DETAILED ACTION
Claims 21, 23-31, and 33-42 are presented for consideration.
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) 21, 23-31, and 33-42 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kim et al. [ US Patent Application No 2023/0189348 ].
3. As per claim 21, Kim discloses the invention as claimed including a method comprising:
determining, for an enhanced-reduced capability user equipment, a type of data that will be communicated with the enhanced-reduced capability user equipment [ i.e. redcap device type information included in UE capability information and reported by a UE to a base station, device type for each use case such as Industrial Wireless sensor (IWS), video surveillance, wearables ] [ paragraphs 0244, and 0277-0290 ];
selecting, based on the type of data, a maximum data rate scaling factor [ i.e. the scaling factor given by the higher layer parameter scalingFactor, and the maximum data rate can be computed ] [ Table 8; and paragraphs 0247-0252 ]; and
communicating, with the enhanced-reduced capability user equipment, data using the maximum data rate scaling factor [ i.e. to transmit and receive a channel/signal/data/information ] [ Figure 16; and paragraphs 0035, 0379, and 0393 ].
4. As per claim 23, Kim discloses dynamically determining the maximum data rate scaling factor using a maximum data rate for the enhanced-reduced capability user equipment [ i.e. scalingFactor and can take values ] [ Table 8; and paragraphs 0247-0252 ].
5. As per claim 24, Kim discloses buffering, in memory, data for the enhanced- reduced capability user equipment using the maximum data rate scaling factor [ i.e. buffer Status report on an amount of data available for transmission ] [ paragraph 0156 ].
6. As per claim 25, Kim discloses wherein communicating the data comprises communicating, to the enhanced-reduced capability user equipment, buffered data from the memory [ i.e. buffer Status report ] [ paragraph 0156 ].
7. As per claim 26, Kim discloses wherein communicating the data comprises sending, by a base station, the data to the enhanced-reduced capability user equipment [ i.e. receiving from base station ] [ Abstract; and Figures 7, 8A, and 8B ].
8. As per claim 27, Kim discloses wherein communicating the data comprises receiving, by a base station, the data from the enhanced-reduced capability user equipment [ i.e. transmit to the base station ] [ Abstract; and Figures 7, 8A, and 8B ].
9. As per claim 28, Kim discloses wherein determining the maximum data rate scaling factor comprises determining the maximum data rate scaling factor selected from a group comprising 0.1, 0.2, 0.4, 0.8, or 1 [ i.e. scalingFactor can take values of 1, 0.8, 0.4 ] [ Table 8 ].
10. As per claim 29, Kim discloses wherein determining the maximum data rate scaling factor comprises determining, by a base station, the maximum data rate scaling factor using a user equipment capability report [ i.e. Redcap device type information included in UE capability information and reported by a UE to a base station/network ] [ paragraph 0244-0246 ].
11. As per claim 30, Kim discloses determining the maximum data rate scaling factor comprises determining, by a base station, the maximum data rate scaling factor using a scaling factor index received from the enhanced-reduced capability user equipment [ Figures 3-5; and paragraph 0093 ].
12. As per claims 31, 33-40, they are rejected for similar reasons as stated above in claims 21, 23-30.
13. As per claim 41, Kim discloses wherein the type of data comprises industrial wireless sensor data, economic video data, lo-tier high-end video data, mid-tier high-end video data, and top-tier high-end video data [ i.e. industrial wireless sensor device types 1 and 2, video surveillance device types 2, 3, wearables device types 4, 5, 6, 7, and low-end services ] [ paragraphs 0206-0216, and 0278-0280 ].
14. As per claim 42, it is rejected for similar reasons as stated above in claim 41.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 21, 23-31, and 33-42 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.
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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Choi et al. [ US Patent Application No 2023/0189308 ] discloses reduced capability user equipment comprising communication module to receive configuration information for configuring a first downlink bandwidth part and a first uplink bandwidth part to be used for an initial access procedure
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DUSTIN NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-3971. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9-6 PST.
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, Brian Gillis can be reached at 571-2727952. 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.
/DUSTIN NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2446
Prosecution Insights