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 .
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: communication unit and control unit in claims 1-4.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 1-5 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.
Claims 1, 4, and 5 recite the limitation “in a case wherein scheduling is performed in the aggregation performed frequency band according to a unit” is confusing as written. The limitation will be interpreted as: in a case where scheduling is performed in the frequency band where carrier aggregation is performed according to a unit.
Claims 2 and 3 are rejected because they depend from a rejected claim.
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 (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 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.
Claim(s) 1-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sun (US 20180227777).
Re claim 1:
Sun discloses a terminal comprising: a communication unit configured to perform an uplink or downlink communication by using a frequency band in which aggregation is performed by carrier aggregation (Para.[0074] As described above, for transmission schemes utilizing carrier aggregation techniques); and
a control unit configured to, in a case where scheduling is performed in the aggregation-performed frequency band according to a unit including a plurality of component carriers (Para.[0058] CFI information may be common across all Coresets in a Coreset group – Examiner Note: CFI is “a unit”),
expect that a control resource set frequency resource having the unit including the plurality of component carriers is obtained by calculating a total sum of control resource set frequency resources of component carriers included in the plurality of component carriers (Para.[0089] In embodiments where carrier aggregation is utilized for the transmission, the transmission may be a multicarrier transmission and the UE may monitor a first carrier of the transmission to detect a primary Coreset, and may monitor a second carrier of the transmission to detect a secondary Coreset) or
expect that a control resource set frequency resource will be configured by using the unit including the plurality of component carriers (Para.[0058] CFI information may be common across all Coresets in a Coreset group).
Re claim 2:
Sun discloses the terminal as claimed in claim 1, wherein the control unit expects that the control resource set frequency resource having the unit including the plurality of component carriers is obtained by calculating a total sum of control resource set frequency resources of component carriers included in the plurality of component carriers (Para.[0089] In embodiments where carrier aggregation is utilized for the transmission, the transmission may be a multicarrier transmission and the UE may monitor a first carrier of the transmission to detect a primary Coreset, and may monitor a second carrier of the transmission to detect a secondary Coreset).
Re claim 3:
Sun discloses the terminal as claimed in claim 1, wherein the control unit expects that the control resource set frequency resource will be configured by using the unit including the plurality of component carriers (Para.[0058] CFI information may be common across all Coresets in a Coreset group).
Re claim 4: Claim 4 is rejected on the same grounds of rejection set forth in claim 1 from the perspective of the base station.
Re claim 5: Claim 5 is rejected on the same grounds of rejection set forth in claim 1.
FOR COMPACT PROSECUTION, A SECOND GROUNDS OF REJECTION IS SET FORTH BELOW INTERPRETING “UNIT” AS A VIRTUAL CC
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 (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 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) 1,3,4, and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Yang (US 20230198690).
Re claim 1:
Yang discloses a terminal comprising: a communication unit configured to perform an uplink or downlink communication by using a frequency band in which aggregation is performed by carrier aggregation (Fig.7 ref. 702 Aggregate a number of component carriers (CCs) to generate a Virtual CC and Para.[0052] A scheduler 246 may schedule UEs for data transmission on the downlink and/or uplink); and
a control unit configured to, in a case where scheduling is performed in the aggregation-performed frequency band according to a unit including a plurality of component carriers (Fig.7 ref. 704 Allocate data channel resources in the virtual CC based on a virtual bandwidth part (BWP) and ref. 706 Allocate control channel resources in the virtual CC based on the virtual BWP and Para.[0052] A scheduler 246 may schedule UEs for data transmission on the downlink and/or uplink),
expect that a control resource set frequency resource having the unit including the plurality of component carriers is obtained by calculating a total sum of control resource set frequency resources of component carriers included in the plurality of component carriers or (alternative addressed below)
expect that a control resource set frequency resource will be configured by using the unit including the plurality of component carriers (Para.[0084] In another configuration, the frequency domain resources are allocated to the CORESET of one CC (e.g., a first CC) in the virtual CC. In this configuration, the bitmap (e.g., first bitmap) is a 45-bit bitmap and each bit allocates frequency domain resources for a number of resource blocks in the virtual CC. The number of resource blocks may be six. Additionally, in this configuration, the frequency domain resources configured for the CORESET of the first CC may be mirrored to other CCs in the virtual CC. Another bitmap (e.g., second bitmap) controls the mirroring. For example, the second bitmap identifies particular CCs of the other CCs that should receive the CORESET resource allocation of the first CC. A length of the second bitmap may be based on a number of CCs in the virtual CC. The CORESET may be applied over all REG clusters and a single search space may be hashed over all clusters of the CORESET).
Re claim 3:
Yang discloses the terminal as claimed in claim 1, wherein the control unit expects that the control resource set frequency resource will be configured by using the unit including the plurality of component carriers (Para.[0084] In another configuration, the frequency domain resources are allocated to the CORESET of one CC (e.g., a first CC) in the virtual CC. In this configuration, the bitmap (e.g., first bitmap) is a 45-bit bitmap and each bit allocates frequency domain resources for a number of resource blocks in the virtual CC. The number of resource blocks may be six. Additionally, in this configuration, the frequency domain resources configured for the CORESET of the first CC may be mirrored to other CCs in the virtual CC. Another bitmap (e.g., second bitmap) controls the mirroring. For example, the second bitmap identifies particular CCs of the other CCs that should receive the CORESET resource allocation of the first CC. A length of the second bitmap may be based on a number of CCs in the virtual CC. The CORESET may be applied over all REG clusters and a single search space may be hashed over all clusters of the CORESET).
Re claim 4: Claim 4 is rejected on the same grounds of rejection set forth in claim 1 from the perspective of the base station.
Re claim 5: Claim 5 is rejected on the same grounds of rejection set forth in claim 1.
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.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang (US 20230198690) in view of Zheng (US 20240178981).
Re claim 2:
As discussed above, Yang meets all the limitations of the parent claim.
Yang does not explicitly disclose the terminal as claimed in claim 1, wherein the control unit expects that the control resource set frequency resource having the unit including the plurality of component carriers is obtained by calculating a total sum of control resource set frequency resources of component carriers included in the plurality of component carriers.
Zheng discloses the terminal as claimed in claim 1, wherein the control unit expects that the control resource set frequency resource having the unit including the plurality of component carriers is obtained by calculating a total sum of control resource set frequency resources of component carriers included in the plurality of component carriers (Para.[0070] As further illustrated in FIG. 4, two or more (for example, up to five) CORESETs may be grouped into a CORESET pool. Each CORESET pool may be associated with a CORESET pool index… In a multi-TRP configuration, each CORESET pool index value may be associated with a particular TRP 405 and Para.[0066] In multi-DCI, a carrier aggregation (CA) framework may be leveraged to treat different TRPs as different virtual component carriers from UE capability perspective).
Yang and Zheng are analogous because they both pertain to data communications.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yang to include a CORESET pool as taught by Zheng in order to improve reliability and increase throughput (Zheng Para.[0063]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Takeda (US 20210314993) shows virtual component carriers, scheduling, and CORESET.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMMAD SAJID ADHAMI whose telephone number is (571)272-8615. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30-5:00 PM.
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 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.
/MOHAMMAD S ADHAMI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2471
Prosecution Insights