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 .
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it is insufficiently descriptive of the invention’s subject matter. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Applicant is reminded of the proper content of an abstract of the disclosure.
A patent abstract is a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. The abstract should not refer to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention and should not compare the invention with the prior art.
If the patent is of a basic nature, the entire technical disclosure may be new in the art, and the abstract should be directed to the entire disclosure. If the patent is in the nature of an improvement in an old apparatus, process, product, or composition, the abstract should include the technical disclosure of the improvement. The abstract should also mention by way of example any preferred modifications or alternatives.
Where applicable, the abstract should include the following: (1) if a machine or apparatus, its organization and operation; (2) if an article, its method of making; (3) if a chemical compound, its identity and use; (4) if a mixture, its ingredients; (5) if a process, the steps.
Extensive mechanical and design details of an apparatus should not be included in the abstract. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph within the range of 50 to 150 words in length.
See MPEP § 608.01(b) for guidelines for the preparation of patent abstracts.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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) 1,5,8,12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Publication No. 2023/0345253 A1 to Lei et al.
As to claim 8, Lei discloses A base station in a wireless communication system, the base station comprising: a transceiver; and at least one processor coupled with the transceiver and configured to (Figs. 1,6,9,10-11: base station/network entity):
identify at least one reference signal associated with a first radio access technology (RAT), identify at least one reference signal associated with a second RAT (Fig. 10, paragraphs 136-145, in particular, paragraph 144, disclosing “A common reference signal, broadcast channel or random access channel for the first RAT and the second RAT can be configured on the radio resources shared between the first and the second RAT”, wherein paragraphs 68-72, 104 disclose UL and DL reference signals as well as reference signals of different RATs, thus teaching to a PHOSITA that a BS/network would “identify” reference signals of different RATs, further teaching that the “common reference signal … for the first RAT and the second rAT” is an embodiment of “reference signal associated with a first RAT” as well as of “RS associated with a second RAT”) ,
generate at least one common reference signal, and transmit, to a terminal, the at least one common reference signal, wherein the at least one common reference signal is used by both the first RAT and the second RAT and is transmitted in a time-frequency resource shared by the first RAT and the second RAT (Fig. 10, paragraphs 136-145, in particular, paragraph 144, disclosing “A common reference signal, broadcast channel or random access channel for the first RAT and the second RAT can be configured on the radio resources shared between the first and the second RAT”, wherein paragraphs 68-72, 104 disclose UL and DL reference signals as well as reference signals of different RATs, thus teaching to a PHOSITA that a BS/network would “transmit, to a terminal, the at least one common reference signal”, which is transmitted “in a time-frequency resource shared by the first RAT and the second RAT” [further see Figs. 12-14 and 6-9, which in combination with the cited portions above teach shared “time-frequency resource”]).
As to claim 12, Lei discloses A terminal in a wireless communication system, the terminal comprising: a transceiver; and at least one processor coupled with the transceiver and configured to (Figs. 1,6,9,10-11: UE):
receive, from a base station, at least one reference signal associated with a first radio access technology (RAT) or a second RAT, and receive, from the base station, at least one common reference signal (Fig. 10, paragraphs 136-145, in particular, paragraph 144, disclosing “A common reference signal, broadcast channel or random access channel for the first RAT and the second RAT can be configured on the radio resources shared between the first and the second RAT” [disclosing, in view of paragraphs 68-72, “receive, from the base station, at least one common reference signal”], wherein paragraphs 68-72, 104 disclose UL and DL reference signals as well as reference signals of different RATs, thus teaching to a PHOSITA an embodiment of “receive, from a base station, at least one reference signal associated with a first radio access technology (RAT) or a second RAT”) ,
wherein the at least one common reference signal is used by both the first RAT and the second RAT and is received in a time-frequency resource shared by the first RAT and the second RAT (Fig. 10, paragraphs 136-145, in particular, paragraph 144, disclosing “A common reference signal, broadcast channel or random access channel for the first RAT and the second RAT can be configured on the radio resources shared between the first and the second RAT”, wherein paragraphs 68-72, 104 disclose UL and DL reference signals as well as reference signals of different RATs, thus teaching to a PHOSITA that a BS/network would “transmit, to a terminal, the at least one common reference signal”, which is transmitted “in a time-frequency resource shared by the first RAT and the second RAT” [further see Figs. 12-14 and 6-9, which in combination with the cited portions above teach shared “time-frequency resource”]).
As to claim 1, see rejection for claim 8.
As to claim 5, see rejection for claim 12.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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) 3,4,10,11,14,15,7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication No. 2023/0345253 A1 to Lei et al., in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2024/0381410 A1 to Hong et al.
As to claim 3, Lei discloses the method as in the parent claim 1.
Lei further discloses transmitting, to the terminal, information (Figs. 6 and 9: network/BS sending information to the UE);
wherein data are received using the time-frequency resource shared by the first RAT and the second RAT. (paragraphs 144, 154, 187)
Lei does not appear to explicitly disclose information comprising at least one of different cyclic shifts, or different roots, wherein the at least one of different cyclic shifts, or different roots is applied to a zadoff-chu (ZC) sequence to generate different physical random access channel (PRACH) preambles associated with the first RAT or the second RAT, and wherein the different PRACH preambles are received using the time-frequency resource.
Hong discloses information comprising at least one of different cyclic shifts, or different roots (paragraph 168: cyclic shifts and root sequences for ZC sequences), wherein the at least one of different cyclic shifts, or different roots is applied to a zadoff-chu (ZC) sequence to generate different physical random access channel (PRACH) preambles associated with the first RAT or the second RAT (paragraph 168: cyclic shifts and root sequences for ZC sequences and NR PRACH), and wherein the different PRACH preambles are received using the time-frequency resource (paragraph 168: cyclic shifts and root sequences for ZC sequences and NR PRACH).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate in, combine with or modify, Lei’s teaching with Hong’s teachings to reject this claim, since both references pertain to the same field of endeavor of signaling in the context of multi-RAT transmissions. In particular, it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA to utilize Lei’s teaching of “transmitting, to the terminal, information” to transmit Hong’s disclosed “information comprising at least one of different cyclic shifts, or different roots” to reject “transmitting, to the terminal, information comprising at least one of different cyclic shifts, or different roots”; similarly, it would have been obvious to a phosita to combine Lei’s teaching of “wherein data are received using the time-frequency resource shared by the first RAT and the second RAT” with Hong’s teaching of “wherein the different PRACH preambles are received using the time-frequency resource” reject “wherein the different PRACH preambles are received using the time-frequency resource shared by the first RAT and the second RAT”, since the PRACH preambles may be transmitted “using the time-frequency resource shared by the first RAT and the second RAT”. The suggestion/motivation would have been to improve resource allocation and signaling for communications featuring multi-RAT techniques (Lei, paragraphs 1-27; Hong, paragraphs 1-28 and Fig. 1). Furthermore, note that with regard to the claimed invention, especially the limitation above, all of the claimed elements have been shown to be known in the cited art, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art as of and before the effective filing date.
As to claim 4, Lei discloses the method as in the parent claim 1.
Lei further discloses wherein the at least one common reference signal comprises (paragraphs 144, 154: common reference signal), and wherein the first RAT is a first standard and the second RAT is a second standard. (paragraphs 144, 154, 187)
Lei does not appear to explicitly disclose a channel state information reference signal (CSI-RS); 5G and 6G.
Hong discloses a channel state information reference signal (CSI-RS) (paragraph 113); 5G and 6G (paragraphs 3 and 4).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate in, combine with or modify, Lei’s teaching with Hong’s teachings to reject this claim, since both references pertain to the same field of endeavor of signaling in the context of multi-RAT transmissions. In particular, it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA to utilize Lei’s teaching of “wherein the at least one common reference signal comprises” together with Hong’s teaching of “CSI-RS” to reject “wherein the at least one common reference signal comprises CSI-RS”; similarly, it would have been obvious to a phosita to that the first and second RATs disclosed in Lei, may be embodied by the 5G and 6G RATS disclosed in Hong, to reject “wherein the first RAT is 5th generation (5G) and the second RAT is 6th generation (6G).” The suggestion/motivation would have been to improve resource allocation and signaling for communications featuring multi-RAT techniques (Lei, paragraphs 1-27; Hong, paragraphs 1-28 and Fig. 1). Furthermore, note that with regard to the claimed invention, especially the limitation above, all of the claimed elements have been shown to be known in the cited art, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art as of and before the effective filing date.
As to claims 10,14, see rejection for claim 3.
As to claims 11,15, see rejection for claim 4.
As to claim 7, Lei discloses the method as in the parent claim 5.
Lei further discloses transmitting, to the terminal, information (Figs. 6 and 9: network/BS sending information to the UE);
wherein data are received using the time-frequency resource shared by the first RAT and the second RAT (paragraphs 144, 154, 187);
wherein the at least one common reference signal comprises (paragraphs 144, 154: common reference signal), and wherein the first RAT is a first standard and the second RAT is a second standard. (paragraphs 144, 154, 187)
Lei does not appear to explicitly disclose information comprising at least one of different cyclic shifts, or different roots, wherein the at least one of different cyclic shifts, or different roots is applied to a zadoff-chu (ZC) sequence to generate different physical random access channel (PRACH) preambles associated with the first RAT or the second RAT, and wherein the different PRACH preambles are received using the time-frequency resource; a channel state information reference signal (CSI-RS); 5G and 6G.
Hong discloses information comprising at least one of different cyclic shifts, or different roots (paragraph 168: cyclic shifts and root sequences for ZC sequences), wherein the at least one of different cyclic shifts, or different roots is applied to a zadoff-chu (ZC) sequence to generate different physical random access channel (PRACH) preambles associated with the first RAT or the second RAT (paragraph 168: cyclic shifts and root sequences for ZC sequences and NR PRACH), and wherein the different PRACH preambles are received using the time-frequency resource (paragraph 168: cyclic shifts and root sequences for ZC sequences and NR PRACH);
a channel state information reference signal (CSI-RS) (paragraph 113); 5G and 6G (paragraphs 3 and 4).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate in, combine with or modify, Lei’s teaching with Hong’s teachings to reject this claim, since both references pertain to the same field of endeavor of signaling in the context of multi-RAT transmissions. In particular, it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA to utilize Lei’s teaching of “transmitting, to the terminal, information” to transmit Hong’s disclosed “information comprising at least one of different cyclic shifts, or different roots” to reject “transmitting, to the terminal, information comprising at least one of different cyclic shifts, or different roots”; similarly, it would have been obvious to a phosita to combine Lei’s teaching of “wherein data are received using the time-frequency resource shared by the first RAT and the second RAT” with Hong’s teaching of “wherein the different PRACH preambles are received using the time-frequency resource” reject “wherein the different PRACH preambles are received using the time-frequency resource shared by the first RAT and the second RAT”, since the PRACH preambles may be transmitted “using the time-frequency resource shared by the first RAT and the second RAT”. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA to utilize Lei’s teaching of “wherein the at least one common reference signal comprises” together with Hong’s teaching of “CSI-RS” to reject “wherein the at least one common reference signal comprises CSI-RS”; similarly, it would have been obvious to a phosita to that the first and second RATs disclosed in Lei, may be embodied by the 5G and 6G RATS disclosed in Hong, to reject “wherein the first RAT is 5th generation (5G) and the second RAT is 6th generation (6G).” The suggestion/motivation would have been to improve resource allocation and signaling for communications featuring multi-RAT techniques (Lei, paragraphs 1-27; Hong, paragraphs 1-28 and Fig. 1). Furthermore, note that with regard to the claimed invention, especially the limitation above, all of the claimed elements have been shown to be known in the cited art, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art as of and before the effective filing date.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 2,6,9,13 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
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHI TANG P CHENG whose telephone number is (571)272-9021. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9:30AM - 6PM.
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, Asad M Nawaz can be reached at (571)272-3988. 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.
/CHI TANG P CHENG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2463
Prosecution Insights