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
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) 1-4, 6-9, 11-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over TIDESTAV et al. (US 2021/0359746 A1), hereinafter TIDESTAV in view of GUO (US 2018/0343653 A1).
Regarding claim 1, TIDESTAV discloses a method comprising:
determining, by a first communication node, a collision (receiving at the same time, see ¶ 0021, 0026, 0098) between a first channel characteristic hypothesis of a first information element (either the physical downlink control channel PDCCH or physical downlink shared channel PDSCH in two beam, see ¶ 0098) and a second channel characteristic hypothesis of a second information element (either the PDCCH or PDSCH in a beam, see ¶ 0098), wherein the second information element uses a quasi co-location (QCL) state (each beam indication indicates a spatial Quasi Colocation, QCL, relation, see ¶ 0098); and
prioritizing, by the first communication node, receiving of the first information element, wherein a priority of the first information element is higher than a priority of the second information element (the receiving of the first signal of the first signal type on the beam indicated by one of the beam indications corresponds to receiving the PDCCH that has a higher priority than the PDSCH, see ¶ 0021, 0026, 0098).
TIDESTAV fails to explicitly disclose the second information element uses a quasi co-location (QCL) state of a lowest control resource set identifier (CORESET ID) of a nearest slot of a cell
In the same field of endeavor, GUO discloses PDCCH uses a quasi co-location (QCL) state of a lowest control resource set identifier (CORESET ID) of a nearest slot of a cell (see claims 1, 4, and 5).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement GUO’s teaching in the network taught by TIDESTAV for providing beam indication or recovery scheme in an advanced wireless communication system.
Regarding claim 2, TIDESTAV discloses the channel characteristic hypothesis comprises a quasi co-location (QCL) (each beam indication indicates a spatial Quasi Colocation, QCL, relation, see ¶ 0021, 0026, 0098).
Regarding claim 3, TIDESTAV discloses the first information element is a control channel and the second information element is a data channel (the physical downlink control channel PDCCH or physical downlink shared channel PDSCH in two beam, see ¶ 0021, 0026, 0098).
Regarding claim 4, GUO discloses the second information element has a scheduling offset less than a threshold (the pre-configured spatial QCL assumption for receiving the data transmission when the time offset is less than the threshold, see claim 4).
Regarding claim 6, TIDESTAV discloses an apparatus comprising at least one processor and a memory that includes executable instructions that when executed by the at least one processor causes the apparatus to:
determining, by a first communication node, a collision (receiving at the same time, see ¶ 0021, 0026, 0098) between a first channel characteristic hypothesis of a first information element (either the physical downlink control channel PDCCH or physical downlink shared channel PDSCH in two beam, see ¶ 0098) and a second channel characteristic hypothesis of a second information element (either the PDCCH or PDSCH in a beam, see ¶ 0098), wherein the second information element uses a quasi co-location (QCL) state of a lowest control resource set identifier (CORESET ID) of a nearest slot of a cell (each beam indication indicates a spatial Quasi Colocation, QCL, relation, see ¶ 0098); and
prioritizing, by the first communication node, receiving of the first information element, wherein a priority of the first information element is higher than a priority of the second information element (the receiving of the first signal of the first signal type on the beam indicated by one of the beam indications corresponds to receiving the PDCCH that has a higher priority than the PDSCH, see ¶ 0021, 0026, 0098).
TIDESTAV fails to explicitly disclose the second information element uses a quasi co-location (QCL) state of a lowest control resource set identifier (CORESET ID) of a nearest slot of a cell
In the same field of endeavor, GUO discloses PDCCH uses a quasi co-location (QCL) state of a lowest control resource set identifier (CORESET ID) of a nearest slot of a cell (see claims 1, 4, and 5).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement GUO’s teaching in the network taught by TIDESTAV for providing beam indication or recovery scheme in an advanced wireless communication system.
Regarding claim 7, TIDESTAV discloses the channel characteristic hypothesis comprises a quasi co-location (QCL) (each beam indication indicates a spatial Quasi Colocation, QCL, relation, see ¶ 0021, 0026, 0098).
Regarding claim 8, TIDESTAV discloses the first information element is a control channel and the second information element is a data channel (the physical downlink control channel PDCCH or physical downlink shared channel PDSCH in two beam, see ¶ 0021, 0026, 0098).
Regarding claim 9, GUO discloses the second information element has a scheduling offset less than a threshold (the pre-configured spatial QCL assumption for receiving the data transmission when the time offset is less than the threshold, see claim 4).
Regarding claim 11, TIDESTAV discloses a non-transitory computer-readable medium including instructions that, upon execution by a processor, perform the method comprising:
determining, by a first communication node, a collision (receiving at the same time, see ¶ 0021, 0026, 0098) between a first channel characteristic hypothesis of a first information element (either the physical downlink control channel PDCCH or physical downlink shared channel PDSCH in two beam, see ¶ 0098) and a second channel characteristic hypothesis of a second information element (either the PDCCH or PDSCH in a beam, see ¶ 0098), wherein the second information element uses a quasi co-location (QCL) state of a lowest control resource set identifier (CORESET ID) of a nearest slot of a cell (each beam indication indicates a spatial Quasi Colocation, QCL, relation, see ¶ 0098); and
prioritizing, by the first communication node, receiving of the first information element, wherein a priority of the first information element is higher than a priority of the second information element (the receiving of the first signal of the first signal type on the beam indicated by one of the beam indications corresponds to receiving the PDCCH that has a higher priority than the PDSCH, see ¶ 0021, 0026, 0098).
TIDESTAV fails to explicitly disclose the second information element uses a quasi co-location (QCL) state of a lowest control resource set identifier (CORESET ID) of a nearest slot of a cell
In the same field of endeavor, GUO discloses PDCCH uses a quasi co-location (QCL) state of a lowest control resource set identifier (CORESET ID) of a nearest slot of a cell (see claims 1, 4, and 5).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement GUO’s teaching in the network taught by TIDESTAV for providing beam indication or recovery scheme in an advanced wireless communication system.
Regarding claim 12, TIDESTAV discloses the channel characteristic hypothesis comprises a quasi co-location (QCL) (each beam indication indicates a spatial Quasi Colocation, QCL, relation, see ¶ 0021, 0026, 0098).
Regarding claim 13, TIDESTAV discloses the first information element is a control channel and the second information element is a data channel (the physical downlink control channel PDCCH or physical downlink shared channel PDSCH in two beam, see ¶ 0021, 0026, 0098).
Regarding claim 14, GUO discloses the second information element has a scheduling offset less than a threshold (the pre-configured spatial QCL assumption for receiving the data transmission when the time offset is less than the threshold, see claim 4).
Claim(s) 5, 10, and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of TIDESTAV-GUO in view of JOHN WILSON et al. (2018/0220403 A1), hereinafter JOHN WILSON.
Regarding claims 5, 10, and 15, the combination of TIDESTAV-GUO fails to disclose the first information element corresponds to one or more first time units and the second information element corresponds to one or more second time units, wherein each time unit of the one or more first and second time units corresponds to a time for an orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM) symbol, and wherein the one or more first time units partially or completely overlap the one or more second time units.
In the same field of endeavor, JOHN WILSON discloses in a OFDM communication system (see ¶ 0050, 0051, 0052, 0067), the UE may receive the first PDCCH transmission, associated with the first beam, in a first set of slots (e.g., slot n and slot n+2, as shown in FIG. 9A). As shown by reference number 925, the UE may receive the PDSCH transmission, associated with the second beam, in the first set of slots (i.e., the first PDCCH transmission and the PDSCH information may be received in the same set of slots), where the received PDCCH and PDSCH transmissions are overlap in time units at receiving end e.g. UE (see figure 9A, ¶ 0100, 0101).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement JOHN WILSON’s teaching in the network taught by the combination of TIDESTAV-GUO to provides High Spectral Efficiency by Overlapping frequency bands pack more data into a narrower total bandwidth without needing empty guard bands between subchannels.
Conclusion
Any response to this action should be mailed to:
The following address mail to be delivered by the United States Postal Service (USPS) only:
Mail Stop _____________
Commissioner for Patents
P. O. Box 1450
Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
or faxed to:
(571) 273-8300, (for formal communications intended for entry)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Bob A. Phunkulh whose telephone number is (571) 272-3083. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday from 8:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. (first week of the bi-week) and Monday-Friday (for second week of the bi-week).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor CHARLES C. JIANG can be reach on (571) 270-7191.
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).
/BOB A PHUNKULH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2412
Prosecution Insights