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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 1/16/2026 has been entered.
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.
Claim(s) 1-11, 13-26 and 31-34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. “Li” US 2024/0155603 in view of He et al. “He” US 2024/0297776 and further in view of Ye et al. “Ye” US 2023/0283446.
Regarding claims 1 and 31, Li teaches a method and an UE for wireless communications, comprising: one or more processors; one or more memories coupled with the one or more processors; and instructions stored in the one or more memories and executable by the one or more processors to cause the UE to:
receive, from a network entity, first control signaling scheduling a downlink communication during a symbol period, wherein the UE is configured to operate in a half-duplex mode during the symbol period receive, from the network entity via the first control signaling, second control signaling, or both, an indication of an uplink communication scheduled during the symbol period (Paragraph 142, and Figures 7-9) teach a UE receiving scheduling information for DL and UL. These schedules transmissions/reception may overlap. Paragraphs 8, 199, 215 teaches system operating in half-duplex mode); and
communicate with the network entity during the symbol period via one of the downlink communication or the uplink communication based at least in part on a plurality of prioritization rules associated with the half-duplex mode, the plurality of prioritization rules indicating whether to receive the downlink communication or transmit the uplink communication during the symbol period when the uplink communication and the downlink communication are scheduled in a same symbol period and when uplink and downlink channel multiplexing is enabled during the same symbol period (Paragraphs 189 and 199 teach a prioritization rule that is used between a DL reception and a UL transmission that overlap in one or more symbols. Paragraphs 190 and 199 disclose a plurality of prioritization rules);
wherein a first prioritization rule of the plurality of prioritization rules indicates for the UE to prioritize the transmission of a RACH over reception of DL communications (the reception of DL is dependent upon the PRACH being sent. Therefore, the RACH is prioritized over the DL reception; Paragraphs 189-190, 194, and 213) which is based, in part, on UL communication associated with the RACH occasion being scheduled in the same symbol as the DL communication (the DL signal may include CSI-RS, SRS, etc (i.e. reference signal. Paragraphs 142-148, and figures 7 and 8, show various examples of receiving the DL transmission or sending the UL transmission based on the prioritization rule. Paragraphs 189 and 199 teach a prioritization rule that is used between a DL reception and a UL transmission that overlap (i.e. scheduled in the same symbol) in one or more symbols).
While Li teaches prioritizing downlink over uplink when they occupy the same slot, Li does not expressly disclose that the RACH via a RACH occasion is prioritized over the reception of DL signals based on UL associated with the RO scheduled in the same period as the DL communication; however, He teaches that Ros are prioritized over DL traffic such as SSBs; Paragraph 57, see also Figure 6. Claims 10 and 12 further show prioritization of RACH ROs over downlink reception. Further, the transmission during the RO occurs over SSB reception when there is overlapping (i.e. sharing symbols/scheduled in same period).
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing to modify the teachings of Li to include prioritizing RACH Ros over DL signals as taught by He.
One would be motivated to make the modification such that RO transmission can be prioritized based on collisions in the system; He paragraph 57.
While the prior art teaches prioritizing the transmission of RACH over a downlink reception, the prior art does not expressly disclose the idea of prioritizing RACH over a downlink shared channel message. Ye teaches that when PDSCH collides with PRACH a priority rule is used to predefine the actions of the UE. Here, the UE keeps the PRACH over the PDSCH. Thus one can see there is a priority associated with the PRACH that is greater than the priority of the PDSCH (i.e. downlink shared channel message) as claimed.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing to modify the teachings of the prior art to include prioritizing the random access channel transmission over reception of a downlink shared channel message as taught by Ye.
One would be motivated to make the modification such that the UE can keep the PRACH and prioritize it over the PDSCH messaging as defined by a base station during scheduling as taught by Ye; Paragraph 100.
Regarding claims 2 and 32, Li teaches a second rule indicates to receive the DL reference signal based on the DL RS including a SSB indicated for measurement by the UE (the UE receives a DL reference signal (CSI-RS DL PRS, etc.) which can include the presence of SSB; Paragraphs 115-121).
While Li teaches prioritizing downlink over uplink when they occupy the same slot, Li does not expressly disclose that the SSB is prioritized over the UL; however, He teaches SSB reception is prioritized over the overlapped RO (uplink communications); Paragraph 50. Paragraph 47 teaches that the UE can prioritized DL reception over UL transmission or vice versa, thus given a particular situation, either can be prioritized)
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing to modify the teachings of Li to include prioritizing SSB over UL as taught by He.
One would be motivated to make the modification such that the system can employ different collision handling techniques as taught by He; Paragraph 50.
Regarding claim 3, Li teaches receiving, from the network entity, a message indicating the periodization rule (the prioritization rule is configured to the UE by higher layer signaling; Paragraph 199. This implies the signaling comes from a network entity and the rule is not defined by the UE itself).
Regarding claim 4, Li teaches a second prioritization rule of the one ore more prioritization rules indicates which of the DL or UL the UE is to perform is based on a channel type, reference signal, or both (Paragraphs 142-148 and 199 disclose a prioritization rule for UL and DL signaling wherein the signaling can be a reference signal (CSI-RS etc.)
Regarding claim 5, Li teaches a second prioritization rule indicates which of the DL or UL the UE is to perform is based on resources associated with the UL or DL wherein the resources are time, frequency or spatial resources (Paragraphs 142-148 and 199 disclose a prioritization rule for UL and DL signaling. This signaling corresponds to a time of transmission (time resource).
Regarding claim 6, Li teaches a second prioritization rule indicates which of the DL or UL the UE is to perform is based a first priority with UL and a second priority associated with DL (Paragraph 145 teaches a UE prioritization DL reception or prioritizing UL transmission. This is viewed as a first and second priority. The claim does not define these priorities as being different, or comparing these priorities to each other, therefore, broadly speaking all that is needed is a priority associated with both a DL and UL which Li teaches).
Regarding claim 7, Li teaches a second prioritization rule indicates which of the DL or UL the UE is to perform is based on the arrival time of the UL or DL (Paragraphs 142-148 teach prioritizing the DL reception or UL transmission based on when they are scheduled with respect to time. In other words, if the UL happens later (i.e. arrives later) then the DL may be prioritized and vice versa).
Regarding claim 8, Li teaches dropping the UL transmission based on the prioritization rule (Paragraphs 143-146 disclose dropping the UL transmission based on the UL/DL which is tied to the priority rule).
Regarding claim 9, Li teaches a second prioritization rule indicates which of the DL or UL the UE is to perform is based on a time order of scheduling (Paragraphs 142-148 teach prioritizing the DL reception or UL transmission based on when they are scheduled with respect to time (i.e. time order of scheduling). In other words, if the UL happens later (i.e. arrives later) then the DL may be prioritized and vice versa).
Regarding claim 10, Li teaches a second prioritization rule indicates which of the DL or UL the UE is to perform is based on resources associated with the UL or DL symbol period (Paragraphs 142-148 and 199 disclose a prioritization rule for UL and DL signaling. This signaling corresponds to a time of transmission (time resource) with respect to the overlapping symbol).
Regarding claim 11, Li teaches a second prioritization rule indicates which of the DL or UL the UE is to perform is based on a repetition configuration for the UL or DL (Paragraphs 142-148 and 199 disclose a prioritization rule for UL and DL signaling. This rule corresponds to multiple transmission being multiplexed together. This infers there was some sort of multiple (repetitious) transmission happening. Further the claim does not state what the correlation is between repetition and the priority rule, thus broadest reasonable interpretation also includes no repetition occurring).
Regarding claim 13, Li teaches transmitting the UL communication based on a second prioritization rule wherein the UL is a reference signal when scheduled in the same symbol as the UL communication (the UL signal may includes SRS (i.e. reference signal. Paragraphs 142-148, and figures 7 and 8, show various examples of receiving the DL transmission or sending the UL transmission based on the prioritization rule).
Regarding claim 14, Li teaches refraining from monitoring at least a portion of DL based on a second prioritization rule, wherein the portion overlaps with the UL in the time domain (Paragraph 199 teaches monitoring occasions tied to the prioritization rule (see also paragraphs 153, 197, and 201. As there are monitoring occasions for the DL this infers that the entire PDCCH is not necessarily monitored and therefore the system refrains from monitoring at least a portion of the DL).
Regarding claim 15, Li teaches a feedback bit associated with the DL is transmitted or withheld based at least in part on the prioritization rule (Paragraphs 150-151 disclose the UE sending, or not sending, feedback in response to the DL communication. As the UL/DL are tied to the priority rule, this infers anything associated with the UL/DL is based on the prioritization rule).
Regarding claim 16, Lie teaches UL communication includes dynamically-scheduled UL and a second prioritization rule indicates the UE to prioritize transmission of the dynamically scheduled UL over the reception of DL communications (Paragraphs 142-148 show examples of when the dynamically scheduled UL is prioritized over the DL. This would mean that the DL is not received and thus deferred based on the prioritization rule. As the UL/DL are tied to the priority rule, this infers anything associated with the UL/DL is based on the prioritization rule).
Regarding claim 17, Li teaches the a second prioritization rule states the UL is prioritized over the DL or vice versa (Paragraphs 189 and 199 teach a prioritization rule that is used between a DL reception and a UL transmission that overlap in one or more symbols. Paragraphs 142-148 show instances when DL is prioritized over UL and vice versa).
Regarding claim 18, Li teaches UL DL multiplexing being enabled during the symbol period based on a restriction being disabled which is based on full duplex operation in the period (UL/DL information can be multiplexed in a given symbol period, or not; Paragraphs 142 and 151. Li teaches that the information is multiplexed which means that any restriction would be disabled as there are times when the information cannot be multiplexed. Further, paragraph 164 teaches the system can operate in full-duplex mode if needed. The claim broadly states these three things are “based on” each other which bears no real meaning. Anything happening in a system can be construed as “based on” everything else occurring. Therefore, because this system has the ability to multiplex, or not (disable) and operate in full duplex, the prior art properly reads on the limitation).
Regarding claims 19 and 33, Li teaches a method and an apparatus for wireless communications at a network entity, comprising: one or more processors; one or more memories coupled with the one or more processors; and instructions stored in the one or more memories and executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to:
transmit, to a UE, first control signaling scheduling a downlink communication during a symbol period, wherein the UE is configured to operate in a half-duplex mode during the symbol period and transmit, to the UE, via the first control signaling, second control signaling, or both, an indication of an uplink communication scheduled during the symbol period (Paragraph 142, and Figures 7-9) teach a UE receiving scheduling information for DL and UL. These schedules transmissions/reception may overlap. Paragraphs 8, 199, 215 teaches system operating in half-duplex mode);
transmit, to the UE, a plurality of prioritization rules associated with the half-duplex mode, the one or more prioritization rules indicating whether to receive the downlink communication or transmit the uplink communication during the symbol period when the uplink communication and the downlink communication are scheduled in a same symbol period and when uplink and downlink channel multiplexing is enabled during the same symbol period (Paragraphs 189 and 199 teach a prioritization rule that is used between a DL reception and a UL transmission that overlap in one or more symbols. Paragraphs 190 and 199 disclose a plurality of prioritization rules); and
communicate with the UE during the symbol period via the UL or DL based on the plurality of prioritization rules (Paragraphs 142-148 and Figures 7-9 show communications between the network entity and UE).
wherein a first prioritization rule of the plurality of prioritization rules indicates for the UE to receive the DL communication based on the DL communication comprising a DL reference signal that is scheduled in the same symbol as the UL communication (the DL signal may include CSI-RS, SRS, etc (i.e. reference signal. Paragraphs 142-148, and figures 7 and 8, show various examples of receiving the DL transmission or sending the UL transmission based on the prioritization rule. Paragraphs 189 and 199 teach a prioritization rule that is used between a DL reception and a UL transmission that overlap in one or more symbols).
While Li teaches prioritizing downlink over uplink when they occupy the same slot, Li does not expressly disclose that the RACH via a RACH occasion is prioritized over the reception of DL signals based on UL associated with the RO scheduled in the same period as the DL communication; however, He teaches that Ros are prioritized over DL traffic such as SSBs; Paragraph 57, see also Figure 6. Claims 10 and 12 further show prioritization of RACH ROs over downlink reception. Further, the transmission during the RO occurs over SSB reception when there is overlapping (i.e. sharing symbols/scheduled in same period).
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing to modify the teachings of Li to include prioritizing RACH Ros over DL signals as taught by He.
One would be motivated to make the modification such that RO transmission can be prioritized based on collisions in the system; He paragraph 57.
While the prior art teaches prioritizing the transmission of RACH over a downlink reception, the prior art does not expressly disclose the idea of prioritizing RACH over a downlink shared channel message. Ye teaches that when PDSCH collides with PRACH a priority rule is used to predefine the actions of the UE. Here, the UE keeps the PRACH over the PDSCH. Thus one can see there is a priority associated with the PRACH that is greater than the priority of the PDSCH (i.e. downlink shared channel message) as claimed.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing to modify the teachings of the prior art to include prioritizing the random access channel transmission over reception of a downlink shared channel message as taught by Ye.
One would be motivated to make the modification such that the UE can keep the PRACH and prioritize it over the PDSCH messaging as defined by a base station during scheduling as taught by Ye; Paragraph 100.
Regarding claims 20 and 34, Li teaches a second prioritization rule indicates which of the DL or UL the UE is to perform is based on a channel type, reference signal, or both (Paragraphs 142-148 and 199 disclose a prioritization rule for UL and DL signaling wherein the signaling can be a reference signal (CSI-RS etc).
Regarding claim 21, Li teaches a second prioritization rule indicates which of the DL or UL the UE is to perform is based on resources associated with the UL or DL wherein the resources are time, frequency or spatial resources (Paragraphs 142-148 and 199 disclose a prioritization rule for UL and DL signaling. This signaling corresponds to a time of transmission (time resource).
Regarding claim 22, Li teaches a second prioritization rule indicates which of the DL or UL the UE is to perform is based a first priority with UL and a second priority associated with DL (Paragraph 145 teaches a UE prioritization DL reception or prioritizing UL transmission. This is viewed as a first and second priority. The claim does not define these priorities as being different, or comparing these priorities to each other, therefore, broadly speaking all that is needed is a priority associated with both a DL and UL which Li teaches).
Regarding claim 23, Li teaches a second prioritization rule indicates which of the DL or UL the UE is to perform is based on the arrival time of the UL or DL (Paragraphs 142-148 teach prioritizing the DL reception or UL transmission based on when they are scheduled with respect to time. In other words, if the UL happens later (i.e. arrives later) then the DL may be prioritized and vice versa).
Regarding claim 24, Li teaches a second prioritization rule indicates which of the DL or UL the UE is to perform is based on resources associated with the UL or DL symbol period (Paragraphs 142-148 and 199 disclose a prioritization rule for UL and DL signaling. This signaling corresponds to a time of transmission (time resource) with respect to the overlapping symbol).
Regarding claim 25, Li teaches a second prioritization rule indicates which of the DL or UL the UE is to perform is based on a repetition configuration for the UL or DL (Paragraphs 142-148 and 199 disclose a prioritization rule for UL and DL signaling. This rule corresponds to multiple transmission being multiplexed together. This infers there was some sort of multiple (repetitious) transmission happening. Further the claim does not state what the correlation is between repetition and the priority rule, thus broadest reasonable interpretation also includes no repetition occurring).
Regarding claim 26, Li teaches a second prioritization rule indicates which of the DL or UL the UE is to perform is based on a time order of scheduling (Paragraphs 142-148 teach prioritizing the DL reception or UL transmission based on when they are scheduled with respect to time (i.e. time order of scheduling). In other words, if the UL happens later (i.e. arrives later) then the DL may be prioritized and vice versa).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-11, 13-26, and 31-34 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
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRANDON M RENNER whose telephone number is (571)270-3621. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7am-5pm EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Derrick Ferris can be reached at (571)-272-3123. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/BRANDON M RENNER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2411