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 .
Claims 1-17 have been canceled. Claims 18-22 have been added.
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 –
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.
Claim(s) 18, 20, 22, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Abotabl et al. (US20210352667 herein after Abo).
Regarding claim 18, 22 Abo teaches A wireless terminal of a cellular telecommunication system, the wireless terminal comprising: processing circuitry ([0180-181] “In another example, the scheduling entity 1000 may be a user equipment (UE) as described with reference, for example, to FIGS. 1 and/or 2…The scheduling entity 1000 includes a processing system 1014 having one or more processors 1004. Examples of processors 1004 include microprocessors”) configured to determine a set of physical resource blocks (PRBs) for a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) based on information in a frequency domain resource assignment field ([0100] “The VRB mapper 904 may further utilize “type 0” or “type 1” frequency domain resource allocation (FDRA) to schedule resources in a given VRB for a PDSCH. With DL resource allocation of type 0, a scheduling entity 108 may provide a scheduled entity 106 with a bitmap having bits that represent an allocation in multiples of resource block groups (RBGs). In some examples, each bit in the bitmap can inform a scheduled entity 106 whether a corresponding RBG is allocated to that scheduled entity 106 for DL communication”);
and puncturing circuitry configured to puncture, from the set of PRBs, one or more PRBs that are outside of one or more subbands available for the PDSCH ([0104] “t may be advantageous, with SBFD in general, for a scheduled entity 106 to avoid utilizing resources related to such overlapping portions for DL resource allocation when the scheduled entity 106 has identified those resources as ‘not available’ for DL. In an example, the scheduled entity 106 may disregard resource elements (REs) related to such overlapping portions. That is, the scheduled entity 106 may assume REs related to such overlapping portions are unavailable for PDSCH and thus, the scheduled entity 106 may disregard such REs and instead, may process REs in non-overlapping portions, when communicating over the SBFD carrier”, [0111] “ And upon determining to disregard information related to any resources that fall within an overlapping portion of the DL resource allocation, the UE may communicate with the BS further, such as over the wireless carrier according to the bandwidth parts while disregarding the information related to the overlapping portion, for example, corresponding to the first BWP. In this way, the UE may utilize the slot format to communicate with the BS over the wireless carrier while disregarding DL data corresponding to an overlapping portion of the slot (e.g., an overlapping portion of the first BWP) having resources unavailable for DL communication, [0122] “disregard (e.g., ignore, forgo to process, omit, discard, exclude, etc.) according to one or more of the various techniques of this disclosure”(Examiner’s Note: puncture ==disregard).
Regarding claim 20, Abo teaches A base station of a cellular telecommunication system which communicates over a radio interface with at least one wireless terminal, the base station comprising: processing circuitry ([0180] “In accordance with various aspects of the present disclosure, the processing system 1014 may include an element, or any portion of an element, or any combination of elements having one or more processors 1004. The scheduling entity 1000 may be an example of a scheduling entity 108 (e.g., a BS) as described herein with reference, for example, to FIGS. 1, 2, and/or 4”)
configured to determine a set of physical resource blocks (PRBs) for a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) ([0100] “The VRB mapper 904 may further utilize “type 0” or “type 1” frequency domain resource allocation (FDRA) to schedule resources in a given VRB for a PDSCH. With DL resource allocation of type 0, a scheduling entity 108 may provide a scheduled entity 106 with a bitmap having bits that represent an allocation in multiples of resource block groups (RBGs). In some examples, each bit in the bitmap can inform a scheduled entity 106 whether a corresponding RBG is allocated to that scheduled entity 106 for DL communication”, [0112] “While the description that follows refers to FIGS. 12-17, which generally illustrate processes that take place at a scheduled entity 106 (e.g., a user equipment (UE)), it is to be understood that this disclosure is not limited to operations or processes at a scheduled entity 106. That is, the description that follows also describes processes and operations that take place at a scheduling entity 108 (e.g., a base station (BS), another UE configured for scheduling, etc.), and the present disclosure is written to fully disclose operations at both endpoints of a signaling exchange between said scheduled entity 106 and scheduling entity 108”, (Examiner’s Note: based on [0112] anything the scheduled entity 106 can perform can also be performed by scheduled entity 108 (BS));
and puncturing circuitry configured to puncture, from the set of PRBs, one or more PRBs that are outside of one or more subbands available for the PDSCH ([0104] “t may be advantageous, with SBFD in general, for a scheduled entity 106 to avoid utilizing resources related to such overlapping portions for DL resource allocation when the scheduled entity 106 has identified those resources as ‘not available’ for DL. In an example, the scheduled entity 106 may disregard resource elements (REs) related to such overlapping portions. That is, the scheduled entity 106 may assume REs related to such overlapping portions are unavailable for PDSCH and thus, the scheduled entity 106 may disregard such REs and instead, may process REs in non-overlapping portions, when communicating over the SBFD carrier”, [0111] “ And upon determining to disregard information related to any resources that fall within an overlapping portion of the DL resource allocation, the UE may communicate with the BS further, such as over the wireless carrier according to the bandwidth parts while disregarding the information related to the overlapping portion, for example, corresponding to the first BWP. In this way, the UE may utilize the slot format to communicate with the BS over the wireless carrier while disregarding DL data corresponding to an overlapping portion of the slot (e.g., an overlapping portion of the first BWP) having resources unavailable for DL communication, (Examiner’s Note: puncture ==disregard).
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.
The factual inquiries 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.
Claim(s) 19, 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abo in view of Xiong et al. (US20230224880).
Regarding claim 19, 21 Abo does not teach wherein a size of a transport block in the PDSCH is determined using a number of PRBs in the set subtracted by a number of the one or more PRBs punctured.
Xiong teaches wherein a size of a transport block in the PDSCH is determined using a number of PRBs in the set subtracted by a number of the one or more PRBs punctured ([0147] “In case of rate-matching, PDSCH transport block size determination is performed over the actual number of PRBs in the PDSCH allocation after rate-matching … Opt 2-3: If the frequency resource indicated by the DCI overlaps with the UL-sub-band, UE assumes that while encoded bits are generated corresponding to the resources in the affected PRBs, the PDSCH symbols are not mapped to the PRBs overlapping with the UL sub-band (also referred to as “puncturing”) so that UE only receives the PDSCH in PRBs outside the UL sub-band”).
It would have been obvious for one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Abo to incorporate the teachings of Xiong. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to increase efficiency of the system.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEITH TRAN-DANH FOLLANSBEE whose telephone number is (571)272-3071. The examiner can normally be reached 10am -6 pm M-Th.
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, Derrick Ferris can be reached at 571-272-3123. 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.
/K.T.F./Examiner, Art Unit 2411
/DERRICK W FERRIS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2411
Prosecution Insights