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 .
This Office Action is in response to communications filed on 8/19/2026.
Claims 1-20 are pending and presented for examination.
Response to Amendment
Claims 1-3, 5, 12-14, 16 & 20 have been amended.
Rejection of claim 12 under 35 USC 112(b) has been withdrawn based on amendments to this claim.
Rejections to claims 1, 2, 6, 7, 12, 13 & 20 under 35 USC 102 and rejections to claims 3-5, 8-11, & 14-19 under 35 USC 103 made in the previous record Non-final rejection dated 5/27/2026 have been withdrawn based on amendments to claims 1-3, 5, 12-14, 16 & 20, but new grounds of rejections have been made to claims 1-20 under 35 USC 103 based on new references Tang et al. (US 2023/0422271)(herein after “Tang”) and Fan et al. (US 2024/0276514)(herein after “Fan”).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see “Remarks”, filed 8/19/2026, with respect to the rejection of claim 12 under 35 USC 112(b) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Amendment to change “transmitter” to “receiver” clarifies this claim. The rejection of claim 12 under 35 USC 112(b) has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see “Remarks”, filed 8/19/2026, with respect to the rejections of claims 1, 2, 6, 7, 12, 13 & 20 under 35 USC 102 and rejections of claims 3-5, 8-11, & 14-19 under 35 USC 103 made in the previous record Non-final rejection dated 5/27/2026 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, these rejections have been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, new grounds of rejections to claims 1-20 are made in view of new reference Tang et al. (US 2023/0422271)(herein after “Tang”) and Fan et al. (US 2024/0276514)(herein after “Fan”).
Regarding claim 1, applicant submits that amendments to this claim traverse the rejection of this claim under 35 USC 102. Examiner agrees and withdraws rejection of claim 1 under 35 USC 102. However, after further consideration, examiner introduces a new ground of rejection of claim 1 under 35 USC 103 based on new references Tang and Fan. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Regarding claims 12 & 20, applicant submits that these claims traverse the rejections of these claims under 35 USC 102 due to similar amendments and arguments as made for claim 1. Examiner agrees and withdraws rejections of claims 12 & 20 under 35 USC 102. However, for the same reasons as discussed above, examiner introduces new grounds of rejections of claims 12 & 20 under 35 USC 103 based on new references Tang and Fan.
Regarding claims 2-11 & 13-19, applicant submits that claims 2, 6, 7 & 13 traverse the rejections of these claims under 35 USC 102 and claims 3-5, 8-11 & 14-19 traverse the rejections of these claims under 35 USC 103 made in the Non-final Rejection dated 5/27/2026 due to amendments and arguments made for claims 1 & 12 and due to their dependency on claims 1 or 12. Examiner agrees and withdraws rejections of claims 2,6,7 & 13 under 35 USC 102 and rejections of claims 3-5, 8-11 & 14-19 under 35 USC 103 made in the Non-final Rejection dated 5/27/2026. However, for the same reasons as discussed above, examiner introduces new grounds of rejections of claims 2-11 & 13-19 under 35 USC 103 based on new references Tang and Fan.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 6, 7, 12, 13 & 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schober et al. (US 2019/0230634)(herein after “Schober”) in view of Tang et al. (US 2023/0422271)(herein after “Tang”).
Regarding claim 1, Schober discloses an apparatus for wireless communication at a receiver, comprising:
one or more memories ([0014] discloses an apparatus at a UE that can perform receiving from a base station (i.e. wireless communication) comprising at least one memory.); and
one or more processors, the one or more processors, individually or collectively and based at least in part on information stored in the one or more memories ([0014] discloses that the apparatus may comprise at least one processor that can execute instructions stored in the at least one memory.), being configured to:
receive a known data indicator (KDI) indicating whether a next control information transmission comprises one or more fields associated with values that are unchanged with respect to a preceding control information transmission (Fig 3b & [0062] disclose receiving, from a base station, a message including an indication element (i.e. a KDI) transmitted in a same subframe (i.e. a next control information transmission) as a slow downlink control information (DCI) that indicates that the slow DCI in the same subframe has the same content (i.e. field values that are unchanged) as a slow DCI in a previous subframe.);
receive the next control information transmission ([0067]-[0069] discloses that the UE receives a PDCCH control channel candidate carrying the slow DCI validity indication (i.e. the KDI) along with the slow DCI in the same subframe and monitors the PDCCH control channel candidate so that the UE can receive and attempt to decode the slow DCI in the same subframe.); and
decode the next control information transmission in accordance with the KDI ([0068]-[0069] discloses that if the UE is not able to find the slow DCI in the same subframe as the slow DCI validity indication, then the UE may look at the slow DCI validity indication and if the slow DCI validity indication is “still valid”, then the UE can assume the slow-DCI information from the last subframe is still valid and proceeds with sTTI operation (i.e. decoding within the same subframe) according to the previous slow DCI information.).
Schober fails to disclose but Tang teaches wherein the KDI indicates whether a next control information transmission comprises one or more other fields associated with values that are changed with respect to the preceding control information transmission ([0203] discloses a UE receiving an indicator field (i.e. a KDI) indicating the presence of a scheduling information field (i.e. one or more other fields) of a DCI (i.e. a next control information transmission) wherein the UE obtains and uses the value in the field (i.e. changes the scheduling information based on a preceding DCI to the value in the scheduling information field of the DCI).); and
wherein the one or more processors, to decode the next control information transmission, are configured to decode the one or more other fields, refrain from decoding the one or more fields, and obtain, from a decoding result associated with the preceding control information transmission, the values associated with the one or more fields ([0127] discloses that a UE decodes a DCI to obtain control information (i.e. values associated with decoded fields of the DCI). [0203] discloses the UE obtains values in scheduling information fields (i.e. decodes one or more other fields) indicated by the indicator field as being present, and would not decode fields that are indicated by the indicator field as absent, but instead use a value of the scheduling information field from a previous DCI.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Schober such that the KDI indicates whether a next control information transmission comprises one or more other fields associated with values that are changed with respect to the preceding control information transmission; and such that the one or more processors, to decode the next control information transmission, are configured to decode the one or more other fields, refrain from decoding the one or more fields, and obtain, from a decoding result associated with the preceding control information transmission, the values associated with the one or more fields, as taught by Tang.
The motivation to do so would have been to reduce decoding overhead by only decoding fields in a DCI that have changed from the previous DCI while using the same values as in the previous DCI for scheduling information fields that have not changed since the previous DCI.
Regarding claims 2 & 13, Schober in view of Tang disclose the apparatus of claim 1.
Schober fails to disclose but Tang teaches wherein obtaining the values associated with the one or more fields, the method comprises to, or the one or more processors are configured to:
obtain, from a successful decoding result associated with the preceding control information transmission, the values associated with the one or more fields, wherein the preceding control information transmission immediately precedes the next control information transmission ([0203] discloses that a UE uses a value of the scheduling information field from the previous DCI (i.e. a DCI immediately predicting the next DCI).).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Schober & Tang disclosing the features of claim 1, to obtain, from a successful decoding result associated with the preceding control information transmission, the values associated with the one or more fields, wherein the preceding control information transmission immediately precedes the next control information transmission, as taught by Tang.
The motivation to do so would have been to reduce decoding overhead by only decoding fields in a DCI that have changed from the previous DCI while using the most recently transmitted scheduling information field values from the previous DCI, immediately preceding the next DCI, for scheduling information fields that have not changed since the previous DCI.
Regarding claim 6, Schober in view of Tang disclose the apparatus of claim 1.
Schober discloses wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: receive, from a transmitter, signaling indicating a bitwidth of the KDI ([0017]-[0018] discloses that the indication element may be 1 bit, or may be a number of bits configured and predetermined by a specification.).
Regarding claim 7, Schober in view of Tang disclose the apparatus of claim 1.
Schober discloses wherein the KDI has a fixed bitwidth ([0017] discloses that the indication element may be a 1 bit signaling.).
Regarding claim 12, Schober discloses a method of wireless communication performed by a receiver, comprising:
receiving, by the receiver, a known data indicator (KDI) indicating whether a next control information transmission comprises one or more fields associated with values that are unchanged with respect to a preceding control information transmission (Fig 3b and [0060] & [0062] disclose a method performed by a UE for receiving, from a base station, a message including an indication element (i.e. a KDI) transmitted in a same subframe (i.e. a next control information transmission) as a slow downlink control information (DCI) that indicates that the slow DCI in the same subframe has the same content (i.e. field values that are unchanged) as a slow DCI in a previous subframe.);
receiving, by the receiver, the next control information transmission ([0067]-[0069] discloses that the UE receives a PDCCH control channel candidate carrying the slow DCI validity indication (i.e. the KDI) along with the slow DCI in the same subframe and monitors the PDCCH control channel candidate so that the UE can receive and attempt to decode the slow DCI in the same subframe.); and
decoding, by the receiver, the next control information transmission in accordance with the KDI ([0068]-[0069] discloses that if the UE is not able to find the slow DCI in the same subframe as the slow DCI validity indication, then the UE may look at the slow DCI validity indication and if the slow DCI validity indication is “still valid”, then the UE can assume the slow-DCI information from the last subframe is still valid and proceeds with sTTI operation (i.e. decoding within the same subframe) according to the previous slow DCI information.).
Schober fails to disclose but Tang teaches wherein the KDI indicates whether a next control information transmission comprises one or more other fields associated with values that are changed with respect to the preceding control information transmission ([0203] discloses a UE receiving an indicator field (i.e. a KDI) indicating the presence of a scheduling information field (i.e. one or more other fields) of a DCI (i.e. a next control information transmission) wherein the UE obtains and uses the value in the field (i.e. changes the scheduling information based on a preceding DCI to the value in the scheduling information field of the DCI).); and
wherein decoding the next control information transmission comprises decoding the one or more other fields, refraining from decoding the one or more fields, and obtaining, from a decoding result associated with the preceding control information transmission, the values associated with the one or more fields ([0127] discloses that a UE decodes a DCI to obtain control information (i.e. values associated with decoded fields of the DCI). [0203] discloses the UE obtains values in scheduling information fields (i.e. decodes one or more other fields) indicated by the indicator field as being present, and would not decode fields that are indicated by the indicator field as absent, but instead use a value of the scheduling information field from a previous DCI.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Schober such that the KDI indicates whether a next control information transmission comprises one or more other fields associated with values that are changed with respect to the preceding control information transmission; and wherein decoding the next control information transmission comprises decoding the one or more other fields, refraining from decoding the one or more fields, and obtaining, from a decoding result associated with the preceding control information transmission, the values associated with the one or more fields, as taught by Tang.
The motivation to do so would have been to reduce decoding overhead by only decoding fields in a DCI that have changed from the previous DCI while using the same values as in the previous DCI for scheduling information fields that have not changed since the previous DCI.
Regarding claim 20, Schober discloses an apparatus for wireless communication at a transmitter, comprising:
one or more memories ([0012] discloses an apparatus at a base station that can perform transmission to a UE (i.e. wireless communication) comprising at least one memory.); and
one or more processors, the one or more processors, individually or collectively and based at least in part on information stored in the one or more memories ([0012] discloses that the apparatus may comprise at least one processor that can execute instructions stored in the at least one memory.), being configured to:
transmit, to a receiver, a known data indicator (KDI) indicating whether a next control information transmission comprises one or more fields associated with values that are unchanged with respect to a preceding control information transmission (Fig 3b & [0062] disclose a reception unit receiving, from a base station (i.e. base station transmitting to the reception unit), a message including an indication element (i.e. a KDI) transmitted in a same subframe (i.e. a next control information transmission) as a slow downlink control information (DCI) that indicates that the slow DCI in the same subframe has the same content (i.e. field values that are unchanged) as a slow DCI in a previous subframe.); and
transmit, to the receiver, the next control information transmission, wherein the receiver is configured to decode in accordance with the KDI ([0064] discloses that an eNB signals (i.e. transmits) in each subframe the slow DCI along with the validity indication. [0067]-[0069] discloses that the UE receives a PDCCH control channel candidate carrying the slow DCI validity indication (i.e. the KDI) along with the slow DCI in the same subframe and monitors the PDCCH control channel candidate so that the UE can receive and attempt to decode the slow DCI in the same subframe. [0068]-[0069] discloses that if the UE is not able to find the slow DCI in the same subframe as the slow DCI validity indication, then the UE may look at the slow DCI validity indication and if the slow DCI validity indication is “still valid”, then the UE can assume the slow-DCI information from the last subframe is still valid and proceeds with sTTI operation (i.e. decoding within the same subframe) according to the previous slow DCI information.).
Schober fails to disclose but Tang teaches wherein the KDI indicates whether a next control information transmission comprises one or more other fields associated with values that are changed with respect to the preceding control information transmission ([0203] discloses a UE receiving an indicator field (i.e. a KDI) indicating the presence of a scheduling information field (i.e. one or more other fields) of a DCI (i.e. a next control information transmission) wherein the UE obtains and uses the value in the field (i.e. changes the scheduling information based on a preceding DCI to the value in the scheduling information field of the DCI).); and
wherein the receiver is configured to decode the one or more other fields and refrain from decoding the one or more fields ([0127] discloses that a UE decodes a DCI to obtain control information (i.e. values associated with decoded fields of the DCI). [0203] discloses the UE obtains values in scheduling information fields (i.e. decodes one or more other fields) indicated by the indicator field as being present, and would not decode fields that are indicated by the indicator field as absent.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Schober such that the KDI indicates whether a next control information transmission comprises one or more other fields associated with values that are changed with respect to the preceding control information transmission; and wherein the receiver is configured to decode the one or more other fields and refrain from decoding the one or more fields, as taught by Tang.
The motivation to do so would have been to reduce decoding overhead by indicating to a UE scheduling information fields that are being transmitted in a DCI, that have changed from the previous DCI, and scheduling information fields that are absent from being transmitted in the DCI, indicating the UE should use the same values as in the previous DCI for the absent scheduling information fields that have not changed since the previous DCI, so that the UE only has to decode the subset of scheduling information fields transmitted in the DCI.
Claims 3, 4, 14 & 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schober et al. (US 2019/0230634)(herein after “Schober”) in view of Tang et al. (US 2023/0422271)(herein after “Tang”), as applied to claims 1 & 12, and further in view of Im et al. (US 2022/0182177)(herein after “Im”).
Regarding claims 3 & 14, Schober in view of Tang disclose the apparatus of claim 1, and the method of claim 12, and that the KDI indicates that the next control information transmission comprises the one or more fields associated with the values that are unchanged and the one or more other fields associated with the values that are changed.
Schober fails to disclose but Im further teaches wherein the method comprises to, or the one or more processors, to decode one or more other fields, are configured to:
determine multiple candidate aggregation levels for the next control information transmission in accordance with reference information (Fig 1 & [0043] disclose that decoding circuit 132, as part of terminal 100, may determine and prioritize multiple aggregation levels based on reference information. [0045] discloses that the reference information may include history information indicating a trend of a format (e.g. one or more formats previously used, such as a previous slow DCI).); and
perform blind decoding for the one or more fields across the multiple candidate aggregation levels for the next control information transmission (Fig 7 & [0082] discloses that the terminal may perform candidate filtering-based blind decoding for each aggregation level based on the decoding priority. Fig 8A & [0084] disclose that the decoding priority for each aggregation level may be based on results of decoding performed in the past (e.g. decoding of the previous DCI or slow DCI).).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify the teachings of Schober and Tang to: determine multiple candidate aggregation levels for the next control information transmission in accordance with reference information; and perform blind decoding for the one or more fields across the multiple candidate aggregation levels for the next control information transmission, as further taught by Im, and substitute the reference information of Im with the indication element of Schober.
The motivation to do so would have been to have a UE, or a method for a UE, that leverage candidate aggregation levels for decoding a DCI based on receiving an indication element from a base station indicating certain scheduling information fields of the DCI are being transmitted using aggregation levels and may have values that have changed and other scheduling information fields of the DCI are not being transmitted whose values have not changed, so that the UE can improve the likelihood of decoding the scheduling information fields that have been indicated to be transmitted using aggregation levels.
Regarding claims 4 & 15, Schober in view of Tang and Im disclose the apparatus of claim 3 and the method of claim 14.
Schober fails to disclose but Im further teaches wherein the method comprises to, or the one or more processors are further configured to:
receive, from a transmitter, signaling indicating the multiple candidate aggregation levels for the next control information transmission ([0073] discloses that a base station may send higher layer signaling to the terminal with search space parameter information such as the number of control channel candidates for each aggregation level.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to have the apparatus of claim 3, or the method of claim 14, as disclosed by Schober in view of Tang and Im, wherein the method comprises to, or the one or more processors are further configured to: receive, from a transmitter, signaling indicating the multiple candidate aggregation levels for the next control information transmission, as further taught by Im. The motivation to do so would have been to have a UE, or a method for a UE, that can receive higher layer signaling from a base station indicating a number of control channel candidates for a number of aggregation levels so that the UE can prioritize the control channel candidates across the aggregation levels for decoding a DCI based on receiving an indication element from a base station indicating that certain scheduling information fields of the DCI are being transmitted using aggregation levels and may have values that have changed and other scheduling information fields of the DCI are not being transmitted whose values have not changed, so that the UE can improve the likelihood of decoding the scheduling information fields that have been indicated to be transmitted using aggregation levels.
Claims 5 & 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schober et al. (US 2019/0230634)(herein after “Schober”) in view of Tang et al. (US 2023/0422271)(herein after “Tang”), as applied to claims 1 & 12, and further in view of Im et al. (US 2022/0182177)(herein after “Im”) and Xue et al. (US 2018/0124744)(herein after “Xue”).
Regarding claims 5 & 16, Schober in view of Tang discloses the apparatus of claim 1 and the method of claim 12.
Schober fails to disclose but Im further teaches wherein the method comprises to, or the one or more processors are further configured to:
receive, from a transmitter, signaling indicating multiple sets of candidate aggregation levels ([0073] discloses that a base station may send higher layer signaling to the terminal with search space parameter information such as the number of control channel candidates for each aggregation level.), and wherein the method comprises to, or the one or more processors, to decode the one or more other fields, are configured to:
perform blind decoding for the one or more other fields across one or more candidate aggregation levels associated with a prioritized set of candidate aggregation levels (Fig 7 & [0082] discloses that the terminal may perform candidate filtering-based blind decoding for each aggregation level based on the decoding priority. Fig 9 & [0088] discloses performing blind decoding on a k-th candidate of a selected aggregation level based on the decoding priority. For example, after 2 iterations in fig 9, blind decoding would be performed across 2 candidate aggregation levels associated with the two highest prioritized candidate aggregation levels.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to have the apparatus of claim 1, or the method of claim 12, as disclosed by Schober in view of Tang, wherein the method comprises to, or the one or more processors are further configured to: receive, from a transmitter, signaling indicating multiple sets of candidate aggregation levels, and wherein the one or more processors, to decode the one or more other fields, are configured to: perform blind decoding for the one or more other fields across one or more candidate aggregation levels associated with a prioritized set of candidate aggregation levels, as further taught by Im.
The motivation to do so would have been to have a UE, or a method for a UE, that can receive sets of control channel candidates across aggregation levels through higher layer signaling and prioritize control channel candidates of aggregation levels, for decoding a DCI, based on receiving an indication element from a base station indicating that certain scheduling information fields of the DCI are being transmitted using aggregation levels and may have values that have changed and other scheduling information fields of the DCI are not being transmitted whose values have not changed, so that the UE can improve the likelihood of decoding the scheduling information fields that have been indicated to be transmitted using aggregation levels.
Schober fails to disclose but Xue further teaches wherein the KDI indicates a set of candidate aggregation levels, of the multiple sets of candidate aggregation levels, associated with the next control information transmission ([0199] discloses a bitmap that can indicate (i.e. a KDI) the aggregation levels of DCIs transmitted in a current TTI wherein a UE only needs to try blind decoding of the DCIs with the indicated aggregation levels, while ignoring blind decoding of DCIs with non-indicated aggregation levels.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to have the apparatus of claim 1, or the method of claim 12, as disclosed by Schober in view of Tang, wherein the method comprises to, or the one or more processors are further configured to: receive, from a transmitter, signaling indicating multiple sets of candidate aggregation levels, and wherein the one or more processors, to decode the next control information transmission, are configured to: perform blind decoding for the next control information transmission across one or more candidate aggregation levels associated with a prioritized set of candidate aggregation levels, as taught by Im, and substitute the prioritized set of candidate aggregation levels of Im with the indication of a set of candidate aggregation levels, of the multiple sets of candidate aggregation levels, associated with the next control information transmission, as further taught by Xue.
The motivation to do so would have been to have a UE, or a method for a UE, that can receive sets of control channel candidates across aggregation levels through higher layer signaling and prioritize control channel candidates of aggregation levels, for decoding a current subframe, based on receiving a bitmap from a base station indicating the aggregation levels of DCIs transmitted in a current TTI, so that the UE can prioritize decoding of control channel candidates of aggregation levels associated aggregation levels indicated in the bitmap, and only perform blind decoding on the aggregation levels indicated in the bitmap, in order to reduce processing power needed to successfully decode the DCI in the current TTI.
Claims 8, 9, 17 & 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schober et al. (US 2019/0230634)(herein after “Schober”) in view of Tang et al. (US 2023/0422271)(herein after “Tang”), as applied to claims 1 & 12, and further in view of Fan et al. (US 2024/0276514)(herein after “Fan”).
Regarding claims 8 & 17, Schober in view of Tang discloses the apparatus of claim 1, and the method of claim 12.
Schober fails to disclose but Fan further teaches wherein the KDI is carried in the control information transmission preceding the next control information transmission (Fig 2B & [0059]-[0060] discloses assistance information (i.e. KDI) included in a DCI including information defining configuration for detecting subsequent control information transmitted in a next DCI.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify the teachings of Schober and Tang such that the KDI is carried in the control information transmission preceding the next control information transmission, as further taught by Fan.
The motivation to do so would have been to reduce delay for a UE to decode only the changed fields in a next DCI by having an indicator in a previous DCI indicating which fields of the DCI are present and may have changed from the previous DCI so that the UE can immediately start decoding the indicated and transmitted fields in the next DCI without having to first decode an indicator field in the next DCI.
Regarding claims 9 & 18, Schober in view of Tang disclose the apparatus of claim 1, and the method of claim 12.
Schober fails to disclose but Fan further teaches wherein the KDI is multiplexed with a data transmission preceding the next control information transmission (Fig 2B & [0059]-[0060] discloses assistance information (i.e. KDI) included in a DCI including information defining configuration for detecting subsequent control information transmitted in a next DCI. Fig 3B & [0106]-[0107] & [0111] discloses that the DCI may be extended to include the assistance information along with conventional DCI information or use reserved bits in the conventional DCI format (i.e. the assistance information is multiplexed with the conventional DCI data).).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify the teachings of Schober and Tang such that the KDI is multiplexed with a data transmission preceding the next control information transmission, as further taught by Fan.
The motivation to do so would have been to reduce delay for a UE to decode only the changed fields in a next DCI without changing the format of a previous DCI by having an indicator in the previous DCI, using the reserved bit in the previous DCI, indicating which fields of the DCI are present and may have changed from the previous DCI so that the UE can immediately start decoding the indicated and transmitted fields in the next DCI without having to first decode an indicator field in the next DCI.
Claims 10, 11 & 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schober et al. (US 2019/0230634)(herein after “Schober”) in view of Tang et al. (US 2023/0422271)(herein after “Tang”) and Fan et al. (US 2024/0276514)(herein after “Fan”), as applied to claims 9 & 18, and further in view of Liu et al. (US 2024/0040615)(herein after “Liu”).
Regarding claim 10, Schober in view of Tang and Fan disclose the apparatus of claim 9.
Schober fails to disclose but Liu further teaches wherein control information is carried on a last symbol in a slot in which the data transmission is received (Fig 7 & [0139]-[0141] disclose that the last symbol 715-e in a preceding slot 710-b may be used to transmit PBCH control information (i.e. a data transmission).).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to have the apparatus of claim 9, as disclosed by Schober in view of Tang and Fan, wherein control information is carried on a last symbol in a slot in which the data transmission is received, as further taught by Liu, and substitute the control information of Liu with the KDI, as disclosed by Schober in view of Tang, in the last symbol of a slot of the data transmission.
The motivation to do so would have been to reduce delay for a UE to decode only the changed fields in a next DCI without changing the format of a previous DCI by having an indicator in the previous DCI, carried on a last symbol in a slot in the previous DCI, indicating which fields of the DCI are present and may have changed from the previous DCI so that the UE can immediately start decoding the indicated and transmitted fields in the next DCI without having to first decode an indicator field in the next DCI.
Regarding claims 11 & 19, Schober in view of Tang and Fan disclose the apparatus of claim 9 and the method of claim 18.
Schober fails to disclose but Liu further teaches wherein control information is carried on an earliest symbol among a first symbol that is a configured number of symbols before a last symbol in a slot in which the data transmission is received and a second symbol corresponding to a last symbol of the data transmission (Fig 7 & [0139]-[0141] disclose that PBCH control information may be transmitted on the sixth symbol of slot 710-b (i.e. an earliest symbol among a first symbol) that is 8 symbols before a last symbol 715-e in slot 710-b, and on the last symbol 715e.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to have the apparatus of claim 9, or the method of claim 19, as disclosed by Schober in view of Tang and Fan, wherein control information is carried on an earliest symbol among a first symbol that is a configured number of symbols before a last symbol in a slot in which the data transmission is received and a second symbol corresponding to a last symbol of the data transmission, as further taught by Liu, and substitute the control information of Liu with the KDI, as disclosed by Schober and Tang, in the earliest symbol among a first symbol that is a configured number of symbols before a last symbol in a slot in which the data transmission is received and a second symbol corresponding to a last symbol of the data transmission.
The motivation to do so would have been to reduce delay for a UE to decode only the changed fields in a next DCI without changing the format of a previous DCI by having an indicator in the previous DCI, carried on an earliest symbol among a first symbol that is a configured number of symbols before a last symbol in a slot in which the data transmission is received and a second symbol corresponding to a last symbol in the previous DCI, indicating which fields of the DCI are present and may have changed from the previous DCI so that the UE can immediately start decoding the indicated and transmitted fields in the next DCI without having to first decode an indicator field in the next DCI.
Conclusion
The following prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Yuan et al. (US 2025/0374191) discloses PDCCH Skipping without Channel Assignments and on Multiple Component Carriers.
Karanukaran et al. (US 2023/0199753) discloses an Incremental Signaling Method for Cross-Slot Scheduling and Burst Traffic.
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 JAMES P SEYMOUR whose telephone number is (571)272-7654. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5 EST.
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, Nishant Divecha can be reached at 571-270-3125. 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.
/JAMES P SEYMOUR/Examiner, Art Unit 2419
/Nishant Divecha/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2419
