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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-12 are presented for examination. Claims 13 is canceled in the 10/23/2024 preliminary amendment.
Information Disclosure Statement
The IDS filed on 2/5/2025 and 6/12/2026 are considered.
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 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.
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 1-5 and 11-12 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Takeda et al (Takeda), US 2023/0085896.
As per claim 1, Takeda teaches the invention including a method of monitoring a control signal by a user equipment (UE) in a wireless communication system, the method comprising:
Determining a control channel element (CCE) index corresponding to a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) candidate (pp. 0077; Equation 1); and
Monitoring the PDCCH candidate for a downlink control information (DCI) format on a scheduling cell based on the CCE index (pp. 0077-0080, 0083, 0087-0090),
Wherein, based on cross carrier scheduling being configured, the CCE index is configured based on a value of a carrier indicator field (CIF) included in the DCI format (pp. 0079-0081, 0089), and
Wherein, based on multi cell scheduling being configured, the CCE index is configured based on a value for each set of scheduling cells (pp. 0078-0080, 0083, 0089-0091).
As per claim 2, Takeda teaches the invention as claimed in claim 1. Takeda further teaches wherein based on multi cell scheduling being configured, the DCI format does not include the CIF (pp. 0091).
As per claim 3, Takeda teaches the invention as claimed in claim 1. Takeda further teaches wherein, based on multi cell scheduling being configured, the DCI format schedules PDSCHs or PUSCHs on all or some of a set of scheduled cells (pp. 0080, 0083-0086, 0089).
As per claim 4, Takeda teaches the invention as claimed in claim 1. Takeda further teaches wherein the DCI format satisfies a DCI size budget through a DCI size alignment process (pp. 0090).
As per claim 5, Takeda teaches the invention as claimed in claim 4. Takeda further teaches wherein the DCI size alignment process is performed for one reference cell among a set of schedule cells (pp. 0090).
As per claim 11, Takeda teaches the invention including a user equipment (UE) configured to monitor a signal in a wireless communication system, the UE comprising:
At least one transceiver (pp. 0100: transceiver 410);
At least one processor (pp. 0100-0101: processor 402); and
At least one memory operably connected to the at least one processor and storing instructions that, when executed, caused the at least one processor to perform specific operations (pp. 0100, 0102; memory 404) comprising:
Determining a control channel element (CCE) index corresponding to a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) candidate (pp. 0077; Equation 1); and
Monitoring the PDCCH candidate for a downlink control information (DCI) format on a scheduling cell based on the CCE index (pp. 0077-0080, 0083, 0087-0090),
Wherein, based on cross carrier scheduling being configured, the CCE index is configured based on a value of a carrier indicator field (CIF) included in the DCI format (pp. 0079-0081, 0089), and
Wherein, based on multi cell scheduling being configured, the CCE index is configured based on a value for each set of scheduling cells (pp. 0078-0080, 0083, 0089-0091).
As per claim 12, Takeda teaches the invention including an apparatus for a user equipment (UE), the apparatus comprising:
At least one processor (pp. 0100-0101: processor 402); and
At least one memory operably connected to the at least one processor and configured to, when executed, caused the at least one processor to perform operations (pp. 0100, 0102; memory 404) comprising:
Determining a control channel element (CCE) index corresponding to a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) candidate (pp. 0077; Equation 1); and
Monitoring the PDCCH candidate for a downlink control information (DCI) format on a scheduling cell based on the CCE index (pp. 0077-0080, 0083, 0087-0090),
Wherein, based on cross carrier scheduling being configured, the CCE index is configured based on a value of a carrier indicator field (CIF) included in the DCI format (pp. 0079-0081, 0089), and
Wherein, based on multi cell scheduling being configured, the CCE index is configured based on a value for each set of scheduling cells (pp. 0078-0080, 0083, 0089-0091).
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.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takeda et al (Takeda), US 2023/0085896, in view of Moon et al (Moon), US 2023/0254857.
As per claim 6, Takeda teaches the invention as claimed in claim 5. Takeda does not teach wherein the DCI size alignment process comprises, based on that a total number of DCI sizes configured to be monitored for the reference cell except a DCI format for the multi cell scheduling exceeds 4 or that a total number of DCI sizes associated with a cell-radio network temporary identifier (C-RNTI) configured to be monitored for the reference cell except for the DCI format for the multi cell scheduling exceeding 3, performing a first DCI size alignment process for legacy DCI formats, and
wherein the first DCI size alignment process is performed in an order of:
DCI size alignment between DCI format 1_0 and DCI format 0_0;
DCI size alignment between DCI format 0_2 and DCI format 1_2; and
DCI size alignment between DCI format 0_1 and DCI format 1_1.
Moon teaches wherein the DCI size alignment process comprises, based on that a total number of DCI sizes configured to be monitored for the reference cell except a DCI format for the multi cell scheduling exceeds 4 or that a total number of DCI sizes associated with a cell-radio network temporary identifier (C-RNTI) configured to be monitored for the reference cell except for the DCI format for the multi cell scheduling exceeding 3 (pp. 0108-0110, 0123-0125), performing a first DCI size alignment process for legacy DCI formats, and
wherein the first DCI size alignment process is performed in an order of:
DCI size alignment between DCI format 1_0 and DCI format 0_0 (pp. 0127);
DCI size alignment between DCI format 0_2 and DCI format 1_2 (pp. 0128); and
DCI size alignment between DCI format 0_1 and DCI format 1_1 (pp. 0129).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to combine the teachings of Takeda and Moon and perform DCI size alignment for DCIs in different DCI format according to the DCI format of the reference cell.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-10 are 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Li et al, EP4117366A1
Gao et al, US 12,634,938
Takeda et al, US 2023/0345478
Moon et al, US 2015/0223213
A shortened statutory period for reply to this Office action is set to expire Three MONTHS from the mailing date of this action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KENNY S LIN whose telephone number is (571) 272-3968.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Noel Beharry can be reached on 571-270-5630. 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
KENNY S. LIN
Examiner
Art Unit 2416
/Kenny S Lin/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2416
August 5, 2026
Prosecution Insights