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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to the application filed on 07/11/2024 has a total of 20 claims pending in the application; there are 3 independent claims and 17 dependent claims, all of which are ready for examination by the examiner.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to:
www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-14 of U.S. Patent No. 12,107,712 B2 [application No.17/599,939], Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the independent claims and their dependent claims of the instant application contain similar limitations of the independent and their dependent claims of the patented application, which lead to the same claimed invention, thus they are not patentably distinct from each other.
The independent claims and their dependent claims of the instant application contain similar limitations of the independent and their dependent claims of the co-pending application.
Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the language of the claims presented contain the same limitations claimed. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art to modify the patented application to create the instant application.
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 4-9 and 13 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 4-7 and 9 recite the acronym “K0, K1 and K2” without a corresponding meaning to the K letter.
Claims 8 and 13 are also rejected since they depend on rejected claims
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Babaei et al. Publication No. (US 2019/0149380 A1) in view of HWANG et al. Publication No. (US 2020/0029354 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Babaei teaches a method for transmitting downlink control information (DCI), comprising:
scheduling traffic channels in a plurality of transmission time intervals (TTIs) through a single downlink control information (DCI) (a base station transmits a grant/DCI to a wireless device (UE), the grant/DCI comprise indication of a cell and/or a TTI/numerology that the UE may transmit data, a first field in the grant/DCI may indicate the cell and a second field in the grant/DCI may indicate the TTI/numerology, a field in the grant/DCI may indicate both the cell and the TTI/numerology [0185] FIG.21);
wherein the scheduling the traffic channels in the plurality of TTIs through the single DCI (A bit in the plurality of bits may correspond to a TTI/subframe/slot/symbol in the monitoring periodicity [0450] FIG.27).
Babaei does not explicitly teach indicating a number of TTIs or the number of repetitions of a multi-TTI scheduling.
KWAK teaches indicating a number of TTIs or the number of repetitions of a multi-TTI scheduling (KWAK: receiving downlink control information (DCI) for scheduling downlink data in a first transmission time interval (TTI); acquiring, from the DCI, information related to whether the reference signal is included in the first TTI in which the downlink data is scheduled, the scheduling indicating the number of TTIs in which the Reference Signal (RS) is sharing the TTIs may be divided into groups in a unit of the number limit for application of RS sharing within the configured number of times of repetitive transmission of the data, the RS may be transmitted only in some TTIs (e.g., the first TTI) of the TTIs corresponding to the number of times of repetitive transmission of the data. Alternatively, the RS may be transmitted in all the TTIs corresponding to the number of times of repetitive transmission of the data [0136-139] FIG.18).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified Babaei by the teaching of KWAK to indicate a number of TTIs or the number of repetitions of a multi-TTI scheduling in order to demodulate the data transmitted within the corresponding TTI or obtain information about a channel state for the corresponding TTI (KWAK: [0118] FIG.17).
Regarding claim 2, Babaei teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the number of the TTIs and the number of repetitions of the multi-TTI scheduling is indicated through the one bit-field in one of following manners: determining, through high-layer signaling configuration by using the one bit-field, the number of the TTIs and the number of repetitions of the multi-TTI scheduling; or determining, through physical signaling indication by using the one bit-field, the number of the TTIs and the number of repetitions of the multi-TTI scheduling (a UE configured for operation in bandwidth parts (BWPs) of a serving cell, may be configured by higher layers for the serving cell a set of bandwidth parts (BWPs) for receptions by the UE (DL BWP set) or a set of BWPs for transmissions by the UE (UL BWP set) [0191-192] FIG.7).
Regarding claim 3, Babaei teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising: in a case where the DCI is used for indicating the number of TTIs and the number of repetitions of the multi-TTI scheduling, firstly performing a repetitive transmission and then performing a transmission of a different transmission block, or firstly performing transmissions of different transmission blocks and then performing a repetitive transmission (RRC may control DRX operation by configuring a plurality of timers, e.g., on Duration Timer and/or drx-Inactivity Timer and/or drx-Retransmission Timer (e.g., one per DL HARQ process except for the broadcast process) and/or drx-UL Retransmission Timer (one per asynchronous UL HARQ process) and/or the long DRX-Cycle and/or the value of the drx Start Offset and/or optionally the drx Short Cycle Timer and/or short DRX-Cycle [405-410]).
Regarding claim 4, Babaei teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the scheduling the traffic channels in the plurality of TTIs through the single DCI comprises: indicating, by the DCI, a time domain resource allocation in one of following manners: configuring, through high-layer signaling, a timing interval, a starting symbol of a first TTI, and an ending symbol in a last TTI (a UE configured for operation in bandwidth parts (BWPs) of a serving cell, may be configured by higher layers for the serving cell a set of bandwidth parts (BWPs) for receptions by the UE (DL BWP set) or a set of BWPs for transmissions by the UE (UL BWP set) [0191-192] FIG.7); configuring, through high-layer signaling, a timing interval, a starting symbol of a first TTI, a number of scheduled TTIs, and an ending symbol in a last TTI; configuring, through high-layer signaling, a timing interval, a starting symbol of a first TTI, a number of symbols, and a number of scheduled TTIs (a UE configured for operation in bandwidth parts (BWPs) of a serving cell, may be configured by higher layers for the serving cell a set of bandwidth parts (BWPs) for receptions by the UE (DL BWP set) or a set of BWPs for transmissions by the UE (UL BWP set) [0191-192] FIG.7); configuring, through high-layer signaling, a timing interval K0 or K2, a starting symbol and a number of symbols indicated for each TTI or each group of TTIs, and a number of scheduled TTIs, wherein the starting symbol and the number of the symbols are not all the same for individual TTI (a UE configured for operation in bandwidth parts (BWPs) of a serving cell, may be configured by higher layers for the serving cell a set of bandwidth parts (BWPs) for receptions by the UE (DL BWP set) or a set of BWPs for transmissions by the UE (UL BWP set) [0191-192] FIG.7); or configuring, through high-layer signaling, a timing interval, a starting symbol of a first TTI, a number of symbols, a number of scheduled TTIs, and a number of subslots/mini-slots within the scheduled TTIs (a UE configured for operation in bandwidth parts (BWPs) of a serving cell, may be configured by higher layers for the serving cell a set of bandwidth parts (BWPs) for receptions by the UE (DL BWP set) or a set of BWPs for transmissions by the UE (UL BWP set) [0191-192] FIG.7).
Regarding claim 5, Babaei teaches the method of claim 1, wherein in a case where a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) is transmitted in the plurality of TTIs, a manner of performing a hybrid automatic repeat request-acknowledgement (HARQ-ACK) feedback on the PDSCH comprises one of: using, by each TTI of the plurality of TTIs, the each TTI as a timing starting point, and determining, according to a feedback timing K1 indicated by the DCI, an uplink TTI where HARQ-ACK information corresponding to the each TTI is located, individually (Some of the DCI formats may be used for UE-specific signaling. Some other DCI formats may be used for common/group-common signaling, example DCI fields in a DL assignment may be PUCCH resource indicator: Indicates the PUCCH time and frequency resource to use for HARQ-ACK [0473]); or using, by each TTI of the plurality of TTIs, a last TTI as a timing starting point, and determining, according to a feedback timing K1 in the DCI, an uplink TTI where HARQ-ACK information corresponding to the plurality of TTIs is located (Some of the DCI formats may be used for UE-specific signaling. Some other DCI formats may be used for common/group-common signaling, example DCI fields in a DL assignment may be PUCCH resource indicator: Indicates the PUCCH time and frequency resource to use for HARQ-ACK [0473]).
Regarding claim 6, Babaei teaches the method of claim 5, further comprising: in a case where HARQ-ACK is fed back through a semi-static codebook and a PDSCH determined by using a K1 set configured by high-layer signaling belongs to a PDSCH in a multi-TTI scheduling, determining the DCI scheduling the PDSCH as a last DCI (a UE may receive PDCCH and PDSCH in a DL BWP according to a configured subcarrier spacing and CP length for the DL BWP. A UE may transmit PUCCH and PUSCH in an UL BWP according to a configured subcarrier spacing and CP length for the UL BWP [0199-200]).
Regarding claim 7, Babaei teaches the method of claim 5, wherein the using, by each TTI of the plurality of TTIs, the each TTI as the timing starting point, and determining, according to the feedback timing K1 indicated by the DCI, the uplink TTI where the HARQ-ACK information corresponding to the each TTI is located, individually comprise one of: in a case where HARQ-ACK is fed back through a dynamic codebook and there are HARQ-ACKs which are fed back for scheduling a first PDSCH and indicate a same uplink TTI, adding additionally one to a downlink allocation index (DAI) of at least one DCI of DCIs for scheduling the first PDSCH (Some of the DCI formats may be used for UE-specific signaling. Some other DCI formats may be used for common/group-common signaling, example DCI fields in a DL assignment may be PUCCH resource indicator: Indicates the PUCCH time and frequency resource to use for HARQ-ACK [0473]); or in a case where HARQ-ACK is fed back through a dynamic codebook and there are HARQ-ACKs which are fed back for scheduling a first PDSCH and indicate one same uplink TTI, determining that HARQ-ACK information corresponding to PDSCHs of a multi-TTI scheduling is located at the beginning of the dynamic codebook (a UE may receive PDCCH and PDSCH in a DL BWP according to a configured subcarrier spacing and CP length for the DL BWP. A UE may transmit PUCCH and PUSCH in an UL BWP according to a configured subcarrier spacing and CP length for the UL BWP [0199-200]).
Regarding claim 8, Babaei teaches the method of claim 7, further comprising: in a case where the HARQ-ACK information corresponding to the PDSCHs of the multi-TTI scheduling is located at the beginning of the dynamic codebook, ordering the PDSCHs of the multi-TTI scheduling according to one of following principles: ordering, at the beginning of the codebook, according to an order of a carrier (CC) indexes and then according to an order of time domain; or ordering, at the beginning of the codebook, according to an order of time domain and then according to an order CC indexes (a UE may receive PDCCH and PDSCH in a DL BWP according to a configured subcarrier spacing and CP length for the DL BWP. A UE may transmit PUCCH and PUSCH in an UL BWP according to a configured subcarrier spacing and CP length for the UL BWP [0199-200]).
Regarding claim 9, Babaei teaches the method of claim 5, wherein the using, by each TTI of the plurality of TTIs, the last TTI as the timing starting point and determining, according to the feedback timing K1 in the DCI, the uplink TTI where the HARQ-ACK information corresponding to the plurality of TTIs is located comprise: in a case where the HARQ-ACK uses a dynamic codebook for feedback and 1 is added to the DCI by a count DAI, determining a size of the codebook according to an actual scheduled number for scheduling the plurality of TTIs (Some of the DCI formats may be used for UE-specific signaling. Some other DCI formats may be used for common/group-common signaling, example DCI fields in a DL assignment may be PUCCH resource indicator: Indicates the PUCCH time and frequency resource to use for HARQ-ACK [0473]).
Regarding claim 10, Babaei teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising: determining, by the DCI, coding block group transmission information (CBGTI) in one of following manners: independently indicating a CBGTI of each TTI of the plurality of TTIs, wherein each TTI uses X/Y bits, X is a number of scheduled TTIs, and Y is a maximum number of coding block groups (CBGs) configured by a radio resource control (RRC); or sharing, by a plurality of TTIs, a same CBGTI, wherein TTIs where a new data indicator (NDI) is not toggled share a same CBGTI indication, and TTIs where the NDI is toggled ignore a CBGTI indication (The fields in a DCI may depend on the DCI format. Some fields may be defined in DL assignment DCI formats and some fields may be used in UL scheduling DCI formats. Example DCI fields in a DL assignment may be CBGTI: Which CBG(s) is/are (re)transmitted and CBGFI: Which CBG(s) is/are handled differently for soft-buffer/HARQ combining [0473]).
Regarding claim 11, Babaei teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising: determining, by the DCI, coding block group refresh information (CBGFI) in one of following manners: independently indicating CBGFI for each TTI of the plurality of TTIs, wherein 1 bit is used for the each TTI for a maximum of N scheduled TTIs; or using N1 bits to indicate CBGFI of TTIs where a new data indicator (NDI) is not toggled, wherein N1 is not greater than N; or sharing, by a plurality of TTIs, a same CBGFI, wherein TTIs where an NDI is not toggled share a same CBGFI indication, and TTIs where the NDI is toggled ignore a CBGFI indication (The fields in a DCI may depend on the DCI format. Some fields may be defined in DL assignment DCI formats and some fields may be used in UL scheduling DCI formats. Example DCI fields in a DL assignment may be CBGTI: Which CBG(s) is/are (re)transmitted and CBGFI: Which CBG(s) is/are handled differently for soft-buffer/HARQ combining [0473]).
Regarding claim 12, Babaei teaches the method of claim 1, wherein a demodulation reference signal (DMRS) pattern in the plurality of TTIs is determined in one of following manners: using, by the plurality of TTIs, a same DMRS pattern, wherein such same DMRS pattern is the same as a DMRS pattern in a first TTI, and the DMRS pattern in the first TTI is determined by combining a time domain resource allocation with an RRC configuration (a numerology of DL BWP configuration may be applied to at least PDCCH, PDSCH & corresponding DMRS. A numerology of UL BWP configuration may be applied to at least PUCCH, PUSCH & corresponding DMRS [0353]); determining a DMRS pattern in a first TTI by combining a time domain resource allocation with an RRC configuration, and using a first DMRS pattern for a TTI continuously occupying 14 orthogonal frequency division multiplexing symbols (OSs), wherein the first DMRS pattern is determined by an RRC or a predefined manner (A multicarrier OFDM communication system may include one or more carriers, for example, ranging from 1 to 10 carriers. [0132]); or using, by the plurality of TTIs, a same DMRS pattern, wherein such same DMRS pattern is the same as a DMRS pattern in a first TTI, and determining, by configuring a TTI pattern, TTIs applying the DMRS pattern, wherein the DMRS pattern of the first TTI is determined by combining a time domain resource allocation with an RRC configuration (for DMRS-based transmission schemes, a single DL DCI format for normal (e.g., non-fallback) operation and/or a single DCI format for fallback operation may be used [0490]).
Regarding claim 13, Babaei teaches the method of claim 4, wherein the TTI is a slot, and a subslot is a length L of a time domain resource allocated for a single transport block (TB) (the wireless device may transmit one or more TBs in the uplink symbols in one or more slots and may receive one or more TBs in the downlink symbols in of one or more slots [0466-467]).
Regarding claims 14-19, the independent claim and each dependent claim are related to the same limitation set for hereinabove in claims 1-13, where the difference used is the limitations were presented from a “apparatus” side and the wordings of the claims were interchanged within the claim itself or some of the claims were presented as a combination of two or more previously presented limitations. This change does not affect the limitation of the above treated claims. Adding these phrases to the claims and interchanging the wording did not introduce new limitations to these claims. Therefore, these claims were rejected for similar reasons as stated above.
Regarding claim 20, related to the same limitation set for hereinabove in claim 1, where the difference used is the limitations were presented in a “computer program” with a storage medium (Babaei [0139] FIG.4) and the wordings of the claim were interchanged within the claim itself or were presented as a combination of two or more previously presented limitations. This change does not affect the limitation of the above treated claims. Adding these phrases to the claim and interchanging the wording did not introduce new limitations to this claim. Therefore this claim was rejected for similar reasons as stated above.
Conclusion
When responding to this office action, Applicant is advised to clearly point out the patentable novelty which he or she thinks the claims present, in view of the state of the art disclosed by the references cited or the objections made. He or she must also show how the amendments avoid such references or objections See 37 CFR 1.111 (c).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABDELNABI O MUSA whose telephone number is (571)270-1901, and email address is abdelnabi.musa@uspto.gov ‘preferred’. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9:00 am - 5:00 pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kevin Bates, can be reached on 571-2723980. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system? Contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ABDELNABI O MUSA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2472
Prosecution Insights