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 .
This action is response to the application filed on 08/09/2024. Claims 21-32 are cancelled. Claims 1-20 are pending and herein considered.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 08/09/2024. These drawings are reviewed and accepted by the Examiner.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS), submitted on 08/09/2024 and 05/15/2025, are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CRR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 8, 17 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Lin et al. (WO-2020246858-A1).
For claim 1:
Lin discloses an apparatus comprising processing circuitry configured to: configure a first search space (SS) set of a first slot group for multi-slot physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) monitoring (MSM) (see Lin, at least paragraph [0301]; PDCCH transmissions in a search space set, for example a CSS set or a UGSS set, including support of repetitions and multi-beam operation and multi-slot scheduling);
configure a second SS set of a second slot group for MSM, wherein the second SS set comprises a first type of common search space (CSS) limited to a maximum number of locations (see Lin, at least paragraph [0200]; a set of PDCCH candidates for a group of UEs to monitor can be defined in terms of a PDCCH search space set, for example a CSS set or a UGSS set. A UE can be configured to monitor up to N"SS_max>=l search space set(s), wherein the search space sets can be CSS sets or UGSS sets. N"SS_max can be predefined in the specification of the system operation); and
perform MSM using the first SS set and the second SS set (see Lin, at least paragraph [0042]-[0044]; [0049]; BS for determining search space sets for PDCCH monitoring. The BS includes a processor configured to generate a configuration for search space sets. The configuration can include a first group of search space sets and a second group of search space sets, and a first group index for the first group of search space sets and a second group index for the second group of search space sets).
For claims 2 and 18:
In addition to rejection in claims 2 and 18, Lin further discloses wherein the second SS set is for a plurality of second slot groups and the maximum number of locations is per each consecutive second slot group (see Lin, at least paragraph [0301]-[0303]; PDCCH monitoring pattern within a slot of associated search space sets, such that N_MOs =Ts *N"MOs_slot, where N"MOs_slot is the number of PDCCH monitoring occasions within a slot indicated by the configured PDCCH monitoring pattern, or the number of start OFDM symbol within a slot associated with search space sets).
For claim 8:
Lin discloses an apparatus comprising processing circuitry:
generate, for transmission to a user equipment (UE), multi-slot physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) monitoring (MSM) parameters (see Lin, at least paragraph [0301]; PDCCH transmissions in a search space set, for example a CSS set or a UGSS set, including support of repetitions and multi-beam operation and multi-slot scheduling), wherein the UE utilizes multiple slot groups to perform MSM and wherein a search space (SS) set for a type of slot group comprises a first type of common search space (CSS) limited to a maximum number of locations (see Lin, at least paragraph [0200]; a set of PDCCH candidates for a group of UEs to monitor can be defined in terms of a PDCCH search space set, for example a CSS set or a UGSS set. A UE can be configured to monitor up to N"SS_max>=1 search space set(s), wherein the search space sets can be CSS sets or UGSS sets. N"SS_max can be predefined in the specification of the system operation);
generate information for transmission to the UE on the PDCCH (see Lin, at least paragraph [0281]; a type of PDCCH monitored in search space, for example CSS or UGSS, for multicasting common control information to UEs).
For claim 17:
For claim 17, claim 17 is directed to a user equipment (UE), which has similar scope as claim 1. Therefore, claim 17 remains un-patentable for the same reasons.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 3, 14 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over anticipated Lin et al. (WO-2020246858-A1) in view of NPL- Moderator (Lenovo), "Draft Discussion on PDCCH monitoring Enhancements"; 3GPP TSG RAN WG1, Meeting #106, August 27, 2021, 50 sheets; hereinafter “NPL-Moderator (Lenovo)”.
For claims 3 and 19:
Lin does not explicitly disclose wherein the maximum number of locations per each consecutive slot group is equal to 1.
NPL-Moderator (Lenovo), from the same or similar fields of endeavor, discloses what Lin fails: value of Y can be 1 slot for 480 kHz and 2 slots for 960 kHz as a start point (see NPL-Moderator (Lenovo), at least section 3, 3.1, 3.1.1; R1-2106443).
Therefore, it would have been obvious statement before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a system comprises a method as taught by NPL-Moderator (Lenovo). The motivation for doing this is to provide system networks that can improve scheduling flexibility and power efficiency.
For claim 14:
Lin does not explicitly disclose wherein a slot group size is set to 4, a subcarrier spacing (SCS) is 960 kilo hertz (kHz) and the SS set comprises a type 0 SS, and wherein only aggregation levels 4 and 8 are supported.
NPL-Moderator (Lenovo), from the same or similar fields of endeavor, discloses what Lin fails: multi-slot PDCCH processing capability ranges for 480/960 kHz SCS as the starting point and additional PDCCH monitoring group sizes should be supported: 1 or 2 for 480 kHz SCS, 2 or 4 for 960 kHz SCS (see NPL-Moderator (Lenovo), at least section 3, 3.1.13; 3.1.14). Therefore, it would have been obvious statement before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a system comprises a method as taught by NPL-Moderator (Lenovo). The motivation for doing this is to provide system networks that can improve scheduling flexibility and power efficiency.
Claims 5 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over anticipated Lin et al. (WO-2020246858-A1) in view of Kuang et al. (EP-4160964-A1).
For claim 5:
Lin does not explicitly disclose wherein the second SS set further comprises a second different type of CSS and the maximum number of locations is for both the first type of CSS and the second type of CSS.
Kuang, from the same or similar fields of endeavor, discloses what Lin fails: a UE performs a monitoring operation of the PDCCH, and the UE monitors a set of PDCCH candidates, which is defined in terms of PDCCH search space sets: a Type1-PDCCH CSS set configured by ra-SearchSpace in PDCCH-ConfigCommon for a DCI format with CRC scrambled by a RA-RNTI, a MsgB-RNTI, or a TC-RNTI on the primary cell a Type2-PDCCH CSS set configured by pagingSearchSpace in PDCCH-ConfigCommon for a DCI format with CRC scrambled by a P-RNTI on the primary cell of the MCG a (see Kuang, at least paragraph [0052]; [0122]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious statement before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a system comprises a method as taught by Kuang. The motivation for doing this is to provide system networks that can improve downlink control channel monitoring procedures.
For claim 7:
Lin does not explicitly disclose wherein the second SS set further comprises a second different type of CSS, wherein the first type of CSS and the second type of CSS are located within a same slot of the second slot group.
Kuang, from the same or similar fields of endeavor, discloses what Lin fails: monitoring opportunities may correspondingly be defined by the location of the remaining CSS (and its monitoring occasions) configured to the UE to be monitored additionally by the UE, e.g. those time slots within the time slot group containing one or more of the remaining CSS. Conversely, the BS can transmit the remaining CSS in further monitoring opportunities within the time slot group outside the Y monitoring time slots, as defined by the corresponding monitoring occasions of the remaining CSS (see Kuang, at least paragraph [0124]; [0141]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious statement before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a system comprises a method as taught by Kuang. The motivation for doing this is to provide system networks that can improve downlink control channel monitoring procedures.
Claims 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over anticipated Lin et al. (WO-2020246858-A1) in view of NPL- Moderator (Lenovo), "Draft Discussion on PDCCH monitoring Enhancements"; 3GPP TSG RAN WG1, Meeting #106, August 27, 2021, 50 sheets; hereinafter “NPL-Moderator (Lenovo)”.
For claim 9:
In addition to rejection in claim 9, Lin does not explicitly disclose wherein the SS set is for a plurality of consecutive slot groups of a same type and the maximum number of locations is per each consecutive slot group of the same type.
NPL-Moderator (Lenovo), from the same or similar fields of endeavor, discloses what Lin fails: a slot group with a same type (see NPL-Moderator (Lenovo), section 3.2.6 (R1-2107001))
Therefore, it would have been obvious statement before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a system comprises a method as taught by NPL-Moderator (Lenovo). The motivation for doing this is to provide a system networks can support the HARQ feedback configuration and/or the HARQ state configuration.
For claim 10:
In addition to rejection in claim 10, Lin- NPL-Moderator (Lenovo) further disclose wherein the maximum number of locations per each consecutive slot group is equal to 1 (see NPL-Moderator (Lenovo), at least section 3, 3.1, 3.1.1; R1-2106443; value of Y can be 1 slot for 480 kHz and 2 slots for 960 kHz as a start point). Therefore, it would have been obvious statement before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a system comprises a method as taught by NPL-Moderator (Lenovo). The motivation for doing this is to provide system networks that can improve scheduling flexibility and power efficiency.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over anticipated Lin et al. (WO-2020246858-A1) in view of NPL- Moderator (Lenovo), "Draft Discussion on PDCCH monitoring Enhancements"; 3GPP TSG RAN WG1, Meeting #106, August 27, 2021, 50 sheets; hereinafter “NPL-Moderator (Lenovo)” further in view of Kuang et al. (EP-4160964-A1).
For claim 12:
Lin- NPL- Moderator (Lenovo) does not explicitly disclose wherein the SS set further comprises a second different type of CSS and the maximum number of locations is for both the first type of CSS and the second type of CSS.
Kuang, from the same or similar fields of endeavor, discloses what Lin fails: a UE performs a monitoring operation of the PDCCH, and the UE monitors a set of PDCCH candidates, which is defined in terms of PDCCH search space sets: a Type1-PDCCH CSS set configured by ra-SearchSpace in PDCCH-ConfigCommon for a DCI format with CRC scrambled by a RA-RNTI, a MsgB-RNTI, or a TC-RNTI on the primary cell a Type2-PDCCH CSS set configured by pagingSearchSpace in PDCCH-ConfigCommon for a DCI format with CRC scrambled by a P-RNTI on the primary cell of the MCG a (see Kuang, at least paragraph [0052]; [0122]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious statement before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a system comprises a method as taught by Kuang. The motivation for doing this is to provide system networks that can improve downlink control channel monitoring procedures.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 6, 11, 13, 15-16 and 20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim but would be allowable if rewritten in all independents form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims and if rewritten or amended to overcome any objection claims set forth in this Office action.
Conclusion
The prior arts made or recorded and not relied upon are considered pertinent to applicant's disclosures. Ma et al. (U.S 2021/0143937), discloses determining, by a terminal device, a blind detection capability of the terminal device; performing, by
the terminal device, PDCCH blind detection in one time unit based on PDCCH configuration information and the blind detection capability of the terminal device, where the blind detection capability of the terminal device includes N maximum
quantities, of blind detection times, corresponding to N subcarrier spacings in the time unit and/or N maximum quantities, of channel estimation control channel elements
CCEs, corresponding to the N subcarrier spacings in the time unit, where N is a positive integer.
Nogami et al. (U.S 2020/0374967), discloses a method PDCCH monitoring occasions for slot-based scheduling. A search space set may be identified for a combination of a control resource set, a DCI format (or DCI format group including DCI format having a same DCI payload size). In the example shown in FIG. 16, two search space sets are seen, search space set #0 and #1.
Choi et al. (U.S 2024/0349292), discloses monitoring a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) in a serving cell is set by combination of X and Y, but the X is a slot-group in a series of slots included. The slot-groups repeat in succession without overlapping, and Y is the number of consecutive slots within X slots.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAN HUONG TRUONG whose telephone number is (571)270-5829. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri (7:30AM-5:00PM).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, RICKY NGO can be reached on 571-272-3139. 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.
/Lan-Huong Truong/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit: 2464
09/04/2026
Prosecution Insights