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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 at line 6 recites “… at least one set of cells…” and where the claim further recites “in different sets of cells …”; however, the claim need only have one (1) set as initially claimed based on “… at least one set of cells…”. Thus, the claim language is ambiguous since if there is only one (1) set, you cannot have different sets as further claimed. It is recommended to amend the claim to clarify at least two sets. For the purpose of examination, examiner assumes only one set can be claimed. Independent claims 19 + 20 have the same above concern. The dependent claims are further rejected as they do not correct the above cited deficiency.
Claim 6 is further rejected under 112(b) as it is unclear whether the claim requires a third information field based on “… wherein the DCI comprises or does not comprise a third information field…”.
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)(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.
Claim(s) 1-15 and 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 2023/0345460 A1 to MolavianJaz et al. “MolavianJaz”
Note: For the purpose of the rejection, the examiner will cite from the provisional 63/333,385 with date 4/21/2022.
Independent claims
As to claim 1, MolavianJaz teaches a data transceiving apparatus (see e.g., UE 116 in Fig. 3A on p. 6/77), applicable to a terminal equipment (see e.g., UE in Fig. 1 on p. 2/77), the apparatus comprising: a receiver and/or a transmitter (see e.g., RF transceiver 310 in Fig. 3A); the receiver configured to receive downlink control information (DCI) in a first cell (see e.g.,1st full paragraph on p. 16/77 with respect to single DCI format), the DCI being used to schedule PDSCH(Physical Downlink Shared Channel)(s) and/or PUSCH(Physical Uplink Shared Channel)(s) on at least two cells in a plurality of cells (see e.g., 2nd to last paragraph on p. 16/77 with respect to serval approaches; 6th full paragraph on e.g., p. 29/77 with respect to PDSCHs and PUSCHs jointly scheduled on multiple cells and last two paragraphs of p. 32/77 with respect to a first and second approach), wherein the plurality of cells comprise at least one set of cells, cells in different sets of cells are unable to be scheduled by a same DCI and a cell in the plurality of cells is the first cell or a second cell(see e.g., 2nd and 3rd full paragraph on p. 31/77; and 2nd full paragraph on p. 32/77 with respect to set of cells that do not belong == unable to be scheduled. Alternative, DCI can be scheduled at cell – CIF level, see e.g., top of p. 33/77); and the receiver configured to receive the PDSCH(s) on the at least two cells and/or the transmitter configured to transmit the PUSCH(s) on the at least two cells (see e.g., 2nd to last paragraph on p. 16/77 with respect to serval approaches; 6th full paragraph on e.g., p. 29/77 with respect to PDSCHs and PUSCHs jointly scheduled on multiple cells and last two paragraphs of p. 32/77 with respect to a first and second approach).
As to claim 19, MolavianJaz teaches a data transceiving apparatus, applicable to a network device (see e.g., base station or gNB in Fig. 1 on p. 2/77; See e.g., Fig. 3B and RF transceiver 327n), the apparatus comprising: a transmitter, and/or a receiver; the transmitter configured to transmit downlink control information (DCI) in a first cell, the DCI being used to schedule PDSCH (Physical Downlink Shared Channel)(s) and/or PUSCH (Physical Uplink Shared Channel)(s) on at least two cells in a plurality of cells, wherein the plurality of cells comprise at least one set of cells, cells in different sets of cells are unable to be scheduled by a same DCI and a cell in the plurality of cells is the first cell or a second cell; and the transmitter configured to transmit the PDSCH(s) on the at least two cells and/or the receiver configured to receive the PUSCH(s) on the at least two cells. See similar rejection to claim 1 where corresponding base station sends/receives info to UE.
As to claim 20, MolavianJaz teaches a communication system, comprising a terminal equipment and/or a network device, the network device configured to transmit downlink control information (DCI) in a first cell to the terminal equipment, the DCI being used to schedule PDSCH(Physical Downlink Shared Channel)(s) and/or PUSCH(Physical Uplink Shared Channel)(s) on at least two cells in a plurality of cells, wherein the plurality of cells comprise at least one set of cells, cells in different sets of cells are unable to be scheduled by a same DCI and a cell in the plurality of cells is the first cell or a second cell; and the terminal equipment receives the PDSCH(s) transmitted by the network device on the at least two cells and/or transmits the PUSCH(s) to the network device on the at least two cells. See combined rejection for claims 1 and 19 where claim 1 is UE (==terminal) and claim 19 is the base station (==network device) for the system.
Dependent claims
As to claim 2, MolavianJaz teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the plurality of cells comprise all or a part of cells in a primary cell group or a secondary cell group or the same PUCCH group (see e.g., p. 23/77 and 2nd full paragraph on p. 31/77 with respect to PCell).
As to claim 3, MolavianJaz teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the plurality of cells comprise cells that are able to be scheduled by the first cell, or cells that are able to be scheduled by the DCI (see e.g., last paragraph of p. 33/77 with respect to using DCI and/or RRC (higher-layer) signaling).
As to claim 4, MolavianJaz teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the DCI comprises a first information field and/or a second information field, the first information field and/or the second information field being used to indicate the cells scheduled by the DCI (see e.g., bottom of p. 32/77 and top of p. 33/77 as well as last paragraph of p. 33/77 with respect to using DCI and indexes CIF values == first and second information fields).
As to claim 5, MolavianJaz teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the DCI is used to simultaneously schedule the plurality of cells (see e.g., bottom of p. 32/77 and top of p. 33/77 where more than one cell is scheduled at a time == simultaneously).
As to claim 6, MolavianJaz teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the DCI comprises or does not comprise a third information field, one or more cells to which the third information field corresponds are not scheduled, a value of the third information field is a first value or the DCI does not include the third information field or the terminal equipment ignores the third information field (see e.g., 4th paragraph on p. 32/77 with respect to common feature (such as frequency band/range); top of p. 37/88 with respect to first value in DCI and 4th paragraph on p. 39/77 with respect to fourth example where DCI. Here a cell specific parameter can broadly be considered as a third information field).
As to claim 7, MolavianJaz teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the DCI includes a fourth information field, the fourth information field including a first block and/or a second block, one or more cells to which the first block or the second block corresponds are not scheduled, a value of the first block or the second block is a second value (see e.g., 4th paragraph on p. 32/77 with respect to common feature (such as frequency band/range); top of p. 37/88 with respect to first value in DCI and 4th paragraph on p. 39/77 with respect to fourth example where DCI. See also 4th paragraph on p. 50/77 with respect to transport blocks. Here a cell specific parameter can broadly be considered as a 4th information field).
As to claim 8, MolavianJaz teaches the apparatus according to claim 7, wherein the fourth information field comprises Frequency domain resource assignment field (see id.).
As to claim 9, MolavianJaz teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the receiver further configured to receive first configuration information, the first configuration information including information indicating the plurality of cells, and/or, information of the at least one set of cells, and/or, information of a cell combination in the plurality of cells that are able to be scheduled by a same DC (see e.g., last paragraph of p. 33/77 with respect to using DCI and/or RRC (higher-layer) signaling).
As to claim 10, MolavianJaz teaches the apparatus according to claim 9, wherein the apparatus further comprises: a processor (see e.g., Fig. 3A:340 on p. 6/77) configured to determine, according to the first configuration information, a cell or a set of cells to which a value of an information field in the DCI corresponds or value of a block of an information field corresponds I (see id.).
As to claim 11, MolavianJaz teaches the apparatus according to claim 9, wherein the first configuration information comprises cell configuration information of the first cell, the cell configuration information of the first cell including first indication information, the first indication information being used to indicate one or more values of a first information field and/or one or more values of a second information field to which a cell in the plurality of cells corresponds (see id. Note that first/second/third indexes can broadly correspond to a first and second information field respectively).
As to claim 12, MolavianJaz teaches the apparatus according to claim 9, wherein the first configuration information comprises cell configuration information of the first cell and/or configuration information of a primary cell group or a secondary cell group, the cell configuration information of the first cell and/or the configuration information of the primary cell group or the secondary cell group including second indication information, the second indication information being used to indicate a value of the first information field and/or one or more values of a second information field to which the plurality of cells corresponds (see id. see e.g., p. 23/77 and 2nd full paragraph on p. 31/77cell groups and primary cell group.).
As to claim 13, MolavianJaz teaches the apparatus according to claim 5, wherein the DCI further comprises a first information field and a second information field, the first information field being used to indicate one cell in the at least two cells, the second information field being used to indicate a scheduled set of cells from one or more sets of cells in which the one cell is located, or being used to indicate a scheduled set of cells from one or more sets of cells associated with the one cell, or being used to indicate one or more cells other than the one cell (see e.g., bottom of p. 32/77 and top of p. 33/77 as well as last paragraph of p. 33/77 with respect to using DCI and indexes CIF values == first and second information fields).
As to claim 14, MolavianJaz teaches the apparatus according to claim 5, wherein the DCI comprises multiple first information fields, and when one or more cells to which one first information field correspond are not scheduled, a value of the first information field is a third value or the DCI does not include the first information field or the terminal equipment ignores the first information field (see e.g., 2nd and 3rd full paragraph on p. 31/77; and 2nd full paragraph on p. 32/77 with respect to set of cells that do not belong == unable to be scheduled).
As to claim 15, MolavianJaz teaches the apparatus according to claim 5, wherein the DCI comprises a first information field or a second information field, the first information field or the second information field being a bitmap, a first bit and a second bit in the bitmap corresponding to different cells or sets of cells (see e.g., bottom of p. 33/77 where a 2-bit field can be used which is a bitmap and where each bit represents a different set/cell. See also bottom of p. 38 with respect to bitmap).
As to claim 17, MolavianJaz teaches the apparatus according to claim 5, wherein the DCI comprises a second information field, the second information field being used to indicate a set of cells (see e.g., bottom of p. 32/77 and top of p. 33/77 as well as last paragraph of p. 33/77 with respect to set and sub-set of cells).
As to claim 18, MolavianJaz teaches the apparatus according to claim 5, wherein the DCI comprises a first information field and a second information field, the second information field being used to indicate a set of cells, and the first information field being used to indicate a cell scheduled by the DCI in the set of cells indicated by the second information field (see e.g., bottom of p. 32/77 and top of p. 33/77 as well as last paragraph of p. 33/77 with respect to set and sub-set of cells).
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) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US2023/0345460 A1 to MolavianJaz et al. “MolavianJaz” in view of US 20250294581 A1 to AHN et al. “AHN”.
Note: For the purpose of the rejection, the examiner will cite from the provisional 63/335,233 with date 4/27/2022.
As to claim 16, MolavianJaz in combination with AHN teaches the apparatus according to claim 5, wherein the DCI comprises a first information field or a second information field, the first information field or the second information field being an RIV (Resource Indicator Value).
MolavianJaz teaches adjusting parameters/fields (see e.g., p. 65/77) can be used but does not expressly mention a RIV.
AHN teaches a RIV can be includes in DCI, see e.g., p 6/41 for item method 2.
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 MolavianJaz, which teaches adjusting parmeters/fields, and apply it to teaching of clarifying that a parameter can expressly be a RIV as taught by AHN. Doing so allows to include delta information AHN [Table 1]. Examiner notes reasonable expectation of success given both references detail with multi-cell scheduling.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DERRICK W FERRIS whose telephone number is (571)272-3123. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. - Fri. 7 AM-3 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 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.
/DERRICK W FERRIS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2411
Prosecution Insights