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 .
Claim Objections
Current amendments made by Applicant to claim 21 to obviate the claim objection presented in the previous Office Action are proper and have been entered. This objection has been withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Current amendments made by Applicant to claim 8 to obviate the claim rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, presented in the previous Office Action, are proper and have been entered. This particular rejection has been withdrawn.
Current amendments made by Applicant to claim 9 to obviate the claim rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, presented in the previous Office Action, are proper and have been entered. This particular rejection has been withdrawn.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-5, 7, 9, 12-14, and 17-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu et al. (U.S. 2023/0284261) (hereinafter “Xu”) in view of Moon et al. (U.S. 2023/0354275) (hereinafter “Moon”).
Regarding claim 1, Xu teaches a UE 900 including a processor 902 as shown in Figure 9, where the UE receives, from a base station 800 (network) of Figure 8, a configuration (signal) for the UE to initiate a channel occupancy time (COT) in an FBE mode as shown in step 1010 of Figure 10 and spoken of on page 15, paragraph [0127].
Xu also teaches the UE 900 that initiates the COT in a first FBE frame having the first FBE frame period, and transmits, to the base station (network) during the COT, an uplink communication signal (transmission) as shown in steps 1020, 1030 of Figure 10 and spoken of on page 15, paragraphs [0128]-[0129].
Xu does not explicitly teach “wherein the UE-initiated COT partially overlaps with a network-initiated COT such that the performing of the transmission comprises: performing a first uplink (UL) transmission in a first fixed frame period (FFP) of the network-initiated COT which is not overlapped with the UE-initiated COT; and performing a second UL transmission in a second FFP of the network-initiated COT which is overlapped with the UE-initiated COT, and wherein: the first FFP of the network-initiated COT includes a first downlink (DL) transmission from the network, the first UL transmission to the network, and a first idle period; and the second FFP of the network-initiated COT includes a second DL transmission from the network, the second UL transmission to the network, and a second idle period”.
However, Moon teaches a method and apparatus supporting URLLC in an unlicensed frequency band where a first FFP and second FFP each utilize a COT and time slot format including a downlink (D) period, an uplink (U) period, as well as an idle period as shown in Figure 7 and spoken of on page 16, paragraphs [0170]-[0171].
Moon also teaches a channel access method in Figure 14 that utilizes a first DL FFP, a second DL FFP, a first UL FFP, and a second UL FFP; and where a COT initiated by a base station (network-initiated COT) and a COT initiated by a UE terminal (UE-initiated COT) may partially overlap with each other as shown by time period T1 of Figure 14 and spoken of on page 24, paragraphs [0240]-[0243].
Given the above references, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to apply the support for overlapping COTs as taught in Moon to the resource allocation process of Xu in order to provide greater flexibility in the allocation of either UL or DL transmission in a particular time resource by using a shared COT as spoken of on page 24, paragraphs [0243]-[0244].
Regarding claim 2, Xu further teaches the configuration received by the base station 900 that may be an RRC configuration as spoken of on page 15, paragraph [0127].
Regarding claim 3, Xu further teaches the UE 115/900 that may use a configured grant resource within the COT 322 for an UL transmission as spoken of on page 9, paragraph [0078]; where the received configuration from the base station indicates a first FBE frame period, e.g., a period or duration of a UE FFP (FFP parameter) such as UE FFPs 320, 420, 520, 620 as spoken of on page 15, paragraph [0127].
Regarding claim 4, Xu further teaches the UE 115/900 that receives, from the base station 800 (network) of Figure 8, a configuration (signal) for the UE to initiate a channel occupancy time (COT) in an FBE mode as shown in step 1010 of Figure 10 and spoken of on page 15, paragraph [0127]; where the UE 115/900 may use a configured grant resource (per configured grant configuration) within the COT 322 for an UL transmission as spoken of on page 9, paragraph [0078].
Regarding claim 5, Xu further teaches the network provisioning for COT initiation at the UEs 115 to provide a lower transmission latency for UL transmissions, such as URLLC transmissions as spoken of on page 7, paragraph [0061].
Regarding claim 7, Xu further teaches the UE 115 that may share the UE COT 742 with the BS 105 such that the BS 105 may utilize a remaining duration in the COT 742 for a downlink transmission (automatically shared with network) as shown in step 760 of Figure 7 and spoken of on page 12, paragraph [0103].
Regarding claim 9, Xu further teaches the base station and/or the UE that may consider a PRACH resource overlapping or partially overlapping with an idle period 314 of the FFPs 310 as invalid such that the UE may not use a PRACH resource that overlaps or partially overlaps with an idle period 314 for random access preamble transmissions as spoken of on page 8, paragraph [0068].
Regarding claim 12, Xu further teaches the UE 115 that transmits a UL transmission to the BS 105 during the COT 742, where the UL transmission may include HARQ ACK/NACK information (acknowledgement) as spoken of on page 12, paragraph [0102]; and where the BS 105 indicates FBE mode of operations and provides the UE 115 with a fallback UL and/or DL grant indicating an LBT process via downlink control information (DCI) such that the UE may acquire a COT (COT initiation) as spoken of on page 7, paragraph [0059] as well as page 8, paragraph [0072].
Regarding claim 13, Xu further teaches the UE 115 that transmits a UL transmission to the BS 105 during the COT 742, where the UL transmission may include HARQ ACK/NACK information (acknowledgement) as spoken of on page 12, paragraph [0102].
Regarding claim 14, Xu teaches a UE 900 including a processor 902 as shown in Figure 9, where the UE receives, from a base station 800 (network) of Figure 8, a configuration (signal) for the UE to initiate a channel occupancy time (COT) in an FBE mode as shown in step 1010 of Figure 10 and spoken of on page 15, paragraph [0127].
Xu also teaches the UE 900 that initiates the COT in a first FBE frame having the first FBE frame period, and transmits, to the base station (network) during the COT, an uplink communication signal (transmission) as shown in steps 1020, 1030 of Figure 10 and spoken of on page 15, paragraphs [0128]-[0129].
Xu also teaches the configuration received by the base station 900 that may be an RRC configuration as spoken of on page 15, paragraph [0127].
Xu does not explicitly teach “wherein the UE-initiated COT partially overlaps with a network-initiated COT such that the performing of the transmission comprises: performing a first uplink (UL) transmission in a first fixed frame period (FFP) of the network-initiated COT which is not overlapped with the UE-initiated COT; and performing a second UL transmission in a second FFP of the network-initiated COT which is overlapped with the UE-initiated COT, and wherein: the first FFP of the network-initiated COT includes a first downlink (DL) transmission from the network, the first UL transmission to the network, and a first idle period; and the second FFP of the network-initiated COT includes a second DL transmission from the network, the second UL transmission to the network, and a second idle period”.
However, Moon teaches a method and apparatus supporting URLLC in an unlicensed frequency band where a first FFP and second FFP each utilize a COT and time slot format including a downlink (D) period, an uplink (U) period, as well as an idle period as shown in Figure 7 and spoken of on page 16, paragraphs [0170]-[0171].
Moon also teaches a channel access method in Figure 14 that utilizes a first DL FFP, a second DL FFP, a first UL FFP, and a second UL FFP; and where a COT initiated by a base station (network-initiated COT) and a COT initiated by a UE terminal (UE-initiated COT) may partially overlap with each other as shown by time period T1 of Figure 14 and spoken of on page 24, paragraphs [0240]-[0243].
Given the above references, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to apply the support for overlapping COTs as taught in Moon to the resource allocation process of Xu in order to provide greater flexibility in the allocation of either UL or DL transmission in a particular time resource by using a shared COT as spoken of on page 24, paragraphs [0243]-[0244].
Regarding claim 17, Xu further teaches the configuration received by the base station 900 that may be an RRC configuration as spoken of on page 15, paragraph [0127]; and where the received configuration indicates a first FBE frame period e.g., a period or duration (parameter) of a UE FFP such as the UE FFPs 320, 420, 520, and/or 620 as spoken of on page 15, paragraph [0127].
Regarding claim 18, Xu further teaches the received configuration (signal) that indicates a first FBE frame period e.g., a period or duration (parameter) of a UE FFP such as the UE FFPs 320, 420, 520, and/or 620 (next FFP) as spoken of on page 15, paragraph [0127].
Regarding claim 19, Xu further teaches the received configuration (signal) that indicates a first FBE frame period e.g., a period or duration (parameter) of a UE FFP such as the UE FFPs 320, 420, 520, and/or 620 (all future FFPs) as spoken of on page 15, paragraph [0127].
Regarding claim 20, Xu further teaches the received configuration (signal) that indicates a first FBE frame period e.g., a period or duration (parameter) of a UE FFP such as the UE FFPs 320, 420, 520, and/or 620 (one or more specific FFPs) as spoken of on page 15, paragraph [0127].
Regarding claims 21 and 22, Xu does not explicitly teach “wherein: the first UL transmission is performed after the first DL transmission, and the second UL transmission is performed before the second DL transmission”.
However, Moon teaches a channel access method in Figure 14 that utilizes a first DL FFP, a second DL FFP, a first UL FFP, and a second UL FFP as shown in Figure 11B, where in time a first DL FFP is followed by a first UL FFP, followed by a second UL FFP, followed by a second DL FFP.
Given the above references, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to apply the support for overlapping COTs as taught in Moon to the resource allocation process of Xu in order to provide greater flexibility in the allocation of either UL or DL transmission in a particular time resource by using a shared COT as spoken of on page 24, paragraphs [0243]-[0244].
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu in view of Moon and Guo et al. (U.S. 2023/0413342) (hereinafter “Guo”).
Regarding claim 8, Xu in view of Moon teaches claim 1 as described above. Xu in view of Moon does not explicitly teach “wherein a PRACH resource used in performing the PRACH transmission is allowed to overlap with an idle period of the network in an event that the PRACH resource is within the UE-initiated COT”.
However, Guo teaches a system and method for wireless transmission of a message in an idle period where a UE may first perform RO-to-PO mapping for a first group of ROs (PRACH occasions) and POs (PUSCH occasions) not overlapping the idle period of the FFP, and then perform RO-to-PO mapping for a second group of ROs and POs overlapping the idle period of the FFP to apply an SSB-to-RO mapping based on the RO-to-PO mapping during the idle period as spoken of on page 3, paragraph [0052].
Given the above references, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to apply the support for PRACH transmission overlap with a network idle period as taught in Guo to the system of Xu in view of Moon in order to improve the resource availability of the system by leveraging available resources for RACH procedures, thereby providing benefits to a UE initiating a channel occupancy time as spoken of on page 3, paragraph [0052] of Guo.
Claim(s) 10 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu in view of Moon and Yao et al. (U.S. 2023/0059505) (hereinafter “Yao”).
Regarding claims 10 and 11, Xu in view of Moon teaches claim 1 as described above. Xu in view of Moon does not explicitly teach “wherein the performing of the transmission comprises performing a configured grant (CG) or dynamic grant (DG) transmission to the network in the UE-initiated COT with an indication informing the network that the UE- initiated COT is shared with the network” or “wherein the indication comprises a bit-field in a configured grant uplink control information (CG-UCI)”.
However, Yao teaches a method of configurable uplink transmission in a wireless communication system where a COT sharing table can be utilized with indices or location (indication) provided in an uplink transmission so as to indicate whether COT sharing is to be enabled; and where the COT sharing table may be signaled via a COT sharing information element (bit-field) of a CG-UCI (configured grant transmission) as spoken of on page 11, paragraph [0094] as well as page 15, paragraph [0146].
Given the above references, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to apply the configured grant transmission indicating COT sharing as taught in Yao to the system of Xu in view of Moon in order to improve the resource allocation of the system by allowing a better potential or likelihood that a UE obtains a channel specifically to the type of transmission or demands at a particular time as spoken of on page 11, paragraph [0094] of Yao.
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu in view of Moon and He et al. (U.S. 2022/0322425) (hereinafter “He”).
Regarding claim 16, Xu in view of Moon teaches claim 14 as described above. Xu in view of Moon does not explicitly teach “wherein the RRC signal disables the COT-initiation functionality in an event that the UE has the low-priority traffic but not the high-priority traffic for transmission.
However, He teaches a method for UE-initiated channel access in a wireless communication system where a CG-PUSCH may be associated with a predefined channel access priority class (CAPC) such that only high priority data may trigger the UE to initiate the UE-FFP (COT-initiation disabled for low priority traffic) as spoken of on page 4, paragraphs [0035] and [0039].
Given the above references, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to apply the traffic priority based COT initiation taught in He to the system of Xu in view of Moon in order to improve the quality of service provided by the communication system by ensuring that priority transmission resources for high priority data such as URLLC data are available as spoken of on page 4, paragraphs [0035] and [0039] of He.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the prior art rejections of claim(s) 1-5, 7, 9, 12-14, and 17-22 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Additional references considered relevant to this application are listed in the attached “Notice of References Cited” (PTO-892).
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 MICHAEL J. MOORE, JR., whose telephone number is (571)272-3168. The examiner can normally be reached M-F (9am-4pm).
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, Hassan A. Phillips can be reached at (571)272-3940. 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.
/MICHAEL J MOORE JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2467