be of most significance. See Penn Yan Boats, Inc. v. Sea Lark Boats, Inc., 359 F. Supp. 948, 175 USPQ 260 (S.D. Fla. 1972), aff ’d, 479 F.2d 1338, 178 USPQ 577 (5th Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 414 U.S. 874 (1974). But cf. Molins PLC v. Textron Inc., 48 F.3d 1172, 33 USPQ2d 1823 (Fed. Cir. 1995).
Claim Interpretation
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.
The claims 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.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
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 limitation(s) is/are:
Transmission/reception module in in claim 15;
Processing module in in claim 15;
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.
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.
Claims 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 a) recite, inter alia, … another base station ( line 3)…. ; “ the other base station “ (line 6, line 10). Are the same or different base stations since there is no “a other base station” before using “ the other base station (line 6, line ). For examining purpose, the examiner will interpret as best understood by the examiner.
Claim 1 b) recite, inter alia, … the downlink content ( line 6, line 8)…. . it appears to have inadequate antecedent basis, as it’s unclear where it connects back to. For examining purpose, the examiner will interpret as best understood by the examiner.
All Dependent claims which depend on the above rejected independent claims are also interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth for their respective independent claims above.
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 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.
Claims 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over OH6736 et al. (US 20240236736 A1; hereinafter as “OH6736”) in view of KIM0636 et al. (US S 20190190636 A1; hereinafter as “KIM0636”).
Examiner’s note: in what follows, references are drawn to OH6736 unless otherwise mentioned.
Regarding claim 1, OH6736 teaches,
A method to dynamically process, at a base station (==base station 2305 in fig. 23), uplink frequency areas in a cross division duplex (XDD) context (see fig. 23: cross division duplex (XDD) system : [0402]), said method comprising the steps of:
PNG
media_image1.png
386
565
media_image1.png
Greyscale
receiving information about UL/DL split from another base station (==Base Station 2315 in fig. 23 ) ( aforesaid Base station receives/consider adjacent channel leakage in downlink and uplink signals from another base station and other wireless device: : [0403]; “downlink adjacent channel leakage includes the interference {circle around (3)} from the downlink signal transmitted from the transmit antenna of another base station 2315, the base station 2305 may not know the whole or part of the transmission information of the downlink signal. In this case, to precisely measure the downlink adjacent channel leakage, it may be required to share the information related to allocation (scheduling) or configuration of the downlink signal transmitted from the base station 2315 between the base stations. ”: [0405]; Cross/missed limitations will be addressed by another reference below),
determining at least an interference frequency area from the UL/DL split information (aforesaid base station 2305 apply/determin/measure “the base station 2305 may allocate (==determine) no uplink signal or channel to the time frequency resource for measuring downlink adjacent channel leakage or configure an uplink rate matching resource. When the downlink adjacent channel leakage includes self-interference {circle around (2)} from the downlink transmitted from the transmit antenna of the base station 2305, the base station 2305 may properly determine uplink allocation and uplink rate matching resource configuration for the UE 2320 according to the transmission information of the self interference {circle around (2)} because the base station 2305 knows the transmission information of the self interference {circle around (2)}”: [0404]),
receiving additional information from the other base station about the downlink content in interference frequency area (aforesaid base station 2305 receives backhaul delay or network context (==additional information ) from base station 2315 and consider those measuring adjacent channel leakage for uplink/downlink : [0403]), and
processing signals received in the interference taking into account the downlink content provided by the other base station in the interference (aforesaid base station 2305 processing /applying different methods “ base station 2305 may apply different methods (==processing signals received ) according to various conditions including the characteristics of the interference uplink signal {circle around (5)} due to a difference in relative locations between the UEs 2310 and 2320 in configuring the UE 2310 to measure the adjacent channel leakage.”: [0406]; “ base station 2305 may estimate that the downlink reception performance of the UE 2310 is highly likely to deteriorate due to the adjacent channel leakage. The base station 2305 may configure the time/frequency resource to measure the uplink adjacent channel leakage through higher layer signaling or indicate it through L1 signaling, to the UE 2310 for expecting the degree of deterioration of the downlink reception performance. The UE 2310 may measure the uplink adjacent channel leakage interference in the configured resource and report the measurement value to the base station 2305 or share it with another UE (e.g., the UE 2320).”: [0407]).
While OH6736 teaches, “receiving information about UL/DL split from another base station” ;
OH6736 does not expressively disclose:
…another base station) having larger downlink frequency area;
sending in answer information about own UL/DL split (),
processing ….the interference frequency area taking into account… by the other base station in the interference frequency area.
KIM0636, in the same field of endeavor, discloses:
…another base station having larger downlink frequency area (“A resource allocation method for controlling, by a base station, inter-cell interference in a wireless communication system operating in a flexible duplex mode on a cell-by-cell basis may comprise the steps of: receiving, from an adjacent base station, information on a resource for downlink only, allocated to an adjacent cell to which the adjacent base station belongs, in a predetermined subframe; and allocating, to terminals in a cell to which the base station belongs, a resource for the cell, which corresponds to the resource for downlink only, allocated to the adjacent cell, as a resource for downlink only, on the basis of the information on the resource.”: [abstract]; “ Signals transmitted between BSs or heterogeneous BSs (picocell, femtocell, and relay node) in a HetNet state are received by an Rx antenna of another BS, and serve as interference.”: [0010]; “ FIG. 17 is a diagram of an example to describe interference possibly generated when a base station operating by flexible duplex having a different DL/UL portion is located in an adjacent area”: [0039]; see fig. 17 Cell 2 is having larger Downlink frequency area than Cell 1: );
sending in answer information about own UL/DL split ( “ f an interference receiving base station receives interference higher than a specific threshold from an interference giving base station or reliability of a received signal becomes lower than the specific threshold, the interference receiving base station may inform the interference giving base station of the following information through predefined signaling (e.g., backhaul included). For the effective management of interference, it is apparent that DL only band and UL only band of different base stations should be matched. For the resource allocation in consideration of interference to an adjacent cell, the following information can be included.”: [0154]; [0155]-[0156]),
processing ….the interference frequency area taking into account… by the other base station in the interference frequency area (see fig. 19 where base station interference frequency area/region taking into account from other base station : [0143], [0145]).
Therefore, 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 teaching of OH6736 to include the above recited limitations as taught by KIM0636. The suggestion/motivation would be flexible duplex mode per cell that can be improved communication performance by controlling inter-cell interference efficiently: (KIM0636; [0020]).
Regarding claim 2, OH6736 in view of KIM0636 teaches the invention of claim 1 as set forth above. Further, OH6736 teaches
The method according to claim 1, wherein additional information on content (==backhaul delay, or network context) of the interference frequency area enabling the base station to know the content sent by the other base station in the interference frequency area, the step of processing signals received in the interference frequency area comprises subtracting such content in the interference frequency area ( “The base station 2305 may apply different methods according to at least one of the characteristics of interference downlink signals {circle around (2)} and {circle around (3)}, backhaul delay, or network context, in measuring the adjacent channel leakage.”:[0403]).
Regarding claim 3, OH6736 in view of KIM0636 teaches the invention of claim 2 as set forth above. Further, KIM0636 teaches
The method according to claim 2, wherein said content of the interference frequency area includes repetitive constant signals. (repetitive transmission : [0314])
Regarding claim 4, OH6736 in view of KIM0636 teaches the invention of claim 3 as set forth above. Further, KIM0636 teaches
The method according to claim 3, wherein the additional information includes, at least once, the repetitive constant signals in order for the base station to be able to subtract it from the received signals in the interference frequency area ( “The base station 2305 may apply different methods according to at least one of the characteristics of interference downlink signals {circle around (2)} and {circle around (3)}, backhaul delay, or network context, in measuring the adjacent channel leakage.”:[0403]; see fig. 25; “ In an embodiment, when the distance between the UE 2310 to receive the downlink signal and the UE 2320 to transmit the uplink signal is short, the base station 2305 may estimate that the downlink reception performance of the UE 2310 is highly likely to deteriorate due to the adjacent channel leakage. The base station 2305 may configure the time/frequency resource to measure the uplink adjacent channel leakage through higher layer signaling or indicate it through L1 signaling, to the UE 2310 for expecting the degree of deterioration of the downlink reception performance. The UE 2310 may measure the uplink adjacent channel leakage interference in the configured resource and report the measurement value to the base station 2305 or share it with another UE (e.g., the UE 2320).”: [0407] [0429]-[0434]).
Regarding claim 5, OH6736 in view of KIM0636 teaches the invention of claim 3 as set forth above. Further, KIM0636 teaches
The method according to claim 3, wherein the repetitive constant signals are common between the two base stations (repetitive signal are common : [0314]).
Regarding claim 6, OH6736 in view of KIM0636 teaches the invention of claim 1 as set forth above. Further, KIM0636 teaches
The method according to claim 3, wherein repetitive constant signals are chosen among the followings:
SS-block, including PSS, SSS and PBCH, BCH/broadcast information, System information, MBMS broadcast (: [0070]).
Regarding claim 7, OH6736 in view of KIM0636 teaches the invention of claim 2 as set forth above. Further, KIM0636 teaches
The method according to claim 2, wherein said content of the interference frequency area includes temporary signals (: [0139]).
Regarding claim 8, OH6736 in view of KIM0636 teaches the invention of claim 7 as set forth above. Further, KIM0636 teaches
The method according to claim 7, wherein temporary signals are on demand system information ([0139]).
Regarding claim 9, OH6736 in view of KIM0636 teaches the invention of claim 7 as set forth above. Further, KIM0636 teaches
The method according to claim 8, wherein additional information includes respective signalling when on demand system information is activated or deactivated (: [0090];[0123]).
Regarding claim 10, OH6736 in view of KIM0636 teaches the invention of claim 7 as set forth above. Further, KIM0636 teaches
The method according to claim 1,wherein information about UL/DL split from another base station having larger downlink frequency area comprises an indication that the uplink frequency area is deviated and indication on the side on which it is deviated (see fig. 16-17: guard Period: GP: [0076]-[0077]; [0148]).
Regarding claim 11, OH6736 in view of KIM0636 teaches the invention of claim 7 as set forth above. Further, KIM0636 teaches
The method according to claim 10, wherein an uplink border, being a UL/DL switching frequency, is provided in addition to the information about UL/DL split (downlink-uplink switch point : [0078]).
Regarding claim 12, OH6736 in view of KIM0636 teaches the invention of claim 7 as set forth above. Further, KIM0636 teaches
The method according to claim 1,wherein a common frequency, being one of the UL/DL switching frequencies, is signaled by a network entity for all involved base stations to apply same frequency for UL/DL switching for all base stations operating on said frequency (downlink-uplink switch point : [0078]).
Regarding claim 13, OH6736 in view of KIM0636 teaches the invention of claim 7 as set forth above. Further, KIM0636 teaches
The method according to claim 1,wherein a maximum allowed UL/DL ratio, in which the base station can decide on the UL or DL allocation of frequency resources, is signaled by a network entity (“ For example, it is able to allocate the above-listed physical channels necessary for the initial access in the NR system to a DL only band and a UL only band in consideration of the aforementioned interference alleviation effect between adjacent cells.”: [0145]).
Regarding claim 14, OH6736 in view of KIM0636 teaches the invention of claim 7 as set forth above. Further, KIM0636 teaches
The method according to claim 12, further comprising a step of receiving at a medium access control of the base station, the respective information on UL/DL synchronized switching frequency and the respective maximum allowed UL/DL ratio which can be used for UL or DL, also by other base stations, and a step, for the medium access control, of performing resources allocation avoiding said frequency area for delay critical and high QoS sessions (switching point: [0045], Channel quality information: [0089]; [0093]).
Regarding claim 15, OH6736 teaches,
A base station adapted to dynamically process uplink frequency areas in a cross division duplex (XDD) context according to the method of one of preceding claims, said base station comprising: transmission/reception module to exchange information about UL/DL split and additional information about downlink content in relation with interference frequency area processing module to determine at least an interference frequency area from the UL/DL split information and to process signals received in the interference frequency area taking into account the downlink content provided by another base station in the interference frequency area (Regarding claim 15, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 1).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. See PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to M MOSTAZIR RAHMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-4785. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30am-5:00pm PST.
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, Derrick Ferris can be reached at 571-272-3123. 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.
/M Mostazir Rahman/Examiner, Art Unit 2411
/DERRICK W FERRIS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2411
Prosecution Insights