DETAILED ACTION
Claim(s) 1-5 are presented for examination.
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 .
Priority
As required by M.P.E.P.201.14(c), acknowledgement is made to applicant’s claim for priority based on application(s) PCT/JP2022/018628 submitted on April 22nd, 2022.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on (October 15th, 2024), (December 9th, 2025), and (February 10th, 2026) follow the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed (i.e., “PREEMPTION INDICATION IN MULTI-MODE, CARRIER AGGREGATION (CA) SYSTEMS”).
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 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 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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over SUN et al. (US 2019/0246419 A1) hereinafter “Sun” in view of HOSSEINI et al. (US 2019/0268127 A1) hereinafter “HOSSEINI”.
Regarding Claims 1 and 5,
Sun discloses a terminal [see fig. 3, pg. 7, ¶65 lines 1-4, a UE “115”] comprising:
a communication unit configured to perform uplink or downlink communication in a frequency band aggregated by carrier aggregation [see fig. 3: Step “305”, pg. 7, ¶64 lines 1-16; pg. 8, ¶66 lines 1-13, in a carrier aggregation configuration, the UE “115” is configured with one or more carriers … for self-scheduling and cross-carrier scheduling indicative of the types of control messages which are monitored on each carrier and which include unicast or group-common control messages carrying preemption information]; and
a reception unit configured to receive a preemption indication for a downlink signal in downlink [see fig. 3: Step “330”, pg. 9, ¶74 lines 1-20, the UE “115” receives the multi-carrier control message with variable-size preemption information from base station “105”].
Although Sun discloses receiving a preemption indication, Sun does not explicitly teach “assuming that, in a case where scheduling is performed in a unit including a plurality of component carriers in the aggregated frequency band, the preemption indication for the downlink signal is transmitted for each of the plurality of component carriers or for the unit including the plurality of component carriers”.
However HOSSEINI discloses performing uplink or downlink communication in a frequency band aggregated by carrier aggregation [see fig. 10: Step “1005”, pg. 8, ¶84 lines 1-5, by receiving a resource assignment scheduling the UE for uplink transmission, the UE is scheduled for a URLLC PUSCH transmission and/or an eMBB PUSCH transmission one or more CCs in one or more symbols];
receiving a preemption indication for a downlink signal in downlink [see fig. 10: Step “1010”, pg. 8, ¶85 lines 1-5, the UE receives an indication to preempt uplink transmission on a portion of the assigned resources to preempt transmission in one or more symbols (e.g., within a slot or slots) and on one or more CCs (e.g., at least one CC)]; and
assuming that [see fig. 10: Step “1015”, pg. 8, ¶86 lines 1-5; ¶87 lines 1-12, the UE determines], in a case where scheduling is performed in a unit including a plurality of component carriers in the aggregated frequency band [see fig. 10: Step “1015”, pg. 8, ¶86 lines 1-5; ¶87 lines 1-12, whether to transmit on the remaining assigned resources], the preemption indication for the downlink signal is transmitted for each of the plurality of component carriers or for the unit including the plurality of component carriers [see fig. 10: Step “1015”, pg. 8, ¶86 lines 1-5; ¶87 lines 1-12, for example, the UE determines whether to transmit or drop the scheduled uplink transmission(s) on other CCs and/or in subsequent symbols and/or slots than the preempted transmission … based on whether phase continuity is maintained between the CCs after the preemption].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide “assuming that, in a case where scheduling is performed in a unit including a plurality of component carriers in the aggregated frequency band, the preemption indication for the downlink signal is transmitted for each of the plurality of component carriers or for the unit including the plurality of component carriers” to better support mobile broadband Internet access by improving spectral efficiency, lowering costs, improving services, making use of new spectrum, and better integrating with other open standards using OFDMA with a cyclic prefix (CP) on the downlink (DL) and on the uplink (UL) [see HOSSEINI, pg. 1, ¶5 lines 1-15].
Regarding Claim 2,
The combined system of Sun and HOSSEINI discloses the terminal according to claim 1.
Sun further discloses wherein the control unit is configured to determine a frequency resource area to be canceled for each of the plurality of component carriers or for the unit including the plurality of component carriers [see fig. 3: Step “335”, pg. 9, ¶74 lines 1-20, if it is determined that preemption information is available for a scheduled carrier, the UE “115” may compare its scheduled resources from block with the preemption information from the multi-carrier control message (e.g., the variable size preemption information “415”) corresponding to each scheduled carrier].
Regarding Claim 3,
The combined system of Sun and HOSSEINI discloses the terminal according to claim 1.
Sun further discloses wherein the control unit is configured to determine a time resource area to be canceled for each of the plurality of component carriers or for the unit including the plurality of component carriers [see fig. 3: Step “340”, pg. 9, ¶75 lines 1-10, the UE “115” attempts to decode a data transmission on its scheduled carrier(s) based on a result of comparing its scheduled resources with preempted resources as previously indicated].
Regarding Claim 4,
Sun discloses a base station [see fig. 3, pg. 7, ¶65 lines 1-4, a base station “105”] comprising:
a communication unit configured to perform communication with a terminal in a frequency band aggregated by carrier aggregation [see fig. 3: Step “320”, pg. 7, ¶64 lines 1-16; pg. 8, ¶68 lines 1-9, in a carrier aggregation configuration, based on the carriers for which preemption information is indicated as available, the base station “105” forms a variable-size preemption information payload]; and
a transmission unit configured to transmit a preemption indication for a downlink signal to the terminal [see fig. 3: Step “325”, pg. 8, ¶68 lines 1-9, using the implicit or explicit carrier index values, the base station “105” sends one or more control messages to the UE “115” which include the indication of availability for the plurality of carriers and the variable-size preemption information].
Although Sun discloses receiving a preemption indication, Sun does not explicitly teach “assuming that, in a case where scheduling is performed in a unit including a plurality of component carriers in the aggregated frequency band, the preemption indication for the downlink signal is transmitted for each of the plurality of component carriers or for the unit including the plurality of component carriers”.
However HOSSEINI discloses perform communication with a terminal in a frequency band aggregated by carrier aggregation [see fig. 10: Step “1005”, pg. 8, ¶84 lines 1-5, by receiving a resource assignment scheduling the UE for uplink transmission, the UE is scheduled for a URLLC PUSCH transmission and/or an eMBB PUSCH transmission one or more CCs in one or more symbols];
transmit a preemption indication for a downlink signal to the terminal [see fig. 10: Step “1010”, pg. 8, ¶85 lines 1-5, the UE receives an indication to preempt uplink transmission on a portion of the assigned resources to preempt transmission in one or more symbols (e.g., within a slot or slots) and on one or more CCs (e.g., at least one CC)]; and
assuming that [see fig. 10: Step “1015”, pg. 8, ¶86 lines 1-5; ¶87 lines 1-12, the UE determines], in a case where scheduling is performed in a unit including a plurality of component carriers in the aggregated frequency band [see fig. 10: Step “1015”, pg. 8, ¶86 lines 1-5; ¶87 lines 1-12, whether to transmit on the remaining assigned resources], the preemption indication for the downlink signal is transmitted for each of the plurality of component carriers or for the unit including the plurality of component carriers [see fig. 10: Step “1015”, pg. 8, ¶86 lines 1-5; ¶87 lines 1-12, for example, the UE determines whether to transmit or drop the scheduled uplink transmission(s) on other CCs and/or in subsequent symbols and/or slots than the preempted transmission … based on whether phase continuity is maintained between the CCs after the preemption].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide “assuming that, in a case where scheduling is performed in a unit including a plurality of component carriers in the aggregated frequency band, the preemption indication for the downlink signal is transmitted for each of the plurality of component carriers or for the unit including the plurality of component carriers” to better support mobile broadband Internet access by improving spectral efficiency, lowering costs, improving services, making use of new spectrum, and better integrating with other open standards using OFDMA with a cyclic prefix (CP) on the downlink (DL) and on the uplink (UL) [see HOSSEINI, pg. 1, ¶5 lines 1-15].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
United States Patent Application Publication: CHOI et al. (US 2022/0312469 A1); see fig. 13, pgs. 13-14, ¶168-¶177.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RUSHIL P SAMPAT whose telephone number is (469) 295-9141. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri (8 AM - 5 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, Ian Moore can be reached on (571) 272-3085. 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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.
/RUSHIL P. SAMPAT/Primary Examiner- TC 2400, Art Unit 2469
Prosecution Insights