DETAILED ACTION
It is hereby acknowledged that the following papers have been received and placed of record in the file: Amendment date 06/25/2026*.
Claims 1, 6 and 10-11 are presented for examination.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to claims 1, 6 and 10-11 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Examiner’s Note
The Examiner further reviewed the claims and the Applicant’s Specification in order to determine ways to place this case in better condition for allowance. The Examiner would like applicant to reconsider two things to the Applicant's attention. First, all the independent claims further specify what is the capability information Second, all the independent claims further include the radio base station20 may estimate the PRG size based on at least one of UL channel estimation values, the system bandwidth (the number of RBs), the bandwidth (the number of RBs) allocated to the PUSCH addressed to this user terminal (see Specification 0051]). The Examiner is open to additional features or concepts and working with the Applicants to determine way to help place this case in better condition for allowance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1, 6, and 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1 line 7, the phrase "based on the capability information, based on a downlink (DL) signal and based on a sounding reference signal" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear determine size of the precoding group of the PUSCH “based on only capability information” or “based on capability information, downlink (DL) signal and sounding reference signal (SRS)”. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). Similar issue exists in claims 6 and 10-11.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1, 6 and 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Davydov et al. (US 2016/0227520 A1) in view of Yin et al. (US 2018/0020335 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Davydov teaches a terminal (UE 102 see Yin: Fig.1) comprising:
a transmitter (Transmitter 122 see Davydov: Fig.1) transmits a PUSCH signal (), wherein the PUSCH is precoded per precoding group that includes a given number of frequency resource units (identifying one or more precoding resource groups in UE based on indication of a precoding resource group see Davydov: Fig.6 steps 610-620; ¶[0054-0055]); and
a processor that controls precoding of the PUSCH precoded per the precoding group (controller 124 identify the preconfigured PRGs related to configuration of UE “UE 120 may identify, e.g., by controller 124, a plurality of one or more preconfigured PRGs relating to a precoding granularity configuration of the UE 120 received, by receiver 126 from eNB 110 via higher layer signaling such as RRC (610)” see Davydov: ¶[0054]; Fig.6 step 610),
wherein the DL signal includes downlink control information that allocates the PUSCH (controller 124 identify the each PRG size and precoding granularity configuration with lower frequency selectivity and system bandwidth NRbDL and PRG size (see Table 2) and DCI format 0 used for scheduling PUSCH “controller 124 may comprise an identifying circuitry or module or unit (now shown) to identify the plurality of preconfigured PRGs that may each have a PRG Size and/or a precoding granularity indicated in the precoding granularity configuration” see Davydov: ¶[0054-0055]; ¶[0045] Table 1; ¶[0051]).
Davydov does not explicitly teaches transmitter that transmits capability information that indicate whether or not support precoding of a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) and wherein the processor determines a size of the precoding group of the PUSCH, based on the capability, based on a downlink (DL) signal and based on a sounding reference signal (SRS), to be a size specified by a radio base station.
However, Yin teaches the transmitter that transmits capability information that indicate whether or not support precoding of a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) (UE 102 capability whether a UE 102 is capable of supporting reduced processing time for legacy TTI and processing capability doe decoding and UL transmission preparation see Yin: ¶[0208]; ¶[0212]; ¶[0027]), and wherein the processor determines a size of the precoding group of the PUSCH, based on the capability, based on a downlink (DL) signal and based on a sounding reference signal (SRS) (PUSCH scheduling and transmission time depend on PUSCH transport block Size and number of TB and UE capability see Yin: ¶[0221]; Table 5; ¶[0111]), to be a size specified by a radio base station (eNB configured the processing time reduction “The eNB sends a configuration message of processing time reduction to a UE” see Yin: ¶[0033]) in order to processing time reduction signaling for legacy transmission timing interval (see Yin: ¶[0002]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to create the invention of Nogami to include (or to use, etc.) the transmitter that transmits capability information that indicate whether or not support precoding of a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) and wherein the processor determines a size of the precoding group of the PUSCH, based on the capability, based on a downlink (DL) signal and based on a sounding reference signal (SRS), to be a size specified by a radio base station as taught by Yin in order to processing time reduction signaling for legacy transmission timing interval (see Yin: ¶[0002]).
Regarding claim 6, claim 6 is rejected for the same reason as claim 1 as set forth hereinabove. Claim 6 recites a radio communication method that perform the same functionalities as the terminal of claim 1 as described hereinabove.
Regarding claim 10, claim 10 is rejected for the same reason as claim 1 as set forth hereinabove. Claim 10 discloses a base station that performs the similar limitations in the vice versa direction of terminal as disclosed in claim 1 as set forth hereinabove.
Regarding claim 11, claim 11 is rejected for the same reason as claim 1 as set forth hereinabove. Claim 11 discloses a system that performs the similar limitations of terminal as disclosed in claim 1 as set forth hereinabove.
Conclusion
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 GUANG W LI whose telephone number is (571)270-1897. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 7AM-5PMET.
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, Joseph Avellino can be reached at (571) 272-3905. 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.
GUANG W. LI
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2478
August 31, 2026
/GUANG W LI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2478
Prosecution Insights