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 .
Application Status
2. Acknowledgment is made of Applicant’s submission of the present application on August 6, 2024. Claims 1-20 are pending. This communication is considered fully responsive and sets forth below.
Information Disclosure Statement
3. Acknowledgment is made of Applicant’s submission of information disclosure statement (IDS), dated on November 6, 2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Examiner's Notes
4. Applicant is encouraged to submit a written authorization for Internet communications (PTO/SB/439, http://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/sb0439.pdf) in the instant patent application to authorize the examiner to communicate with the applicant via email. The authorization will allow the examiner to better practice compact prosecution. The written authorization can be submitted via one of the following methods only: (1) Central Fax which can be found in the Conclusion section of this Office action; (2) regular postal mail; (3) EFS WEB; or (4) the service window on the Alexandria campus. EFS web is the recommended way to submit the form since this allows the form to be entered into the file wrapper within the same day (system dependent). Written authorization submitted via other methods, such as direct fax to the examiner or email, will not be accepted. See MPEP § 502.03.
Double Patenting
5. 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 obviousness-type 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); and 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 a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the conflicting application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement.
Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b).
6. Claim 1 is provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 and 5 of copending Application No. 18/795,781.
Regarding claim 1, it recites, “A method comprising:
receiving, from a guest operator assigned to a sub-band of a frequency band of a telecommunications network implementing a shared radio unit architecture, a request to modify a downlink to uplink ratio associated with the sub-band to implement time division duplexing; and
modifying the downlink to uplink ratio.”
Claims 1 and 5 of copending Application No. 18/795,781 recite, “1. A method comprising:
dividing, into a plurality of sub-bands, a frequency band of a telecommunications network implementing a shared radio unit architecture;
assigning, to each sub-band of the plurality of sub-bands, a respective guest operator of a plurality of guest operator of the telecommunications network; and
allocating, for each sub-band assigned to the respective guest operator, at least one type of transmission to a plurality of time slots of the sub-band to implement time division duplexing.”
5. The method of claim 4, further comprising:
receiving, from the at least one guest operator, at least one request to modify the at least one downlink to uplink ratio; and
modifying the at least one downlink to uplink ratio.”
Claim 1 is a method step claim, including receiving and modifying steps, which are a part of the elements in claims 1 and 5 of copending Application No. 18/795,781. Here are the limitations mappings:
For the receiving step, i.e., “receiving, from a guest operator assigned to a sub-band of a frequency band of a telecommunications network implementing a shared radio unit architecture, a request to modify a downlink to uplink ratio associated with the sub-band to implement time division duplexing,”
the limitation of “a frequency band of a telecommunications network implementing a shared radio unit architecture” as indicated in italics in dividing step in claim 1 of the copending Application teaches the same limitation here;
the limitation of “the sub-band to implement time division duplexing” as indicated in italics in allocating step in claim 1 of the copending Application teaches the same limitation here;
in fact, the limitations mentioned above and the receiving step in claim 5, i.e., “receiving, from the at least one guest operator, at least one request to modify the at least one downlink to uplink ratio” as indicated in italics in claim 5 of the copending Application teach this limitation.
For the modifying step, i.e., “modifying the downlink to uplink ratio,”
the modifying step, i.e., “modifying the at least one downlink to uplink ratio” as indicated in italics in claim 1 of the copending Application teaches this limitation here.
Based on the mappings presented above, claim 1 is merely a broader version of the claims 1 and 5 of copending Application No. 18/795,781 by eliminating some limitations, e.g., “a plurality of time slots,” as indicated in italics in the last limitation of claim 1 of the copending Application.
It has been held that the omission of an element and its function is an obvious expedient if the remaining elements perform the same function as before. In re Karlson, 136 USPQ 184 (CCPA).
Same rationale applies to claims 2, 8-9, and 15-16 as follows:
7. Claim 2 is provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of copending Application No. 18/795,781.
8. Claim 8 is provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 8 and 12 of copending Application No. 18/795,781.
9. Claim 9 is provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 8 of copending Application No. 18/795,781.
10. Claim 15 is provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 15 and 18 of copending Application No. 18/795,781.
11. Claim 16 is provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 15 of copending Application No. 18/795,781.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
12. 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.
13. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
14. Claims 1-5, 8-12, and 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Miya (US 2002/0105935).
Regarding claim 1, Miya teaches the method comprising:
receiving, from a guest operator assigned to a sub-band of a frequency band of a telecommunications network implementing a shared radio unit architecture, a request to modify a downlink to uplink ratio associated with the sub-band to implement time division duplexing (paragraphs [0007] lines 1-10 & [0017] lines 1-14; Examiner’s Notes: MS201 illustrated in FIG. 6 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a guest operator;”
the TDD system/network regards to the traffic/frequency band sharing as illustrated in FIG. 4 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a telecommunications network implementing a shared radio unit architecture;”
the ratio of the length of the downlink slot 109 to the length of the uplink slot 110, as illustrated in FIG. 5B in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a downlink to uplink ratio;”
in fact, receiving from UE, e.g., MS201 assigned to a sub-band 107 among 105-107 in the TDD system/network regards to the traffic/frequency band sharing as illustrated in FIG. 4, information/request to change the ratio of the length of the downlink slot 109 to the length of the uplink slot 110, as illustrated in FIG. 6 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “receiving, from a guest operator assigned to a sub-band of a frequency band of a telecommunications network implementing a shared radio unit architecture, a request to modify a downlink to uplink ratio associated with the sub-band to implement time division duplexing” in the instant application); and
modifying the downlink to uplink ratio (paragraph [0017] lines 1-14; Examiner’s Notes: changing/modifying the ratio of the length of the downlink slot 109 to the length of the uplink slot 110, as illustrated in FIG. 5B in the prior art teaches the limitation of “modifying the downlink to uplink ratio” in the instant application).
Regarding claim 2, Miya further teaches the method, wherein the sub-band comprises a plurality of time slots (paragraph [0016] lines 1-8; Examiner’s Notes: the sub-band including slots, e.g., downlink slot 109, uplink slot 110, etc., as illustrated in FIG. 5B in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein the sub-band comprises a plurality of time slots” in the instant application), and
wherein the plurality of time slots is allocated at least one type of transmission (paragraph [0016] lines 1-8; Examiner’s Notes: the downlink signal/transmission in downlink slot 109, as illustrated in FIG. 5B in the prior art teaches the limitation of “at least one type of transmission;”
in fact, allocating/assigning, each sub-band assigned to the respective USER, e.g., USER #1, the downlink signal/transmission in downlink slot 109, in the TDD system as illustrated in FIG. 5B in the prior of machine learning in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein the plurality of time slots is allocated at least one type of transmission” in the instant application).
Regarding claim 3, Miya further teaches the method, wherein the at least one type of transmission is at least one of an uplink transmission or a downlink transmission (paragraph [0016] lines 1-8; Examiner’s Notes: the downlink signal/transmission in downlink slot 109, as illustrated in FIG. 5B in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein the at least one type of transmission is at least one of an uplink transmission or a downlink transmission” in the instant application).
Regarding claim 4, Miya further teaches the method, wherein the guest operator is not a boundary guest operator of the telecommunications network (paragraphs [0004] lines 1-8 & [0018] lines 1-12; Examiner’s Notes: UE, e.g., MS201, at the cover area in the TDD system/network, as illustrated in FIG. 6 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein the guest operator is not a boundary guest operator of the telecommunications network” in the instant application).
Regarding claim 5, Miya further teaches the method, further comprising:
dividing the frequency band into a plurality of sub-bands comprising the sub-band (paragraphs [0014] lines 1-10 & [0032] lines 1-15; Examiner’s Notes: dividing/securing, into sub-bands, e.g., 105 and 107, the frequency band of the TDD system/network regards to the traffic/frequency band sharing, as illustrated in FIG. 4 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “dividing the frequency band into a plurality of sub-bands comprising the sub-band” in the instant application);
assigning, to each sub-band of the plurality of sub-bands, a respective guest operator of a plurality of guest operator of the telecommunications network (paragraph [0007] lines 1-10; Examiner’s Notes: users, e.g., USER #1, USER #2, etc., illustrated in FIG. 2 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a plurality of guest operators;”
in fact, assigning, to each sub-band, e.g., 107 as illustrated in FIG. 4, a user, e.g., USER #1 among USER #1, USER #2, etc., in the TDD system/network in the prior art teaches the limitation of “assigning, to each sub-band of the plurality of sub-bands, a respective guest operator of a plurality of guest operator of the telecommunications network” in the instant application); and
allocating, for each sub-band assigned to the respective guest operator, at least one type of transmission to a plurality of time slots of the sub-band (paragraph [0016] lines 1-8; Examiner’s Notes: the downlink signal/transmission in downlink slot 109, as illustrated in FIG. 5B in the prior art teaches the limitation of “at least one type of transmission;”
in fact, allocating/assigning, each sub-band assigned to the respective USER, e.g., USER #1, the downlink signal/transmission in downlink slot 109, in the TDD system as illustrated in FIG. 5B in the prior of machine learning in the prior art teaches the limitation of “allocating, for each sub-band assigned to the respective guest operator, at least one type of transmission to a plurality of time slots of the sub-band” in the instant application).
Regarding claim 8, Miya further teaches the system comprising:
a memory; and a processing device (paragraph [0035] lines 1-16; Examiner’s Notes: the radio communication system, as illustrated in FIG. 6 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “system” in the instant application;
“a memory; and a processing device,” such as in BS202 in FIG. 6, is anticipated under 35 U.S.C. 102 based on the teaching of BS202 in the radio communication system. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255 n.4, 195 USPQ 430, 433 n.4 (CCPA 1977)), operatively coupled with the memory, to:
receive, from a guest operator assigned to a sub-band of a frequency band of a telecommunications network implementing a shared radio unit architecture, a request to modify a downlink to uplink ratio associated with the sub-band to implement time division duplexing (paragraphs [0007] lines 1-10 & [0017] lines 1-14; Examiner’s Notes: MS201 illustrated in FIG. 6 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a guest operator;”
the TDD system/network regards to the traffic/frequency band sharing as illustrated in FIG. 4 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a telecommunications network implementing a shared radio unit architecture;”
the ratio of the length of the downlink slot 109 to the length of the uplink slot 110, as illustrated in FIG. 5B in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a downlink to uplink ratio;”
in fact, receiving from UE, e.g., MS201 assigned to a sub-band 107 among 105-107 in the TDD system/network regards to the traffic/frequency band sharing as illustrated in FIG. 4, information/request to change the ratio of the length of the downlink slot 109 to the length of the uplink slot 110, as illustrated in FIG. 6 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “receive, from a guest operator assigned to a sub-band of a frequency band of a telecommunications network implementing a shared radio unit architecture, a request to modify a downlink to uplink ratio associated with the sub-band to implement time division duplexing” in the instant application); and
modify the downlink to uplink ratio (paragraph [0017] lines 1-14; Examiner’s Notes: changing/modifying the ratio of the length of the downlink slot 109 to the length of the uplink slot 110, as illustrated in FIG. 5B in the prior art teaches the limitation of “modify the downlink to uplink ratio” in the instant application).
Regarding claim 9, Miya further teaches the system, wherein the sub-band comprises a plurality of time slots (paragraph [0016] lines 1-8; Examiner’s Notes: the sub-band including slots, e.g., downlink slot 109, uplink slot 110, etc., as illustrated in FIG. 5B in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein the sub-band comprises a plurality of time slots” in the instant application), and
wherein the plurality of time slots is allocated at least one type of transmission (paragraph [0016] lines 1-8; Examiner’s Notes: the downlink signal/transmission in downlink slot 109, as illustrated in FIG. 5B in the prior art teaches the limitation of “at least one type of transmission;”
in fact, allocating/assigning, each sub-band assigned to the respective USER, e.g., USER #1, the downlink signal/transmission in downlink slot 109, in the TDD system as illustrated in FIG. 5B in the prior of machine learning in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein the plurality of time slots is allocated at least one type of transmission” in the instant application).
Regarding claim 10, Miya further teaches the system, wherein the at least one type of transmission is at least one of an uplink transmission or a downlink transmission (paragraph [0016] lines 1-8; Examiner’s Notes: the downlink signal/transmission in downlink slot 109, as illustrated in FIG. 5B in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein the at least one type of transmission is at least one of an uplink transmission or a downlink transmission” in the instant application).
Regarding claim 11, Miya further teaches the system, wherein the guest operator is not a boundary guest operator of the telecommunications network (paragraphs [0004] lines 1-8 & [0018] lines 1-12; Examiner’s Notes: UE, e.g., MS201, at the cover area in the TDD system/network, as illustrated in FIG. 6 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein the guest operator is not a boundary guest operator of the telecommunications network” in the instant application).
Regarding claim 12, Miya further teaches the method, further comprising:
dividing the frequency band into a plurality of sub-bands comprising the sub-band (paragraphs [0014] lines 1-10 & [0032] lines 1-15; Examiner’s Notes: dividing/securing, into sub-bands, e.g., 105 and 107, the frequency band of the TDD system/network regards to the traffic/frequency band sharing, as illustrated in FIG. 4 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “dividing the frequency band into a plurality of sub-bands comprising the sub-band” in the instant application);
assigning, to each sub-band of the plurality of sub-bands, a respective guest operator of a plurality of guest operator of the telecommunications network (paragraph [0007] lines 1-10; Examiner’s Notes: users, e.g., USER #1, USER #2, etc., illustrated in FIG. 2 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a plurality of guest operators;”
in fact, assigning, to each sub-band, e.g., 107 as illustrated in FIG. 4, a user, e.g., USER #1 among USER #1, USER #2, etc., in the TDD system/network in the prior art teaches the limitation of “assigning, to each sub-band of the plurality of sub-bands, a respective guest operator of a plurality of guest operator of the telecommunications network” in the instant application); and
allocating, for each sub-band assigned to the respective guest operator, at least one type of transmission to a plurality of time slots of the sub-band (paragraph [0016] lines 1-8; Examiner’s Notes: the downlink signal/transmission in downlink slot 109, as illustrated in FIG. 5B in the prior art teaches the limitation of “at least one type of transmission;”
in fact, allocating/assigning, each sub-band assigned to the respective USER, e.g., USER #1, the downlink signal/transmission in downlink slot 109, in the TDD system as illustrated in FIG. 5B in the prior of machine learning in the prior art teaches the limitation of “allocating, for each sub-band assigned to the respective guest operator, at least one type of transmission to a plurality of time slots of the sub-band” in the instant application).
Regarding claim 15, Miya teaches the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium comprising instructions that, when executed by a processing device, cause the processing device to perform operations (paragraph [0035] lines 1-16; Examiner’s Notes: BS202 depicted in FIG. 6 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a processing device” in the instant application;
“the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium comprising instructions that, when executed by a processing device, cause the processing device to perform operations” is anticipated under 35 U.S.C. 102 based on the teaching of BS202 in the radio communication system in the prior art. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255 n.4, 195 USPQ 430, 433 n.4 (CCPA 1977)) comprising:
receiving, from a guest operator assigned to a sub-band of a frequency band of a telecommunications network implementing a shared radio unit architecture, a request to modify a downlink to uplink ratio associated with the sub-band to implement time division duplexing (paragraphs [0007] lines 1-10 & [0017] lines 1-14; Examiner’s Notes: MS201 illustrated in FIG. 6 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a guest operator;”
the TDD system/network regards to the traffic/frequency band sharing as illustrated in FIG. 4 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a telecommunications network implementing a shared radio unit architecture;”
the ratio of the length of the downlink slot 109 to the length of the uplink slot 110, as illustrated in FIG. 5B in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a downlink to uplink ratio;”
in fact, receiving from UE, e.g., MS201 assigned to a sub-band 107 among 105-107 in the TDD system/network regards to the traffic/frequency band sharing as illustrated in FIG. 4, information/request to change the ratio of the length of the downlink slot 109 to the length of the uplink slot 110, as illustrated in FIG. 6 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “receiving, from a guest operator assigned to a sub-band of a frequency band of a telecommunications network implementing a shared radio unit architecture, a request to modify a downlink to uplink ratio associated with the sub-band to implement time division duplexing” in the instant application); and
modifying the downlink to uplink ratio (paragraph [0017] lines 1-14; Examiner’s Notes: changing/modifying the ratio of the length of the downlink slot 109 to the length of the uplink slot 110, as illustrated in FIG. 5B in the prior art teaches the limitation of “modifying the downlink to uplink ratio” in the instant application).
Regarding claim 16, Miya further teaches the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, wherein the sub-band comprises a plurality of time slots (paragraph [0016] lines 1-8; Examiner’s Notes: the sub-band including slots, e.g., downlink slot 109, uplink slot 110, etc., as illustrated in FIG. 5B in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein the sub-band comprises a plurality of time slots” in the instant application), and
wherein the plurality of time slots is allocated at least one type of transmission (paragraph [0016] lines 1-8; Examiner’s Notes: the downlink signal/transmission in downlink slot 109, as illustrated in FIG. 5B in the prior art teaches the limitation of “at least one type of transmission;”
in fact, allocating/assigning, each sub-band assigned to the respective USER, e.g., USER #1, the downlink signal/transmission in downlink slot 109, in the TDD system as illustrated in FIG. 5B in the prior of machine learning in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein the plurality of time slots is allocated at least one type of transmission” in the instant application).
Regarding claim 17, Miya further teaches the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, wherein the guest operator is not a boundary guest operator of the telecommunications network (paragraphs [0004] lines 1-8 & [0018] lines 1-12; Examiner’s Notes: UE, e.g., MS201, at the cover area in the TDD system/network, as illustrated in FIG. 6 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein the guest operator is not a boundary guest operator of the telecommunications network” in the instant application).
Regarding claim 18, Miya further teaches the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, further comprising:
dividing the frequency band into a plurality of sub-bands comprising the sub-band (paragraphs [0014] lines 1-10 & [0032] lines 1-15; Examiner’s Notes: dividing/securing, into sub-bands, e.g., 105 and 107, the frequency band of the TDD system/network regards to the traffic/frequency band sharing, as illustrated in FIG. 4 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “dividing the frequency band into a plurality of sub-bands comprising the sub-band” in the instant application);
assigning, to each sub-band of the plurality of sub-bands, a respective guest operator of a plurality of guest operator of the telecommunications network (paragraph [0007] lines 1-10; Examiner’s Notes: users, e.g., USER #1, USER #2, etc., illustrated in FIG. 2 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a plurality of guest operators;”
in fact, assigning, to each sub-band, e.g., 107 as illustrated in FIG. 4, a user, e.g., USER #1 among USER #1, USER #2, etc., in the TDD system/network in the prior art teaches the limitation of “assigning, to each sub-band of the plurality of sub-bands, a respective guest operator of a plurality of guest operator of the telecommunications network” in the instant application); and
allocating, for each sub-band assigned to the respective guest operator, at least one type of transmission to a plurality of time slots of the sub-band (paragraph [0016] lines 1-8; Examiner’s Notes: the downlink signal/transmission in downlink slot 109, as illustrated in FIG. 5B in the prior art teaches the limitation of “at least one type of transmission;”
in fact, allocating/assigning, each sub-band assigned to the respective USER, e.g., USER #1, the downlink signal/transmission in downlink slot 109, in the TDD system as illustrated in FIG. 5B in the prior of machine learning in the prior art teaches the limitation of “allocating, for each sub-band assigned to the respective guest operator, at least one type of transmission to a plurality of time slots of the sub-band” in the instant application).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
15. 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 of this title, 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.
16. Claims 6-7, 13-14, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miya (US 2002/0105935) in view of Hosseini et al. (US 2018/0091285).
Regarding claim 6, Miya teaches the method without explicitly teaching implementing a static sub-band.
Hosseini et al. from the same or similar field of endeavor teach implementing fairness of the method, wherein a second downlink to uplink ratio associated with a second guest operator assigned to a second sub-band of the frequency band is static (paragraph [0019] lines 1-16; Examiner’s Notes: Examiner’s Notes: the resource/frequency band having a static TDD pattern in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a second sub-band of the frequency band is static;”
In fact, the downlink to uplink ratio associated to a UE assigned to a resource/frequency band having a static TDD pattern in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein a second downlink to uplink ratio associated with a second guest operator assigned to a second sub-band of the frequency band is static” in the instant application).
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in art to implement the method of Hosseini et al. in the system of Miya.
The motivation for implementing a static sub-band, is to further enhance the mechanism for the base station allocating resources for communication with a UE, wherein the resources include subframes, and each subframe includes one or more shortened transmission time intervals (sTTIs), each sTTI is assigned a transmission direction according to a time division duplex (TDD) pattern, based on traffic needs from other UEs or base stations, the base station determines to modify the TDD pattern used for communication.
Regarding claim 7, Miya further teaches the method, wherein the second guest operator is a boundary guest operator of the telecommunications network (paragraph [0018] lines 1-12; Examiner’s Notes: UE, e.g., MS201, at the edge of the cover area in the TDD system/network, as illustrated in FIG. 6 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein the second guest operator is a boundary guest operator of the telecommunications network” in the instant application).
Regarding claim 13, Miya teaches the system without explicitly teaching implementing a static sub-band.
Hosseini et al. from the same or similar field of endeavor teach implementing fairness of the method, wherein a second downlink to uplink ratio associated with a second guest operator assigned to a second sub-band of the frequency band is static (paragraph [0019] lines 1-16; Examiner’s Notes: Examiner’s Notes: the resource/frequency band having a static TDD pattern in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a second sub-band of the frequency band is static;”
In fact, the downlink to uplink ratio associated to a UE assigned to a resource/frequency band having a static TDD pattern in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein a second downlink to uplink ratio associated with a second guest operator assigned to a second sub-band of the frequency band is static” in the instant application).
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in art to implement the method of Hosseini et al. in the system of Miya.
The motivation for implementing a static sub-band, is to further enhance the mechanism for the base station allocating resources for communication with a UE, wherein the resources include subframes, and each subframe includes one or more shortened transmission time intervals (sTTIs), each sTTI is assigned a transmission direction according to a time division duplex (TDD) pattern, based on traffic needs from other UEs or base stations, the base station determines to modify the TDD pattern used for communication.
Regarding claim 14, Miya further teaches the system, wherein the second guest operator is a boundary guest operator of the telecommunications network (paragraph [0018] lines 1-12; Examiner’s Notes: UE, e.g., MS201, at the edge of the cover area in the TDD system/network, as illustrated in FIG. 6 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein the second guest operator is a boundary guest operator of the telecommunications network” in the instant application).
Regarding claim 19, Miya teaches the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium without explicitly teaching implementing a static sub-band.
Hosseini et al. from the same or similar field of endeavor teach implementing fairness of the method, wherein a second downlink to uplink ratio associated with a second guest operator assigned to a second sub-band of the frequency band is static (paragraph [0019] lines 1-16; Examiner’s Notes: Examiner’s Notes: the resource/frequency band having a static TDD pattern in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a second sub-band of the frequency band is static;”
In fact, the downlink to uplink ratio associated to a UE assigned to a resource/frequency band having a static TDD pattern in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein a second downlink to uplink ratio associated with a second guest operator assigned to a second sub-band of the frequency band is static” in the instant application).
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in art to implement the method of Hosseini et al. in the system of Miya.
The motivation for implementing a static sub-band, is to further enhance the mechanism for the base station allocating resources for communication with a UE, wherein the resources include subframes, and each subframe includes one or more shortened transmission time intervals (sTTIs), each sTTI is assigned a transmission direction according to a time division duplex (TDD) pattern, based on traffic needs from other UEs or base stations, the base station determines to modify the TDD pattern used for communication.
Regarding claim 20, Miya further teaches the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, wherein the second guest operator is a boundary guest operator of the telecommunications network (paragraph [0018] lines 1-12; Examiner’s Notes: UE, e.g., MS201, at the edge of the cover area in the TDD system/network, as illustrated in FIG. 6 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein the second guest operator is a boundary guest operator of the telecommunications network” in the instant application).
Conclusion
17. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to
Amerga et al. (US 2013/0294318) is generally directed to various aspects of the method for transmitting a downlink signal at a base station in a wireless communication system includes generating a user equipment (UE)-specific reference signal sequence and mapping the generated sequence to resource elements (REs) predetermined according to antenna port groups.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WEI ZHAO whose telephone number is (571)270-5672. The examiner can normally be reached from 8:00AM to 5:00PM Monday through Friday.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, JAE Y. LEE can be reached on 571-270-3936. 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.
/WEI ZHAO/ Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2479
Prosecution Insights