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 office action is in response to application filed 10/04/2024.
Claims 1-6 are cancelled. Claims 7-10 are newly presented in preliminary amendment.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/28/2025 and 10/04/2024 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 7, 9, 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takeda et al. (US 2021/0045017 A1) in view of 3GPP (3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #107bis-e, R1-2200308, referred to as 3GPP from hereon, cited in IDS).
Regarding claims 7, 9, 10, Takeda discloses a radio communication system or method comprising
a terminal (see fig. 8, 115-b) and a base station (see fig. 8, 105-b),
wherein the base station includes a transmitter (see fig. 14, 1435) that transmits: a PDSCH configuration comprising a higher layer parameter to be used in the MBS, for indication a size of the DCI (see para. 0088-0090, 0094, discloses configuration including size of DCI);
wherein the terminal includes: a receiver that receives the DCI and the PDSCH configuration (see para. 0088-0090, 0094, discloses multicast configuration i.e. PDSCH configuration and receiving DCI); and
wherein the processor determines a size of the DCI based on the PDSCH configuration which is the higher layer parameter to be used in the MBS (see para. 0088, 0094, discloses higher layer parameter configuration include size of DCI).
Takeda fails to disclose but 3GPP discloses transmitting downlink control information (DCI) scrambled by a group-common RNTI for multicast in a multicast/broadcast service (MBS) in which data is delivered for a plurality of terminals (page 4, section 5.1.6.2 discloses scrambling of DCI using G-RNTI), and
a processor that controls whether or not to enable at least any one of two or more transport blocks based on the DCI when the two or more transport blocks are configured by the PDSCH configuration comprising the higher layer parameter to be used in the MBS (see section 5.1.3.2 page 13 maxNrofCodeWordsScheduledByDCI indicates configuration enabling or disabling of any two or more transmission blocks).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify to include scrambling of the DCI and controlling enabling and disabling of transport blocks as described by 3GPP.
The motivation for doing so would be to allow enabling multicast transmission by performing necessary configuration of transmission parameters.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takeda in view of 3GPP as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of Gordaychik (US 2019/0363843 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Takeda fails to disclose but Gordaychik discloses the terminal further comprising a transmitter that reports to a network that the terminal supports the DCI (para. 0222, see also claim 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to report the support for DCI as disclosed by Gordaychik.
The motivation for doing so would be to allow notifying the capability to allow network to figure out the compatibility with the UE.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
3GPP – R1-2112471 (cited in IDS) explicitly discloses configuration of transmit block via PDSCH configuration and including the parameter in the config (page 11).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NISHANT B DIVECHA whose telephone number is (571)270-3125. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 AM-6:00 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, Deborah J. Reynolds can be reached at 571-272-0734. 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.
NISHANT B. DIVECHA
Supervisory Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2419
/Nishant Divecha/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2419
Prosecution Insights