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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 14 are objected to because of the following informalities: the step “configuring, by a network device, use of at least two capabilities for physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) monitoring for a user equipment (UE)” is not clear to Examiner, should be rewritten as “configuring, by a network device, for user equipment (UE) to use of at least two capabilities for physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) monitoring.”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-20 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.
- Regarding to claim 1, the step “configuring, by a network device, use of at least two capabilities for physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) monitoring for a user equipment (UE)” is not clear to that the UE capable to monitor at least two PDCCH or UE capable to use at least two PDCCH monitoring. Appropriate clarification is required. Same rejection for claim 14.
- Regarding to claim 1, the term “a method” in line 4 is not clear that the same as the method in line 1 or not. Same rejection for claim 14.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4, 11, 14-15, 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Papasakellariou et al. (Pub No. 20200022144).
- With respect to claims 1, 14, Papasakellariou teaches a wireless communication method, comprising: configuring, by a network device, use of at least two capabilities for physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) monitoring for a user equipment (UE) (e.g. Fig. 11 shows the number of PDCCH monitoring in par. 119-120 discloses “the step “configuring, by a network device, use of at least two capabilities for physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) monitoring for a user equipment (UE)” is not clear to Examiner”; step 1610 in Fig. 16 where UE configured for monitoring PDCCH and par.271 where UE capability monitor number DCI format to number PDCCH monitoring); and determining a method for using the at least two capabilities according to a rule (e.g. abstract discloses the UE receiver DCI in PDCCH; par. 5-7).
- With respect to claims 2, 15, Papasakellariou teaches wherein the rule specifies that the at least two capabilities are used for different downlink control information formats (e.g. par. 5 disclose first and second DCI).
- With respect to claims 4, 17, Papasakellariou teaches wherein the rule specifies that the at least two capabilities are used for different search spaces (see Fig. 16 with first and second search space).
- With respect to claims 11, Papasakellariou teaches wherein in response to a first downlink control information and a second downlink control information being undetected (e.g. par. 119-120 discloses UE does not detect DCI formats), the method further includes: the first capability or the second capability is selected as a capability to be used (par. 267-268 discloses UE capability to decode number of DCI formats); or one capability is selected as a threshold to be used, and in a case where used resources or detection times exceed the threshold to be used, one of remaining capabilities is used as a threshold to be used; or a sum of all thresholds of the at least two capabilities is calculated, and a calculation result is used as a threshold to be used.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 5-10, 12-13, 16, 18-20 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892.
. Examiner's Note: Examiner has cited particular paragraphs or columns and line numbers in the references applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner.Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHUC H TRAN whose telephone number is (571)272-3172. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5 Flex.
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, Sujoy K. Kundu can be reached at 571-272-8586. 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.
/PHUC H TRAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2471
Prosecution Insights