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 .
Claims 8 and 11-24 are pending.
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)(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.
Claims 8, 11, 12, 16-19, 23 and 24 are rejected under both 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Lei et al, application no. 2022/0007395, hereinafter known as Lei (IDS submitted art).
As to claim 8, Lei discloses a communication apparatus (Lei, figure 20, communication apparatus as an User Equipment (UE)), comprising: reception circuitry, which, in operation, receives a control signal including information on a configuration of a transmission direction for each of a plurality of time resources in a unit period (Lei, [0010], UE receives from base station downlink control information, DCI; control information provides slot information to UE, specifically uplink, downlink or flexible time resources configuration; [0004], time resources of slot configured as uplink, downlink or flexible as per New Radio TDD standard well known in the art), the configuration including different transmission directions in a same time resource (Lei, [0010], time resources in a slot can be uplink, downlink or flexible); and control circuitry, which, in operation, determines the configuration based on the information (Lei, [0222], control circuitry of UE to operate according to configuration provided in the Slot Format Indicator SFI for time resources in a slot, include using the times resources as uplink, downlink or flexible).
As to claim 11, Lei discloses wherein the information on the configuration is indicated individually for a first part of a frequency band and a second part of the frequency band (Lei, [0006]-[0007], [0097]-[0098], frequency bandwidth including subbands being configured as uplink or downlink individually).
As to claim 12, Lei discloses wherein the configuration of the transmission direction is determined based on the control signal and a TDD UL/DL configuration indicated by a higher layer signaling (Lei, [0004], [0113], [0121], [0165], RRC signaling, higher layer signaling, used to indicate SFI signaling that provides the uplink and downlink configuration for time resources in a slot).
As to claim 16, Lei discloses wherein each of the plurality of time resources is a symbol, and the unit period is a slot (Lei, [0004], [0052], common slot structure of the art with plural time resource symbols in a lot).
As to claims 17-19 and 23, the claims are rejected as applied to claims 8, 11, 12 and 16 respectively above by Lei.
As to claim 24, the claim is rejected as applied to claim 1 above by Lei.
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, 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 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 13, 14, 20 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lei in view of Abotabl et al, application no. 2021/0297226, hereinafter known as Abotabl.
As to claim 13, Lei dicloses the communication apparatus according to claim 8. Lei does not disclose however Abotabl discloses wherein each of the plurality of time resources is a symbol, and a downlink symbol among the plurality of time resources is overwritten with a symbol supporting both of a downlink direction and an uplink direction (Abotabl, [0110], either or both uplink and downlink time resources can be overwritten into either flexible symbol as uplink or downlink symbols).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Lei to include the limitations of wherein each of the plurality of time resources is a symbol, and a downlink symbol among the plurality of time resources is overwritten with a symbol supporting both of a downlink direction and an uplink direction as taught by Abotabl. Use of flexible symbols that can be written to be both uplink and downlink symbols provides spectral efficiency in allocating resources and lower latency for sending traffic when uplink or downlink symbol could be configured as soon as needed.
As to claim 14, Lei and Abotabl dicloses the communication apparatus according to claim 13. Lei does not disclose however Abotabl discloses wherein the downlink symbol is overwritten with the symbol supporting both of the downlink direction and the uplink direction by a higher layer signaling (Abotabl, [0108], RRC signaling, higher layer signaling, used to indicate SFI signaling that provides the uplink and downlink configuration for time resources in a slot).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Lei to include the limitations of wherein the downlink symbol is overwritten with the symbol supporting both of the downlink direction and the uplink direction by a higher layer signaling as taught by Abotabl. Higher signaling such as RRC signaling between devices in network are well known that indicates to UEs to how configure and process communications.
As to claims 20 and 21, the claims are rejected as applied to claims 13 and 14 respectively above by Lei in view of Abotabl.
Claims 15 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lei in view of Abotabl et al, application no. 2021/0352667, hereinafter known as Abotabl2.
As to claim 15, Lei dicloses the communication apparatus according to claim 8. Lei does not disclose however Abotabl2 discloses wherein a guard band is placed at symbols between a first part of a frequency band and an adjacent part of the frequency band where the transmission directions are different (Abotabl2, Figure 6, [0087], Guard band placed in between two frequency bands, one being an uplink band and one being a downlink band).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Lei to include the limitations of wherein a guard band is placed at symbols between a first part of a frequency band and an adjacent part of the frequency band where the transmission directions are different as taught by Abotabl2. Placing guard bands in between frequency bands is well known technique in the art to reduce interference in communicated signals.
As to claim 22, the claim is rejected as applied to claim 15 above by Lei in view of Abotabl2.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GAUTAM SHARMA whose telephone number is (571)270-7182. The examiner can normally be reached 11am-8pm.
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, Hassan Phillips can be reached at 571-272-3940. 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.
/GAUTAM SHARMA/ Examiner, Art Unit 2467
/HASSAN A PHILLIPS/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2467
Prosecution Insights