Alcatel LucentDownload PDFPatent Trials and Appeals BoardNov 23, 20212020005413 (P.T.A.B. Nov. 23, 2021) Copy Citation UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE United States Patent and Trademark Office Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS P.O. Box 1450 Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450 www.uspto.gov APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO. 15/513,310 03/22/2017 Shin Horng Wong LUTZ 202221US01 5781 48116 7590 11/23/2021 FAY SHARPE/NOKIA 1228 Euclid Avenue, 5th Floor The Halle Building Cleveland, OH 44115-1843 EXAMINER MAK, PETER K ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 2413 NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE 11/23/2021 ELECTRONIC Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding. The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication. Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the following e-mail address(es): docketing@faysharpe.com PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07) UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE ____________ BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD ____________ Ex parte SHIN HORNG WONG, SEAU SIAN LIM, YU CHEN, and MATTHEW BAKER Appeal 2020-005413 Application 15/513,310 Technology Center 2400 ____________ Before RICHARD M. LEBOVITZ, ELENI MANTIS MERCADER, and JAMES W. DEJMEK, Administrative Patent Judges. LEBOVITZ, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL The Examiner rejected claims 1–20 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as obvious. Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 134(a), Appellant1 appeals from the Examiner’s decision to reject the claims. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b). We REVERSE. 1 We use the word “Appellant” to refer to “applicant” as defined in 37 C.F.R. § 1.42 (2019). Appellant identifies the real party in interest as Alcatel Lucent. Appeal Br. 1. Appeal 2020-005413 Application 15/513,310 2 STATEMENT OF THE CASE The Examiner rejected claims 1–20 in the Final Action as follows: Claims 7, 11–13, and 20 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(2) as anticipated by Nguyen et al. (US 2015/0230249 A1, published Aug. 13, 2015) (“Nguyen”). Final Act. 6. Claims 1–5 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as obvious in view of Nguyen and Papasakellariou et al. (US 2014/0328260 A1, published Nov. 6, 2014) (“Papasakellariou”). Final Act. 13. Claim 6 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as obvious in view of Nguyen, Papasakellariou, and Seo et al. (US 2015/0092690 A1, published Apr. 2, 2015) (“Seo”). Final Act. 18. Claims 8–10, 14, and 15 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as obvious in view of Nguyen and Yi et al. (US 2016/0309470 A1, published Oct. 20, 2016) (“Yi”). Final Act. 20. Claims 16–19 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as obvious in view of Nguyen, Papasakellariou, and Yi. Final Act. 25. Independent claims 7 and 1 are reproduced below (annotated with bracketed numbers for reference to the recited limitations): 7. A method for data transmission in a base station, the base station being for transmitting data to a plurality of machine type communication device terminals, comprising: [1] performing the following when the base station transmits a first portion of a data transmission in a cell common message to the plurality of machine type communication device terminals: [1a] transmitting first indication information from the base station to the plurality of machine type communication device terminals via an EPDCCH on a first resource block, wherein the first indication information indicates a second resource block for transmitting the first portion of the data Appeal 2020-005413 Application 15/513,310 3 transmission in the cell common message from the base station via a PDSCH; and [1b] transmitting the first portion of the data transmission in the cell common message from the base station to the plurality of machine type communication device terminals via the PDSCH on the second resource block; and [2] performing the following when the base station transmits a second portion of the data transmission in downlink data to at least a portion of the plurality of machine type communication device terminals, the portion of the plurality of machine type communication device terminals to which the downlink data in the second portion of the data transmission is transmitted needing to obtain the second portion of the data transmission in the downlink data: [2a] assigning a downlink resource block for each machine type communication device terminal of the portion of machine type communication device terminals that need to obtain the second portion of the data transmission in the downlink data from the base station; [2b] transmitting second indication information from the base station to the portion of machine type communication device terminals that need to obtain the second portion of the data transmission in the downlink data via the EPDCCH on a third resource block, the second indication information including DCI information for the machine type communication device terminals of the portion of machine type communication device terminals that need to obtain the second portion of the data transmission in the downlink data from the base station, respective DCI information indicating the downlink resource block assigned by the base station to the respective machine type communication device terminal for receiving the second portion of the data transmission in the downlink data from the base station via the PDSCH; and [2c] transmitting the second portion of the data transmission in the downlink data from the base station to the portion of machine type communication device terminals that need to obtain the second portion of the data transmission in the Appeal 2020-005413 Application 15/513,310 4 downlink data via the PDSCH on the downlink resource block, respectively. 1. A method for receiving data transmission in a machine type communication device terminal, comprising: [1] performing the following when the machine type communication device terminal receives a first portion of a data transmission in a cell common message from a base station: [1a] receiving first indication information at the machine type communication device terminal from the base station via an EPDCCH on [1ai] a first resource block, wherein the first indication information [1aii] indicates a second resource block for receiving the first portion of the data transmission in the cell common message from the base station via a PDSCH; and [1b] receiving the first portion of the data transmission in the cell common message at the machine type communication device terminal from the base station via the PDSCH on the second resource block; and [2] performing the following when the machine type communication device terminal receives a second portion of the data transmission in downlink data from the base station: [2a] receiving second indication information at the machine type communication device terminal from the base station via the EPDCCH on [2ai] a third resource block; [2b] detecting whether DCI information exists in the second indication information and, if the DCI information exists, [2bi] decoding identifying information of a fourth resource block in the detected DCI information for receiving the second portion of the data transmission in the downlink data from the base station via the PDSCH; and [2c] receiving the second portion of the data transmission in the downlink data at the machine type communication device terminal from the base station via the PDSCH on the fourth resource block. Appeal 2020-005413 Application 15/513,310 5 ANTICIPATION Claim 7 is directed to a method for transmitting data from a base station to a plurality of machine type communication device terminals. A “Machine Type Communication (MTC) device is a user equipment [(UE)] that is used by a machine for specific application. An example of such an MTC device is smart meter.” Spec. ¶ 2. The claim has two main steps, step [1] of transmitting a first portion of data in a “cell common message” and step [2] of transmitting a second portion of the data transmission in downlink data. Step [1] accomplishes the data transmission of the first data portion in two steps. The first step [1a] is transmitting a first indication via EPDCCH on a first block. The first indication indicates a second resource block for transmitting the first portion on the data transmission. An EPDCCH is an enhanced physical downlink control channel. Nguyen ¶ 30. The EPDCCH is mapped to physical resource blocks (PRBs) in the data region of the physical layer. Spec. ¶ 5; Nguyen ¶ 30. The second step [1b] is transmitting the first portion of the data transmission via PDSCH on the second resource block (of the physical layer) indicated in step [1a]. PDSCH is a physical downlink shared channel. Step [2] accomplishes the data transmission of the second data portion in three steps. The first step [2a] is assigning a downlink resource for each MTC device terminal block. The second step [2b] is the base station transmitting a second indication, via the EPDCCH on a third resource block, to the MTC. The Appeal 2020-005413 Application 15/513,310 6 second indication includes DCI (downlink control information) indicating the downlink resource block for receiving the second portion of the data transmission. The third step [2c] is the base station transmitting the second portion of the data transmission in the downlink data via the PDSCH on the downlink resource block indicated in the step [2b]. To summarize the main limitations of claim 7 for the purpose of this appeal: The first step [1] comprises transmitting a first indication that comprises an indication of the second resource block on which the first portion of the data transmission is received. The second step comprises transmitting a second indication that comprises an indication of the downlink resource block on which the second portion of the data transmission is received. Rejection The Examiner cited Nguyen as anticipating the claim. Final Act. 6. The Examiner cited various disclosures in Nguyen as disclosing the steps of the claim, specifically referencing paragraphs 222–226 of Nguyen as describing steps [1] and [2] of claim 7 as summarized above. Id. ¶¶ 6, 7, 9– 10. Paragraphs 222–226 of Nguyen describe a process shown in the flowchart depicted in Figure 9a. Figure 9a of Nguyen is reproduced below: Appeal 2020-005413 Application 15/513,310 7 Figure 9a, reproduced above, is a flowchart of a process conducted by a wireless base (eNB) station in Nguyen. The process comprises steps 902 to 910. The Examiner summarized the mapping of the claim limitations to the process in Figure 9a as follows: As explained in Oct Action, Nguyen [0222-0226] Fig. 9a clearly describe a method embodying the invention as conducted by a wireless base station (i.e. eNB). For example, at step 904 and 908, the eNB transmits a control message (i.e. first DCI) (i.e., first indication information) within an ePDCCH (i.e., first resource block) which comprises location information indicating the location of a data region of subframe within a PDSCH (i.e., a second resource block) specially for the MTC US's reception and demodulation of a MTC-SIB (i.e., cell-common messages) (i.e., first portion of a data transmission), which is transmitted by the eNB at step 910). Furthermore, [Para. 0189] as illustrated in FIG. 5, a ‘common search’ on the ePDCCH 422-a, carrying control information (DCI) indicating the location within the data region subframe of PDSCH, 433-a, which carrying MTC-SIB to enable the MTC device for reception, demodulation and Appeal 2020-005413 Application 15/513,310 8 decoding of the MTC-SIB. [Para, 0092] the SIB comprising cell access information and cell selection information, located within a Broadcast Control Channel (BCCH) of the data region of a PDSCH (i.e., SIB message comprising cell common message). Thus, the eNB transmits the first indication information (i.e., DCI message) within a first resource block (i.e., ePDCCH) which indicate location information for the transmitting the MTC-SIB (i.e., first portion of a data transmission in a cell common message) being broadcasted via the data region of the PDSCH (i.e., second resource block) to all low-lost MTC devices under the cell coverage 250 as shown in Fig. 1. Ans. 8. The Examiner refers to 904 and 908 of Figure 9a as the “first indication.” Ans. 8. This finding is somewhat unclear because step [1a] of the claim recites only one step in which a first indication is transmitted, not two as indicated by the Examiner. We address each of these steps separately to determine whether they meet the claim limitation. Claim 7 recites that the first indication is on a first resource block and is required by the claim to indicate a “second resource block” for receiving the first portion of the data transmission. To meet this limitation, the Examiner identifies the DCI as the “first indication” and the “second resource block” as the “location information indicating the location of a data region of subframe within a PDSCH (i.e., second resource block).” Ans. 8. Step 904, however, is described differently by Nguyen: At step 904, in order to provide support for a DL-2 option, the first control message (i.e. first DCI) is duplicated, by a transmission within a reduced bandwidth of the data region. In particular, in embodiments of the invention the duplicated DCI is transmitted within an ePDCCH configured for blind detection by an MTC UE. Nguyen ¶ 224. Appeal 2020-005413 Application 15/513,310 9 The duplicated message is for “blind detection,” which is described by Nguyen as being done to “eliminate[] signal processing on the full carrier DL bandwidth for the control channel” and to “streamline[] the signal processing for MTC within a reduced bandwidth for both control and data channels.” Nguyen ¶ 210. The Examiner did not explain the relevance of message duplication and blind detection to the recited “first indication.” The Examiner’s statement in the Answer about location information indicating the location of a data region appears in the description of step 902 of Figure 9a of Nguyen. Specifically, Nguyen discloses: At step 902 the eNB transmits a first control message within the control region of a subframe, i.e. a first DCI, which identifies a location of a second control message within the data region of the subframe, i.e. the SIB 1. Nguyen ¶ 223. The mapping by the Examiner to step 904 of the “first indication” is therefore inconsistent because the description cited by the Examiner for step 904 is actually in step 902 of Figure 9a. Consequently, we shall take step 902 into consideration because that appears to be what the Examiner is referencing. In step 902 (“Transmit 1st control message (DCI)”), Nguyen discloses that the DCI identifies location for a control message “SIB 1” in the data region of the subframe of the physical layer. Nguyen ¶ 223. The claim requires that [1b] “the first indication information indicates a second resource block for transmitting the first portion of the data transmission.” The Examiner did not provide evidence that the “SIB 1” is a resource block nor that it is subsequently utilized to transmit the first portion of the data transmission as required by step [1b] of the claim. An SIB is a system Appeal 2020-005413 Application 15/513,310 10 information block, which is described by Nguyen paragraphs 25–28 as having one or more of the following attributes: [0025] downlink reduced bandwidth information; [0026] uplink carrier frequency and bandwidth information; [0027] random access parameters information; and [0028] frame and subframe configuration information. The Examiner, in fact, acknowledges that SIB is a message and finds that it is the first portion of the data transmission. Ans. 7. For these reasons, we conclude that the Examiner’s finding that step 904, or step 902, is a “first indication” is not supported by a preponderance of the evidence. See Reply Br. 4–5. Transmission of a DCI is also described in step 908 (“Transmit 2nd DCI in ePDCCH”) of Figure 9a of Nguyen, which is also cited by the Examiner as a “first indication.” Ans. 8. Nguyen discloses: At step 908, the eNB transmits the second DCI for the reception of the third control message within a reduced bandwidth of the data region. In particular, in embodiments of the invention the second DCI is transmitted within an ePDCCH configured for blind detection by an MTC UE. The second DCI comprises location information and control information for the reception and demodulation of a third control message, i.e. the MTC-SIB, within a PDSCH of the data region of the subframe, which is transmitted by the eNB at step 910. Nguyen ¶ 226. In Nguyen paragraph 226, step 908 transmits a second DCI, which “comprises location information and control information for the reception and demodulation of a third control message, i.e. the MTC-SIB.” The Examiner did not adequately explain how the information in the second DCI comprises the resource block for transmitting a first portion of the data Appeal 2020-005413 Application 15/513,310 11 transmission in step [1b], the latter which the Examiner found to be met by step 910 of Nguyen. Even if we find that the DCI of step 908 contains an indication of a resource allocation, such as a resource block to receive the first portion of the data transmission (“MTC-SIB”),2 Figure 9a is deficient because the claim requires both a first and second indication comprising an indication of a resource block, and only one indication would be met by step 908. The Examiner also cited Nguyen, paragraph 189, which discloses a search on ePDSCH carrying an “MTC-SIB” to further bolster the finding that Figure 9a discloses the claimed “first indication.” Ans. 8. The Examiner cited Nguyen, paragraph 92, as evidence that the MTC-SIB is cell common message of step [1] of the claim 7. Ans. 8. The Examiner found that the “location information for the transmitting the MTC-SIB (i.e., first portion of a data transmission in a cell common message)” in the DCI of paragraph 189 contains the resource block of step [1a] because it is “broadcasted via the data region of the PDSCH.” Ans. 8. Nguyen, paragraph 190, discloses that information is mapped to resource blocks (which is how wireless data is transmitted), but there is no explicit disclosure that the DCI message comprises an indication of the resource block on which the first portion of data is transmitted. The Examiner did not provide sufficient evidence that the claim limitation [1] is met by the disclosures at Nguyen paragraphs 92 and 189 as found in the Answer at page 8. Thus, we agree with Appellant that the Examiner’s explanation is deficient. Reply Br. 5–6. 2 See Nguyen ¶ 63; Yi ¶¶ 53, 83 (a DCI can comprise resource allocation information). Appeal 2020-005413 Application 15/513,310 12 For the second step [2], and the second resource block, the Examiner, in addition to citing step 908 of Figure 9a, further relies on Nguyen, paragraphs 191 and 216. Ans. 10. We agree with Appellant that these sections do not explicitly describe “second indication information including DCI information . . . indicating the downlink resource block assigned by the base station . . . for receiving the second portion of the data transmission in the downlink data” as in step [2b] of the claim. See Reply Br. 13. First, Nguyen, paragraph 191, is an explanation of paragraph 189, which the Examiner also cited for the first indication. Thus, it is not clear how this same disclosure can describe both the first and second indications required by the claim. Second, Nguyen, paragraph 216, describes generally how a LTE based MTC device operates, but the Examiner did not explain how this disclosure relates to the second indication of step [2b]. In general, we are unable to discern from the Examiner’s explanation where both a first and second indication are described in Nguyen For the foregoing reasons, we conclude that the Examiner did not meet the burden of establishing by a preponderance of the evidence that claim 7 is anticipated by Nguyen. The rejection of claim 7 is therefore reversed. Claims 11–13 and 20 depend from claim 7 and are reversed for the same reason. OBVIOUSNESS REJECTIONS Claim 1 is directed to a method which comprises receiving [1a] first and [2a] second indications, which comprise resource block information for [1aii] first and [2bi] data second portions, respectively. The Examiner rejected claim 1 as obvious in view of Nguyen and Papasakellariou. Final Appeal 2020-005413 Application 15/513,310 13 Act. 13. The Examiner cited Nguyen for the first and second indications (id. at 13–15) and Papasakellariou for “if the DCI information exists, [2bi] decoding identifying information of a fourth resource block in the detected DCI information for receiving the second portion of [the] data transmission in the downlink data from the base station via the PDSCH” (id. at 16 (citing claim 1)) The Examiner cited similar disclosure in Nguyen for the first and second indications as for claim 7 (Final Act. 13–15), which we have already discussed and found to be deficient. The Examiner additionally refers to Figures 9B and 9C of Nguyen. Final Act. 14. Nguyen, in paragraphs 227–233, describes Figures 9B and 9C, which disclose DCI messages comprising location information, but no explicit description of resource blocks contained in the message for receiving the first and second data portions. To the extent the Examiner believes the resource blocks are inherent to the messages, the Examiner has the burden of providing evidence that such DCI messages meet the corresponding first and second indications recited in the claim. This burden was not met. The Examiner also cited Nguyen paragraphs 57–66, 72–78, 202, and 203. Final Act. 14. The Examiner cites these disclosures as disclosing the first indication indicating a second resource block for receiving the first portion of data. Id. The Examiner does not explain how these disclosures meet the recited limitation in the claim. For example, paragraphs 61–63 disclose three different control messages, but the Examiner did not make a fact-based finding that such messages comprise an indication of a resource block for receiving a data transmission. The findings are deficient. Appeal 2020-005413 Application 15/513,310 14 The additionally cited references, Papasakellariou, Seo, and Yi, are not described by the Examiner as making up for the deficiencies in Nguyen. For the foregoing reasons, we conclude that the Examiner did not meet the burden of establishing by a preponderance of the evidence that claim 1 is obvious in view of Nguyen and Papasakellariou. The rejection of claim 1 is therefore reversed. Claims 2–6 depend from claim 1 and are reversed for the same reasons. CONCLUSION In summary: Claim(s) Rejected 35 U.S.C. § Reference(s)/Basis Affirmed Reversed 7, 11–13, 20 102(a)(2) Nguyen 7, 11–13, 20 1–5 103 Nguyen, Papasakellariou 1–5 6 103 Nguyen, Papasakellariou, Seo 6 8–10, 14, 15 103 Nguyen, Yi 8–10, 14, 15 16–19 103 Nguyen, Papasakellariou, Yi 16–19 Overall Outcome 1–20 REVERSED Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation