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 .
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 7-11, 15-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MA et al (US 2023/0114058) in view of YI et al (US 20180054291)
Regarding claim 1, 8, 15, MA et al (US 2023/0114058) A user device comprising:
at least one processor; and
at least one memory storing instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the user device at least to:
determine a repetition pattern associated with repetitions of a physical downlink control channel, PDCCH, transmission, wherein the repetition pattern is configured in at least one slot in one or more frames (MA: Fig. 28, Fig. 3, ¶124-127, ¶278-279, ¶103, UE determines a repetition resource set which is for PDCCH transmission; the repetition is configured in at least one slot in a frame);
monitor the repetitions of the PDCCH transmission based on the repetition pattern (MA: Fig. 28, Fig. 3, Fig. 9, ¶131, ¶144, monitor the PDCCH repetitions of the PDCCH); and
decode control information based on at least one monitored repetition of the repetitions of the PDCCH transmission (MA: Fig. 28, Fig. 3, Fig. 9, ¶131, ¶133, ¶282, the decoding of the PDCCH transmissions is based on the monitored repetition PDCCH).
MA remains silent regarding wherein the repetition pattern is determined based on a frame offset value, and wherein the one or more frames have a first frame number indicating a starting frame number for the repetitions of the PDCCH transmission and a second frame number having the frame offset value with respect to the first frame number.
However, YI et al (US 20180054291) discloses wherein the repetition pattern is determined based on a frame offset value, and wherein the one or more frames have a first frame number indicating a starting frame number for the repetitions of the PDCCH transmission and a second frame number having the frame offset value with respect to the first frame number (YI: ¶87-90, ¶107, ¶109-110, PDCCH repetitions that start at a start frame number and an offset relative to the starting frame number).
A person of ordinary skill in the art working with the invention of MA would have been motivated to use the teachings of YI as it provides that a UE can monitor a control channel from a starting subframe efficiently (¶9). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify invention of MA with teachings of YI in order to improve efficiency.
Regarding claim 2, 9, 16 MA modified by YI discloses the user device of claim 1, wherein the repetition pattern is determined based on at least one of: a repetition factor, a starting symbol number, a starting slot number, a slot offset value, or an index of a synchronization signal block, SSB, beam (MA: ¶131, starting slot number to determine the repetition pattern).
Regarding claim 3, 10, 17, MA et al (US 2023/0114058) discloses user device of claim 2, wherein the at least one slot has at least one slot number, wherein the at least one slot number comprises at least one of: a first slot number indicating the starting slot number for the repetitions of the PDCCH transmission, or a second slot number with the slot offset value with respect to the first slot number (MA: ¶131, ¶125, the slot number includes a starting slot number to determine the repetition pattern; the repetition size indicating an offset).
Regarding claim 4, 11, 18, MA et al (US 2023/0114058) discloses user device of claim 3, wherein the repetition pattern is configured in slots having at least one of the first or second slot number in the one or more frames (MA: Fig. 3, ¶103, ¶125-127, ¶131, each pattern is indicated using a first or second slot number e.g. starting slot number within a frame).
Regarding claim 7, 14, MA et al (US 2023/0114058) discloses user device of claim 3, wherein the first slot number is predefined (MA: Fig. 3, ¶124, first slot is defined by the base station (network node) for the UE).
Claim(s) 5-6, 12-13, 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MA modified by YI as applied to claim 3 above, further in view of TAKAHASHI et al (US 2023/0362956).
Regarding claim 5, 12, 19 MA modified by YI discloses user device of claim 3, wherein the repetition pattern is configured in a slot having the first or second slot number (MA: Fig. 3, ¶127, ¶103, ¶131, first or second slot in a subframe of a frame, pattern 310, the one or more frames have at least a first slot number and a duration in units of slots).
MA modified by YI remains silent regarding the slot having a first or second slot number in each of the one or more frames.
However, TAKAHASHI et al (US 2023/0362956) discloses a first or second slot number in each of the one or more frames (TAKAHASHI: ¶88, ¶65, the slot number is indicated for each of the one or more frame).
A person of ordinary skill in the art working with the invention of MA modified by YI would have been motivated to use the teachings of TAKAHASHI as it provides a way to minimize control information and lower overhead. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify invention of MA modified by YI with teachings of TAKAHASHI in order to improve a signaling of pattern with lower granularity and lower overhead.
Regarding claim 6, 13, 20, MA modified by YI modified by TAKAHASHI discloses user device of claim 5, wherein the repetition pattern is configured in at least one symbol of the slot having the first or second slot number (MA: Fig. 10, ¶146, ¶103, ¶126, symbol of the slot; TAKAHASHI: ¶103-104, ¶109, Fig. 7, a symbol in a slot having a slot number).
A person of ordinary skill in the art working with the invention of MA modified by YI would have been motivated to use the teachings of TAKAHASHI as it provides a way to minimize control information and lower overhead. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify invention of MA modified by YI with teachings of TAKAHASHI in order to improve a signaling of pattern with lower granularity and lower overhead.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 9/15/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicants argue,
“
PNG
media_image1.png
368
944
media_image1.png
Greyscale
”
Examiner respectfully disagrees with the above arguments. Applicants take a position that MA does not disclose, “…the repetition pattern is determined based on a frame offset value, and wherein the one or more frames have a first frame number indicating a starting frame number for the repetitions of the PDCCH transmission and a second frame number having the frame offset value with respect to the first frame number…” Examiner submits that MA already discloses a slot pattern determination at the UE.
The newly cited reference, YI et al (US 20180054291) however, discloses wherein the repetition pattern is determined based on a frame offset value, and wherein the one or more frames have a first frame number indicating a starting frame number for the repetitions of the PDCCH transmission and a second frame number having the frame offset value with respect to the first frame number (YI: ¶87-90, ¶107, ¶109-110, PDCCH repetitions that start at a start frame number and an offset relative to the starting frame number).
A person of ordinary skill in the art working with the invention of MA would have been motivated to use the teachings of YI as it provides that a UE can monitor a control channel from a starting subframe efficiently (¶9). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify invention of MA with teachings of YI in order to improve efficiency.
All remaining arguments are based on the arguments addressed above and are fully responded to as above.
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 OMER S MIAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7524. The examiner can normally be reached M,T,W,Th: 10a-7p, Fri, 9a-12p.
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, Huy D Vu can be reached at 571-272-3155. 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.
OMER S. MIAN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2461
/OMER S MIAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2461
Prosecution Insights