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 .
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.
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.
Claims 1-4 and 6-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al.(CN 110380831, See translation) in view of Li et al. (2023/0246786).
For claims 1-4 and 6-16, Li et al.(CN 110380831, See translation) discloses a method (description, paragraphs 0134-0139 and pages 9-10), wherein transmission of a first time slot in the time slot aggregation transmission is indicated by downlink control information (DCI) or is configured by a radio resource control (RRC) message. The DCI is used for grant based transmission, and the RRC message is used for grant free transmission. When switching of bandwidth part occurs during a process of time slot aggregation transmission, a bandwidth part before the switching is mapped to a bandwidth part after the switching, and data in time slots where transmission has not been carried out in aggregated time slots by using the bandwidth part after the switching. Optionally, the step in which the bandwidth part before the switching is mapped to the bandwidth part after the switching comprises at least one of the following steps: an i-th resource block (RB) of the bandwidth part before the switching is mapped to an i-th RB of the bandwidth part after the switching, wherein i is an integer greater than or equal to 0 (equivalent to determining the position of transmission resources according to the positional relationship between the transmission resources, and the position of a starting or ending RB before switching being relatively consistent with the position of the starting or ending RB after the switching); an i-th RB of the bandwidth part before the switching is mapped to an (i+) or (i-)-th RB of the bandwidth part after the switching, wherein i and A are integers greater than or equal to 0 (equivalent to the position of the starting RB before the switching and the position of the starting RB after the switching being offset); a first RB of the bandwidth part before the switching is mapped to a second RB of the bandwidth part after the switching, wherein a frequency domain position of the first RB and a frequency domain position of the second RB arc the same; an i-th RB of the bandwidth part before the switching is mapped to an (i mod X)-th RB of the bandwidth part after the switching, wherein X is the number of RBs of the bandwidth part after the switching; and when the bandwidth part before the switching is greater than or equal to the bandwidth part after the switching, the RB of the bandwidth part before the switching is mapped from the lowest RB of the bandwidth part after the switching (equivalent to determining the size of the transmission resources according to a size relationship between the transmission resources). Li et al.(CN 110380831, See translation) further discloses (see citation above): determining a legal time slot used for time slot aggregation transmission according to time domain information and/or frequency domain information, and transmitting data in the legal time slot. The time domain information comprises at least one of the following: a start and length indicator value (SLIV); a time domain symbol start position; a time domain symbol duration; and bandwidth part conversion time. The frequency domain information comprises at least one of the following: a sub-carrier spacing of a bandwidth part; a sub-carrier spacing of a bandwidth part after a switching; a size of a bandwidth part; a size of a bandwidth part after a switching; a frequency domain position of a bandwidth part; a frequency domain position of a bandwidth part after a switching; and a resource allocation domain being a preset state, for example, the resource allocation domain being Null. Claim 5 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
For claims 1-4 and 6-18, Li et al.(CN 110380831, See translation) discloses all the subject matter of the claimed invention with the exception of the first information may also be information of a terminal; and in respect of the position of a pre-configured starting RB in a communications network. Li et al. (2023/0246786).Li et al. from the same or similar fields of endeavor teaches a provision of the first information may also be information of a terminal; and in respect of the position of a pre-configured starting RB in a communications network ( see paragraphs 0091 lines 1-4 and 0114 lines 1-8). Thus, it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the first information may also be information of a terminal; and in respect of the position of a pre-configured starting RB in a communications network as taught by Li et al. (2023/0246786). in the communication network of Li et al.(CN 110380831, See translation) for the purpose of providing the position of the RB.
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.
Claims 17-18, 24, and 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al.(CN 110380831, See translation) in view of Li et al. (2023/0246786) and further in view of Nam (2016/0157218).
For claims 17,18,24,and 32, Li et al.(CN 110380831, See translation) in view of Li et al. (2023/0246786). disclose all the subject matter of the claimed invention with the exception of memory, processor and a non-transitory computer readable medium having executable codes in a communications network. Nam et al. from the same or similar fields of endeavor teaches a provision of the memory, processor and a non-transitory computer readable medium having executable codes ( See paragraphs 0014 and 0052). Thus, it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use memory, processor and a non-transitory computer readable medium having executable codes as taught by Nam et al. in the communication network of Li et al.(CN 110380831, See translation) in view of Li et al. (2023/0246786) for the purpose of storing codes in the memory to execute the process by the processor.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANG T TON whose telephone number is (571)272-3171. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 5:30 AM to 3:00 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, Ayaz Sheikh can be reached at 571-272-3795. 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.
/DANG T TON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2476 /D.T.T/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2476
Prosecution Insights