DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to the Applicant response filed on May 11, 2026. As set forth therein, claims 15 and 17 are amended and claims 15-36 are pending.
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 .
Reissue Applications
For reissue applications filed before September 16, 2012, all references to 35 U.S.C. 251 and 37 CFR 1.172, 1.175, and 3.73 are to the law and rules in effect on September 15, 2012. Where specifically designated, these are “pre-AIA ” provisions.
For reissue applications filed on or after September 16, 2012, all references to 35 U.S.C. 251 and 37 CFR 1.172, 1.175, and 3.73 are to the current provisions.
Applicant is reminded of the continuing obligation under 37 CFR 1.178(b), to timely apprise the Office of any prior or concurrent proceed-ing in which Patent No. 11,588,670 is or was involved. These proceedings would include interferences, reissues, reexaminations, and litigation.
Applicant is further reminded of the continuing obligation under 37 CFR 1.56, to timely apprise the Office of any information which is mate-rial to patentability of the claims under consideration in this reissue appli-cation.
These obligations rest with each individual associated with the filing and prosecution of this application for reissue. See also MPEP §§ 1404, 1442.01 and 1442.04.
Response to Arguments
35 U.S.C. § 101
The Applicant states that “Numerology” is a technical term, not a mathematical concept and that the specification specifically explains that the ‘numerology’ refers to physical layer parameters (subcarrier spacing, symbol length, cyclic prefix) in OFDM-based systems.
The Examiner agrees that “numerology” is a technical term; however, the claim is directed to the transmission of information and not directly to any function related to numerology. The recitation of ‘numerology’ is recited as part of the information that is being transmitted (“the information comprises…numerology information”). The claim is not directed to any function associated with the use of numerology. As set forth below in the 101 section, the Examiner noted that the claim was directed to the transmission of information and the information is based on organizing information which includes numerology and indexes. Thus, it is not specifically ‘numerology’ that is the issue, rather the issue is that the claim is specifically directed to the transmission of information.
The Applicant also states that the claims solve a technical problem and that the specification identifies that single-numerology carries cause inefficient spectrum utilization, and the claims provide a technical solution enabling multiple numerologies. Reference was made to paragraph [0042] of the originally-filed specification which discloses a solution to employ multiple numerologies in a single carrier and by receiving numerology information indicating numerologies of one or more basic units for the carrier, the terminal device can receive signal based on the numerology information.
The Examiner notes that the claim is not limited to a plurality (or multiple) numerologies. Rather, the claim is directed to the transmission of information and where the information includes numerology information. It is noted that the claimed numerology information is of “each of the one or more resource units”. Thus, the claim, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, covers a single numerology since at the very least it reads on “one resource unit”. The claim does not solve the technical problem set forth in the specification since it does not specifically require multiple numerologies.
The Applicant also states that the claims integrate into a practical application, namely, enhancement of 5G wireless communication systems to support diverse traffic requirements and high-density connection scenarios.
The Examiner notes that none of these applications are recited in the claim.
The Applicant also references USPTO’s Example 41 (Cryptographic Communication) which found claims eligible where mathematical formulas were used in a specific manner for network communication. The Applicant maintains that Example 41 states, “the mathematical concepts are integrated into a process that secures private network communications, so that a ciphertext word signal can be transmitted between computers of people who do not know each other or who have not shared a private key between them in advance of the message being transmitted”.
The Examiner notes that in Example 41, the mathematical concepts are integrated into a process that secure private network communication based on the claim limitations of “receiving a plain text word signal at the first computer terminal; transforming the plain text word signal to one or more message block word signals MA” and “transmitting the ciphertext word signal CA to the second computer terminal over a communication terminal”. Thus in the case, the claim as a whole (in Example 41) integrated the mathematical concept into a practical application.
In contrast, the instant reissue claim only recites the transmission of information to a terminal device. The terminal device does not perform any function and the network device only performs the function of “transmitting” which is not sufficient to show a practical application in comparison to Example 41 which in addition to transmitting, also transformed the plain text word signal.
For the above reasons, the Examiner does not find the Applicant’s arguments persuasive.
Claim Rejections – 35 USC 103
The Applicant states that claim 15 recites, in part, “an index of each of the one or more resource units” included in “information of one or more resource units”, which is transmitted from a network device to a terminal device “via a RRC signaling”.
With reference to paragraphs [0091-0092] of Tooher, the Applicant states that Tooher merely discloses the index derived from the detected system signature sequence and that Tooher is silent as to whether the index, which is derived from the detected system signature sequence, is also an index of “each of the one or more resource units”. In addition, the Applicant states that Examiner fails to provide any rationale as to why the index, which is derived from the detected system signals sequence in Tooher, is used for an entirely different purpose, namely, an index of each of the one or more resource units.
The Examiner finds that Tooher provides teachings directed to the use of an index as set forth in at least paragraphs [0091-0092]. It is acknowledged that paragraphs [0091-0092] disclose that the index is associated with a system signature, however, since index information is still received by the WTRU then it is still considered ‘information’ as claimed. As set forth in paragraph the index provides access to an access time for initial access parameters which include applicable physical layer resources. Thus, Tooher provides a teaching which links indexes to physical resources. In addition, the Examiner notes that the claim is not directed to using an index, rather the claim is directed to the transmission of information and then recites what that information comprises.
It is also noted that in paragraph [0193-0194], Tooher discloses that a resource block which are configured to a WTRU may be indexed. Further, Tooher also generally discloses the indexing of resource blocks in paragraph [0180].
As to whether this is an index of “each of the one or more resource units”, the Examiner found that the cited paragraphs disclose the indexing of resources and thus specifically discloses that it was well known to at least provide an index for resources. The Examiner finds that these teachings specifically provides a reason as to why index can be used for resource units (i.e. the teachings of using indexes for resources). As explained by Tooher in paragraph [0091], an index are used to retrieve parameters or as set forth in paragraphs [0193-0194] an index is used to specify index resource blocks in a sequence. See also paragraph [0180] which shows that resource block indexes are used to indicate the starting index for resource allocation.
Thus, the Examiner maintains that the teachings relied upon in Tooher show how indexing is used with respect to resources allocated to the WTRU. As set forth in the Office Action, it was acknowledged that Tooher discloses of an index of a resource block but did not specifically disclose of an index of a ‘resource unit’.
The Applicant states that Liu is about using an index to derive mapping relationships for the control channel resource set that corresponds to the EPDCCH. The Applicant states that Liu fails to disclose or teach that an index corresponds to “each of the one or more resource units” included in a message transmitted via a RRC signaling.
Liu discloses of providing index numbers to both resource sets and physical resource blocks of the set (see at least [0178]). The Examiner finds that the claim does not specifically define resource unit other than to specify that the resource block “in each of the…resource unit”. With respect to Liu, the resource block is of the set and thus is in each resource set. The Examiner notes that although paragraph [0178] does not disclose whether the index is received via RRC signaling, this teaching was already disclosed by Tooher which discloses of receiving parameters via RRC signaling. In addition, Liu also generally discloses the use of RRC signaling (see paragraph [0047]) for receiving information by the UE.
The Applicant further states that claim 15 recites, “a first index of a resource block in each of the one or more resource units and a number of resource blocks in each of the one or more resource units.” The Applicant states that Tooher’s resource block index and number of resource blocks are conveyed in DCI message (dynamic L1 signaling), not “via RRC signaling” as required by claim 15. The Applicant states that the Examiner fails to explain why it would have been obvious to move DCI-level scheduling information of Tooher into the RRC signaling.
The Examiner notes that Tooher discloses that both DCI transmission and RRC signaling can be used for the transmission of parameters for the numerology blocks. As set forth in paragraph [0113], Tooher discloses that “parameters for at least one numerology block may be indicated semi-statically by higher layer signaling (e.g., RRC signaling)”. In addition, in paragraph [0114], Tooher discloses “parameters may be indicated dynamically. For example, downlink control information (DCI) may indicate the boundary and set of parameters of at least one numerology block.” Paragraph [0115] discloses that “the appropriate numerology (or numerologies) may be indicated to the WTRU to be used in the resources that the WTRU is schedule to transmit or receive data”. Thus, Tooher equally discloses that it was known to indicate numerology block parameters via either RRC signaling or DCI signaling.
The Applicant states that claim 15 requires this information on a per-resource-unit basis (in each of the one or more resource units”), whereas Tooher’s [0180] discusses a general resource block index and number of resource blocks within a DCI scheduling grant, not per-resource-unit information.
The Examiner notes that the claim is written in a manner which only requires “one” resource unit (“one or more”) and thus does not specifically require the information on a “per-resource unit basis”. Nonetheless, Tooher discloses that the PRBs are consecutively indexed. Thus, each PRB in Tooher is indexed. See paragraphs [0193-0194]. Thus, information for each resource is disclosed by Tooher.
For the above reasons, the Examiner does not find the Applicant’s arguments persuasive.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed May 11, 2026 proposes amendments to the claims that do not comply with 37 CFR 1.173(b), which sets forth the manner of making amendments in reissue applications.
The Examiner notes that in accordance with 37 CFR 1.173(d), matter to be added by reissue must be underlined. Since claims 15-36 are new relative to the patent being reissued, they must be underlined in their entirety. It is noted that a separate marked up copy may be provided in order show what is changed relative to the previous amendment. See MPEP 1453(VI)(D).
Specification
The Examiner notes that the previous amendment to the specification filed on February 21, 2025 states that the amendment should be inserted “immediately under the Title”. The Examiner notes that the ‘670 Patent includes a Cross Reference to Related Applications Section which already lists PCT/CN2016/000597.
Clarification is respectfully requested as to whether the amendment to the specification should continue to be inserted after the title or whether an amended should be made to col. 1, lines 7-1 of the patent with respect to the Cross Reference to Related Applications section.
In addition, the Examiner notes that the amendment should specify the column and line number of the insertion.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 15-16 and 18-36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Eligibility Step 1:
The Examiner determines that the claims recite a “process, machine, manufacture, or composition” under § 101 because claims 15 and 20 recites a “method” (i.e., a process) and claims 23 and 26 recite a “device”. Thus, the claim is based on one of the categories of eligible subject matter described in 35 U.S.C §101.
The Examiner notes that in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int’l, 573 U.S. 208 (2014), the Supreme Court provided a two-step framework to apply when evaluating whether a claim attempts to patent purely an abstract idea. In the first step of the Alice framework, a determination is made as to whether the claim at issue is “directed to” an abstract idea. In the second step of the Alice framework, a determination is made as to whether additional elements transform the claim into something “significantly more” than the abstract idea. See MPEP 2106.
Eligibility Step 2A, Prong One:
The Examiner notes that in the first prong of Step 2A (Prong One), we evaluate whether the claim “recites” a judicial exception, such as an abstract idea. (2019 Guidance, Federal Register Vol. 84, No. 4, 54.) The 2019 Guidance “extracts and synthesizes key concepts identified by the courts as abstract ideas,” these concepts include “[c]ertain methods of organizing human activity,” “[m]athematical concepts”, and “[m]ental processes”).
In determining whether the claim recites a judicial exception (a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea), the Examiner determines that claim 15 recites “a method performed by a network device, the method comprising transmitting, to a terminal device, information of one or more resource units via a RRC signaling” and where the information comprises ‘numerology’ information and ‘index’ of each of the resource units and a first ‘index’ of a resource block. Claim 20 recites, “a method performed by a terminal device, the method comprising receiving, from a network device, information of one or more resource units via a radio resource control (RRC) signaling” and where the information comprises ‘numerology’ information and ‘index’ of each of the resource units and a first ‘index’ of a resource block. Claim 23 recites “a network device…to transmit to a terminal device, information of one or more resource units via a radio resource control (RRC) signaling” and where the information comprises ‘numerology’ information and ‘index’ of each of the resource units and a first ‘index’ of a resource block. Claim 26 recites “a terminal device…to receive, from a network device, information of one or more resource units via a radio resource control (RRC) signaling” and where the information comprises ‘numerology’ information and ‘index’ of each of the resource units and a first ‘index’ of a resource block. In each of these claims, the claim is directed to the general transmission or reception of information as where the information comprises at least index information regarding resources.
The Examiner finds that each of these claims merely invoke generic processes such as the transmission or reception of numerology and index information and thus are directed to a mathematical concept since they are directed to organizing information using numerology and indexes.
Therefore, claims 15, 20, 23 and 26 recites a judicial exception (i.e. an abstract idea).
Eligibility Step 2A, Prong Two
In the second prong of Step 2A (Prong Two), we evaluate whether the claim contains additional elements that “integrate” the abstract idea “into a practical application.” (2019 Guidance, Federal Register Vol. 84, No. 4, 54.) When a claim’s additional elements amount to generic computer components performing generic computer functions, they do not integrate an abstract idea into a practical application. (See id. at 55.) For example, the “mere automation” of a manual activity “does not negate its abstraction.” (Data Engine Techs., LLC v. Google LLC, 90 F.3d 999, 1013 (Fed. Cir. 2018).) If a claim recites an abstract idea, and the claim’s additional elements “do not integrate” the abstract idea “into a practical application,” then the claim is “directed to” an abstract idea under Step 2A. (2019 Guidance, Federal Register Vol. 84, 54.)
In determining whether the claim recites additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application, the Examiner determines that MPEP 2106.04(d) identifies considerations indicative of whether an additional element or combination of elements integrate the judicial exception into a practical application, such as an additional element reflecting and improving the functions of a computer or an improvement to other technology or technical field. See also MPEP 2106.05(a). In this case, the claims recite, “a method comprising transmitting…information of one or more resource units”. “a method comprising receiving…information of one or resource units”, “a network device…to transmit…information of one or more resource units” as well as including an “numerology” and “index” for the resource units and resource blocks.
The Examiner finds that the additional elements of “terminal” or “network device” or including numerology or an index do not reflect an improvement in the functions of a computer or an improvement to other technology or technical field. That is, the claims are directed to the transmission of “information” and the additional elements pertain to the content of the information (i.e. numerology or index) without providing any further details as to any improvement in the function of a computer or an improvement to other technology or technical field.
Thus, with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of using a “network device” or “terminal” amounts to no more than the mere transmission of “information” and the use of numerology or an index and to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Mere transmission of information or including numerology information or an index to apply an exception using a generic computer component does not adequately provide an inventive concept.
Eligibility Step 2B, Prong Two
In Step 2B, we evaluate whether “additional elements” recited in the claim provide “‘significantly more’ than the recited judicial exception.” (2019 Guidance, Federal Register Vol. 84, No. 4, 56.) More particularly, we evaluate whether these additional elements “add[] a specific limitation or combination of limitations that are not well-understood, routine, conventional activity,” or whether they instead “simply append[] well understood, routine, conventional activities previously known to the industry, specified at a high level of generality, to the judicial exception.” (Id.) If a claim is directed to an abstract idea under Step 2A, and the claim’s additional elements do not provide significantly more than this abstract idea under Step 2B, then “the claim is ineligible.” ((2019 Guidance, Federal Register Vol. 84, No. 4, 56.)
In determining whether the addition elements recited in the claim provide “significantly more” than the recited judicial exception, the Examiner finds that claims 15 and 20 recite a network device and a terminal device. The claim does not recite any additional elements other that reciting what is included with “the information”. Thus, the additional elements simply routine and conventional activity such as the transmission or reception of information. In addition, claim 23 and claim 26 recited a memory configured to store a program and a processor configured to execute the program to receive or transmit” These additional elements amount to conventional and routine activity and are not considered to provide “significantly more”.
In view of the above discussion, the claim is not patent eligible.
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) 15, 16 and 19-36 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tooher et al. US Patent Pub. 2019/02084821 in view of Liu et al. US Patent Pub. 2015/0236826.
Regarding claim 15:
A method performed by a network device, the method comprising transmitting, to a terminal device, information of one or more resource units via a radio resource control (RRC) signaling,
Tooher is directed to a wireless transmit/receive unit (WTRU) for monitoring a control region indicating boundaries of a plurality of numerology blocks of a carrier. See the abstract. As explained in paragraph [0113], at least one boundary or sets of parameters for at least one numerology block may be indicated by RRC signaling and the WTRU (terminal device) may receive this transmission from a gNB (network device). See also paragraph [0115] which discloses that the transmission relates to the resources that the WTRU is scheduled to transmit or receive. See also paragraph [0119]. Tooher discloses in paragraph [0079] and Figure 3 that a subcarrier spacing is set to 15kHz. As illustrated in Figure 3, one subcarrier is one resource unit. See also Figure 5A and paragraph [0191].
wherein the information comprises: numerology information of each of the one or more resource units,
As set forth in paragraph [0100], the WTRU receives an information block which provides numerology information with respect to resources. See also paragraphs [0112],[0128-0129] and [0179]. As explain in paragraph [0173], based on the information, the WTRU may determine the total number of resource elements or may receive information regarding a set of resource elements or resource blocks (paragraph [0191]). See also paragraph [0195].
an index of each of the one or more resource units, and
As set forth in paragraph [0091-0092], the Tooher discloses that the WTRU may derive an index which is used to provide parameters. The parameters include resources for the WTRU. As set forth in paragraph [0193-0194], Tooher discloses that the PRBs are indexed.
The Examiner notes that to the extent it is considered that Tooher does not specifically disclose an index of a ‘resource unit’, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide an index to each of the one or more resource units since Tooher already discloses of providing an index to the WTRU.
Nonetheless, Liu discloses that it was known for a User Equipment to receiving information about the mapping of a resource element group and a resource element of each resource set according to the index and the index number of the first physical resource block PRB of the resource set. See paragraph [0178-0181]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a persons of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include information regarding an index of a resource unit. As set forth above, both Tooher and Liu both discloses of providing index information regarding various resources. In addition, it would have been predictable to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide index information for each resource. As explained in paragraph [0175] of Tooher, the information provided to the WTRU allows for are more efficient allocation of resource usage. In addition, Tooher in paragraph [0193] states that resource blocks must be index since such indexing allows the WTRU to determine which bandwidth portions of a carrier are not configured for the WTRU.
a first index of a resource block in each of the one or more resource units and a number of resource blocks in each of the one or more resource units.
As set forth in paragraph [0180], the starting index for a resource allocation is indicated. In addition, the number or resource blocks is also indicated. Likewise, Liu also discloses that the index number of the first physical resource block is received in the information.
Regarding claim 16:
The method of claim 15, wherein the first index is an index of a first resource block in a first resource unit allocated to the terminal device.
As set forth in paragraph [0193-0194], Tooher discloses that the PRBs are indexed. As set forth in paragraph [0180], the starting index for a resource allocation (resource block index) is indicated.
Regarding claim 19:
The method of claim 15, further comprising transmitting, to the terminal device, a signal based on the information.
As explained in paragraph [0113], at least one boundary or sets of parameters for at least one numerology block may be indicated by RRC signaling and the WTRU (terminal device) may receive this transmission. See also paragraph [0115] which discloses that the transmission relates to the resources that the WTRU is scheduled to transmit or receive. See also paragraph [0119]
Regarding claim 20:
A method performed by a terminal device, the method comprising receiving, from a network device, information of one or more resource units via a radio resource control (RRC) signaling, wherein the information comprises:
Tooher is directed to a wireless transmit/receive unit (WTRU) for monitoring a control region indicating boundaries of a plurality of numerology blocks of a carrier. See the abstract. As explained in paragraph [0113], at least one boundary or sets of parameters for at least one numerology block may be indicated by RRC signaling and the WTRU (terminal device) may receive this transmission from a gNB (network device). See also paragraph [0115] which discloses that the transmission relates to the resources that the WTRU is scheduled to transmit or receive. See also paragraph [0119]. Tooher discloses in paragraph [0079] and Figure 3 that a subcarrier spacing is set to 15kHz. As illustrated in Figure 3, one subcarrier is one resource unit. See also Figure 5A and paragraph [0191].
numerology information of each of the one or more resource units;
As set forth in paragraph [0100], the WTRU receives an information block which provides numerology information with respect to resources. See also paragraphs [0112],[0128-0129] and [0179]. As explain in paragraph [0173], based on the information, the WTRU may determine the total number of resource elements or may receive information regarding a set of resource elements or resource blocks (paragraph [0191]). See also paragraph [0195].
an index of each of the one or more resource units; and
As set forth in paragraph [0091-0092], the Tooher discloses that the WTRU may derive an index which is used to provide parameters. The parameters include resources for the WTRU. As set forth in paragraph [0193-0194], Tooher discloses that the PRBs are indexed.
The Examiner notes that to the extent it is considered that Tooher does not specifically disclose an index of a ‘resource unit’, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide an index to each of the one or more resource units since Tooher already discloses of providing an index to the WTRU.
Nonetheless, Liu discloses that it was known for a UE/WTRU unit to receiving information about the mapping of a resource element group (resource unit) and a resource element of each resource set according to the index and the index number of the first physical resource block PRB of the resource set. See paragraph [0178-0181]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a persons of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include information regarding an index of a resource unit. As set forth above, both Tooher and Liu both discloses of providing index information regarding various resources. In addition, it would have been predictable to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide index information for each resource. As explained in paragraph [0175] of Tooher, the information provided to the WTRU allows for are more efficient allocation of resource usage. In addition, Tooher in paragraph [0193] states that resource blocks must be index since such indexing allows the WTRU to determine which bandwidth portions of a carrier are not configured for the WTRU.
a first index of a resource block in each of the one or more resource units and a number of resource blocks in each of the one or more resource units.
As set forth in paragraph [0180], the starting index for a resource allocation is indicated. In addition, the number or resource blocks is also indicated. Likewise, Liu also discloses that the index number of the first physical resource block is received in the information.
Regarding claim 21:
The method of claim 20, wherein the first index is an index of a first resource block in a first resource unit allocated to the terminal device.
As set forth in paragraph [0193-0194], Tooher discloses that the PRBs are indexed. As set forth in paragraph [0180], the starting index for a resource allocation (resource block index) is indicated.
Regarding claim 22:
The method of claim 20, further comprising receiving, from the network device, a signal based on the information.
As explained in paragraph [0113], at least one boundary or sets of parameters for at least one numerology block may be indicated by RRC signaling and the WTRU (terminal device) may receive this transmission. See also paragraph [0115] which discloses that the transmission relates to the resources that the WTRU is scheduled to transmit or receive. See also paragraph [0119]
Regarding claim 23:
A network device comprising: a memory configured to store a program; and a processor configured to execute the program to transmit, to a terminal device, information of one or more resource units via a radio resource control (RRC) signaling, wherein the information comprises:
Tooher is directed to a wireless transmit/receive unit (WTRU) for monitoring a control region indicating boundaries of a plurality of numerology blocks of a carrier. See the abstract. As explained in paragraph [0113], at least one boundary or sets of parameters for at least one numerology block may be indicated by RRC signaling and the WTRU (terminal device) may receive this transmission from a gNB (network device). See also paragraph [0115] which discloses that the transmission relates to the resources that the WTRU is scheduled to transmit or receive. See also paragraph [0119]. Tooher discloses in paragraph [0079] and Figure 3 that a subcarrier spacing is set to 15kHz. As illustrated in Figure 3, one subcarrier is one resource unit. See also Figure 5A and paragraph [0191].
As explained in paragraph [0210], the methods are implemented in a computer program and executed by a processor. See also paragraph [0021] which discloses that the network device is a base station, eNB, gNB, NR NodeB, site controller or the like.
numerology information of each of the one or more resource units;
As set forth in paragraph [0100], the WTRU receives an information block which provides numerology information with respect to resources. See also paragraphs [0112], [0128-0129] and [0179]. As explain in paragraph [0173], based on the information, the WTRU may determine the total number of resource elements or may receive information regarding a set of resource elements or resource blocks (paragraph [0191]). See also paragraph [0195].
an index of each of the one or more resource units; and
As set forth in paragraph [0091-0092], the Tooher discloses that the WTRU may derive an index which is used to provide parameters. The parameters include resources for the WTRU. As set forth in paragraph [0193-0194], Tooher discloses that the PRBs are indexed.
The Examiner notes that to the extent it is considered that Tooher does not specifically disclose an index of a ‘resource unit’, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide an index to each of the one or more resource units since Tooher already discloses of providing an index to the WTRU.
Nonetheless, Liu discloses that it was known for a UE/WTRU unit to receiving information about the mapping of a resource element group (resource unit) and a resource element of each resource set according to the index and the index number of the first physical resource block PRB of the resource set. See paragraph [0178-0181]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a persons of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include information regarding an index of a resource unit. As set forth above, both Tooher and Liu both discloses of providing index information regarding various resources. In addition, it would have been predictable to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide index information for each resource. As explained in paragraph [0175] of Tooher, the information provided to the WTRU allows for are more efficient allocation of resource usage. In addition, Tooher in paragraph [0193] states that resource blocks must be index since such indexing allows the WTRU to determine which bandwidth portions of a carrier are not configured for the WTRU.
a first index of a resource block in each of the one or more resource units and a number of resource blocks in each of the one or more resource units.
As set forth in paragraph [0180], the starting index for a resource allocation is indicated. In addition, the number or resource blocks is also indicated. Likewise, Liu also discloses that the index number of the first physical resource block is received in the information.
Regarding claim 24:
The network device of claim 23, wherein the first index is an index of a first resource block in a first resource unit allocated to the terminal device.
As set forth in paragraph [0193-0194], Tooher discloses that the PRBs are indexed. As set forth in paragraph [0180], the starting index for a resource allocation (resource block index) is indicated.
Regarding claim 25:
The network device of claim 23, wherein the processor is further configured to transmit, to the terminal device, a signal based on the information.
As explained in paragraph [0113], at least one boundary or sets of parameters for at least one numerology block may be indicated by RRC signaling and the WTRU (terminal device) may receive this transmission. See also paragraph [0115] which discloses that the transmission relates to the resources that the WTRU is scheduled to transmit or receive. See also paragraph [0119]
Regarding claim 26:
A terminal device comprising: a memory configured to store a program; and a processor configured to execute the program to receive, from a network device, information of one or more resource units via a radio resource control (RRC) signaling, wherein the information comprises:
Tooher is directed to a wireless transmit/receive unit (WTRU) for monitoring a control region indicating boundaries of a plurality of numerology blocks of a carrier. See the abstract. As explained in paragraph [0113], at least one boundary or sets of parameters for at least one numerology block may be indicated by RRC signaling and the WTRU (terminal device) may receive this transmission from a gNB (network device). See also paragraph [0115] which discloses that the transmission relates to the resources that the WTRU is scheduled to transmit or receive. See also paragraph [0119]. Tooher discloses in paragraph [0079] and Figure 3 that a subcarrier spacing is set to 15kHz. As illustrated in Figure 3, one subcarrier is one resource unit. See also Figure 5A and paragraph [0191].
As explained in paragraph [0210], the methods are implemented in a computer program and executed by a processor. With respect to Figure 1B and paragraph [0033-0034], the WTRU (terminal device) includes a memory (non-removable and removable) and a processor.
numerology information of each of the one or more resource units;
As set forth in paragraph [0100], the WTRU receives an information block which provides numerology information with respect to resources. See also paragraphs [0112], [0128-0129] and [0179]. As explain in paragraph [0173], based on the information, the WTRU may determine the total number of resource elements or may receive information regarding a set of resource elements or resource blocks (paragraph [0191]). See also paragraph [0195].
an index of each of the one or more resource units; and
As set forth in paragraph [0091-0092], the Tooher discloses that the WTRU may derive an index which is used to provide parameters. The parameters include resources for the WTRU. As set forth in paragraph [0193-0194], Tooher discloses that the PRBs are indexed.
The Examiner notes that to the extent it is considered that Tooher does not specifically disclose an index of a ‘resource unit’, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide an index to each of the one or more resource units since Tooher already discloses of providing an index to the WTRU.
Nonetheless, Liu discloses that it was known for a UE/WTRU unit to receiving information about the mapping of a resource element group (resource unit) and a resource element of each resource set according to the index and the index number of the first physical resource block PRB of the resource set. See paragraph [0178-0181]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a persons of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include information regarding an index of a resource unit. As set forth above, both Tooher and Liu both discloses of providing index information regarding various resources. In addition, it would have been predictable to a person of ordinary skill in the art to provide index information for each resource. As explained in paragraph [0175] of Tooher, the information provided to the WTRU allows for are more efficient allocation of resource usage. In addition, Tooher in paragraph [0193] states that resource blocks must be index since such indexing allows the WTRU to determine which bandwidth portions of a carrier are not configured for the WTRU.
a first index of a resource block in each of the one or more resource units and a number of resource blocks in each of the one or more resource units.
As set forth in paragraph [0180], the starting index for a resource allocation is indicated. In addition, the number or resource blocks is also indicated. Likewise, Liu also discloses that the index number of the first physical resource block is received in the information.
Regarding claim 27:
The terminal device of claim 26, wherein the first index is an index of a first resource block in a first resource unit allocated to the terminal device.
As set forth in paragraph [0193-0194], Tooher discloses that the PRBs are indexed. As set forth in paragraph [0180], the starting index for a resource allocation (resource block index) is indicated.
Regarding claim 28:
The terminal device of claim 26, wherein the processor is further configured to receive, from the network device, a signal based on the information.
As explained in paragraph [0113], at least one boundary or sets of parameters for at least one numerology block may be indicated by RRC signaling and the WTRU (terminal device) may receive this transmission. See also paragraph [0115] which discloses that the transmission relates to the resources that the WTRU is scheduled to transmit or receive. See also paragraph [0119]
Regarding claim 29:
The method of claim 15, wherein the information is a resource allocation information.
See paragraph [0180] which discloses that the information that is received is for a resource allocation.
Regarding claim 30:
The method of claim 15, wherein the resource block is a physical resource block, and wherein the resource blocks are physical resource blocks.
See paragraph [0193] which discloses that the resource blocks can be physical resource blocks.
Regarding claim 31:
The method of claim 20, wherein the information is a resource allocation information.
See paragraph [0180] which discloses that the information that is received is for a resource allocation.
Regarding claim 32:
The method of claim 20, wherein the resource block is a physical resource block, and wherein the resource blocks are physical resource blocks.
See paragraph [0193] which discloses that the resource blocks can be physical resource blocks.
Regarding claim 33:
The network device of claim 23, wherein the information is a resource allocation information.
See paragraph [0180] which discloses that the information that is received is for a resource allocation.
Regarding claim 34:
The network device of claim 23, wherein the resource block is a physical resource block, and wherein the resource blocks are physical resource blocks.
See paragraph [0193] which discloses that the resource blocks can be physical resource blocks.
Regarding claim 35:
The terminal device of claim 26, wherein the information is a resource allocation information.
See paragraph [0180] which discloses that the information that is received is for a resource allocation.
Regarding claim 36:
The terminal device of claim 26, wherein the resource block is a physical resource block, and wherein the resource blocks are physical resource blocks.
See paragraph [0193] which discloses that the resource blocks can be physical resource blocks.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 17 is 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
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Ovidio Escalante whose telephone number is (571)272-7537. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Friday - 6:00 AM to 2:30 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Michael Fuelling can be reached on (571) 270-1367. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-9000. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center and the Private Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center or Private PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center and Private PAIR for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/Ovidio Escalante/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3992
Conferees:
/MATTHEW E HENEGHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3992 /M.F/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3992
1 The Examiner notes that Tooher US Patent Pub 2019/0208482 claims priority to Provisional Application No. 62/373,089 filed on August 10, 2016 and Provisional Application No. 62/400,950 filed on September 28, 2016. The Examiner maintains that the teachings relied upon by Tooher are supported by the provisional applications.
Prosecution Insights