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 .
This action is in response to applicant’s amendment/arguments filed on 09/02/2025. Claims 2-4, 6-7, 9, 14-16, 18-24 and 28-29 have been cancelled. Claims 1, 8 and 13 have been amended. Currently, claims 1, 5, 8, 11-13, 17 and 25-27 are pending. This action is made FINAL.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement submitted on 06/04/2025 has been considered by the Examiner and made of record in the application file.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments/amendments with respect to amended claims 1, 8 and 13 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Response to Amendments
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 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.
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.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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) 1, 5, 13 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yao et al. (US 20210258894 A1) in view of Matsumura et al. (US 20230276371 A1).
Consider claim 1, Yao discloses a processor of a user equipment (UE) configured to perform operations (read as the UE configured to perform operations, par [0156] and [0159]) comprising:
receiving a downlink control information (DCI) transmission including a transmission power control (TPC) configuration, wherein the TPC configuration includes at least one TPC command (read as UE detects/receives downlink control information (DCI) having DCI command, par [0075] and [0087]);
determining that each TPC command corresponding to one of the multiple closed loop indexes (read as the UE determines subset the closed loop power control parameters and/or the received TPC commands respectively to adjust; and one TPC command of the received TPC commands is corresponding to one of the multiple local closed loop power control parameters or multiple beam links; and the subset includes all of the multiple local closed loop power control parameters or multiple beam links, par [0087]), wherein the multiple closed loop indexes and multiple beams correspond to multiple transmission and reception points (TRPs) (read as UE determines closed loop power control parameters for each beam link, and received TPC commands respectively to adjust the transmit power of multiple beam links for multiple transmission and reception points (TRPs), par [0087] and [0024]); and
applying each TPC command to one or more physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) or physical uplink shared channel (PUCCH) transmissions corresponding to the multiple closed loop indexes (read as the UE updates the local closed loop power control adjustment amount of each beam link of the current transmission (such as PUSCH/PUCCH transmission) according to the TPC command (of all of the TPC commands) of each beam link (of all of the beam links) and the local closed loop power control adjustment amount (of all of the closed loop power control parameters) corresponding to the closed loop power control number of each link, par [0032], [0040] and [0087]).
However, Yao disclose the claimed invention above but does not specifically disclose the DC as 5G New Radio (NR) DCI format 0_2 transmission includes TPC configuration and the TPC configuration includes multiple TPC commands and multiple closed loop indexes.
Nonetheless, in related art, Matsumura discloses the UE receiving 5G New Radio (NR) DCI format 0_2 (par [0003], [0048], [0085] and [0144]); and the 5G New Radio (NR) DCI format 0_2 as a single DCI includes TPC configuration; the TPC configuration includes a plurality of TPC commands and plurality of closed loop power controls/indexes (par [0097]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Matsumura into the teachings of Yao to modify the DCI to further include the multiple closed loop indexes in order to more accurately match the TCP commands and close loop indexes.
Consider claim 5, as applied to claim 1 above, Yao, as modified by Matsumura, discloses wherein the operations further comprise: maintaining one closed loop power control (CLPC) for each of the multiple closed loop indexes (read as UE determines closed loop power control parameters for each beam link, and received TPC commands respectively to adjust the transmit power of multiple beam links. The UE updates the local closed loop power control adjustment amount of each beam link of the current transmission according to the TPC command of each beam link and the local closed loop power control adjustment amount corresponding to the closed loop power control number of each link, par [0087]).
Consider claim 13, Yao discloses a processor of a base station configured to perform operations (read as the system comprising the base station and the UE configured to perform operations, par [0156] and [0159]) comprising:
generating, for transmission, to a user equipment (UE), a downlink control information (DCI) transmission including a transmission power control (TPC) configuration, wherein the TPC configuration includes at least one TPC command (read as UE detects/receives downlink control information (DCI) having DCI command from base station, par [0075] and [0087]),
determining that each TPC command corresponding to one of themultiple closed loop indexes (read as the UE determines subset the closed loop power control parameters and/or the received TPC commands respectively to adjust; and one TPC command of the received TPC commands is corresponding to one of the multiple local closed loop power control parameters or multiple beam links; and the subset includes all of the multiple local closed loop power control parameters or multiple beam links, par [0087]), wherein the multiple closed loop indexes and multiple beams correspond to multiple transmission and reception points (TRPs) (read as UE determines closed loop power control parameters for each beam link, and received TPC commands respectively to adjust the transmit power of multiple beam links for multiple transmission and reception points (TRPs), par [0087] and [0024]); and
wherein the UE is configured to apply each TPC command to one or more physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) or physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) transmissions corresponding to the multiple closed loop indexes (read as the UE updates the local closed loop power control adjustment amount of each beam link of the current transmission (such as PUSCH/PUCCH transmission) according to the TPC command (of all of the TPC commands) of each beam link (of all of the beam links) and the local closed loop power control adjustment amount (of all of the closed loop power control parameters) corresponding to the closed loop power control number of each link, par [0032], [0040] and [0087]).
However, Yao disclose the claimed invention above but does not specifically disclose the DC as 5G New Radio (NR) DCI format 0_2 transmission includes TPC configuration and the TPC configuration includes multiple TPC commands and multiple closed loop indexes.
Nonetheless, in related art, Matsumura discloses the UE receiving 5G New Radio (NR) DCI format 0_2 (par [0003], [0048], [0085] and [0144]); and the 5G New Radio (NR) DCI format 0_2 as a single DCI includes TPC configuration; the TPC configuration includes a plurality of TPC commands and plurality of closed loop power controls/indexes (par [0097]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Matsumura into the teachings of Yao to modify the DCI to further include the multiple closed loop indexes in order to more accurately match the TCP commands and close loop indexes.
Consider claim 17, as applied to claim 13 above, Yao, as modified by Matsumura, discloses wherein the UE is configured to maintain one closed loop power control (CLPC) for each of the multiple closed loop indexes (read as UE determines closed loop power control parameters for each beam link, and received TPC commands respectively to adjust the transmit power of multiple beam links. The UE updates the local closed loop power control adjustment amount of each beam link of the current transmission according to the TPC command of each beam link and the local closed loop power control adjustment amount corresponding to the closed loop power control number of each link, par [0087]).
Claims 25-26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yao et al. (US 20210258894 A1) in view of Matsumura et al. (US 20230276371 A1), and in further view of Yang et al. (US 20210100004 A1).
Consider claim 25, as applied to claim 13 above, Yao, as modified by Matsumura, discloses the claimed invention above but does not specifically disclose receiving a DCI transmission having a field which explicitly indicates a configured number of PUCCH repetitions.
Nonetheless, in related art, Yang discloses UE performing PUCCH repetition transmissions, UE would determine the repetition level indicated by RRC signaling or DCI message; wherein bits within the DAI that would then be used to dynamically indicate the repetition level to the UE 115; in particular, if the possible indicated repetition levels for a UE 115 are 1, 2, 4, and 8, two DAI bits would need to be used to indicate the particular repetition level, par [0084]-[0085] and [0093]-[0095].
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Yang into the teachings of Yao, as modified by Matsumura, for the purpose of allowing the UE to clearly identify the particular repetition level needed for transmission.
Consider claim 26, as applied to claim 13 above, Yao, as modified by Matsumura, discloses the claimed invention above but does not specifically disclose receiving a DCI transmission having an extended bitwidth field which explicitly indicates a configured number of PUCCH repetitions in addition to an additional indication.
Nonetheless, in related art, Yang discloses UE performing PUCCH repetition transmissions, UE would determine the repetition level indicated by RRC signaling or DCI message; wherein bits within the DAI that would then be used to dynamically indicate the repetition level to the UE 115; in particular, if the possible indicated repetition levels for a UE 115 are 1, 2, 4, and 8, two DAI bits would need to be used to indicate the particular repetition level, par [0084]-[0085] and [0093]-[0095].
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Yang into the teachings of Yao, as modified by Matsumura, for the purpose of allowing the UE to clearly identify the particular repetition level needed for transmission.
Claim 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yao et al. (US 20210258894 A1) in view of Matsumura et al. (US 20230276371 A1), and in further view of Ling et al. (US 20230198684 A1).
Consider claim 27, as applied to claim 13 above, Yao, as modified by Matsumura, discloses the claimed invention above but does not specifically disclose receiving a DCI transmission having a "PDSCH-to-HARQfeedback timing indicator" field that indicates one of multiple entries of a "DL-DataToUL-ACK" table, wherein each of the multiple entries indicates (i) a slot offset between a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) transmission and a hybrid automatic repeat request acknowledgement (HARQ-ACK), and (ii) a configured number of PUCCH repetitions.
Nonetheless, in related art, Ling disclose a system for PUCCH repetition number indication, comprising HARQ-ACK corresponding to a scheduled DL transmission is transmitted on a PUCCH resource and that the DCI scheduling the DL transmission also schedules the PUCCH resource and indicates the repetition number (par [0060]-[0061]); also the repetition number of the PUCCH carrying HARQ-ACK corresponding to the scheduled DL transmission would be indicated in the PDSCH-to-HARQ feedback timing indicator filed of the DCI, and that the value m of the PDSCH-to-HARQ feedback timing indicator field indicates a row m+1 of a table configured by the DL-DataToUL-ACK (see par [0069]); furthermore, each row of the DL-DataToUL-ACK list includes parameters where k indicates the time offset between the PDSCH and the PUCCH carrying the HARQ-ACK, and an additional parameter (nrofSlots) indicates the repetition number of the PUCCH, such that each entry/row of the DL-DataToUL-ACK list/table indicates both the HARQ timing offset and the PUCCH repetition number (see par [0070]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Ling into the teachings of Yao, as modified by Matsumura, to further modify the DCI-based uplink control with the DL-DataToUL-UL-ACK based HARQ timing and PUCCH repetition indication to improve transmission reliability (see par [0073] of Ling).
Claims 8 and 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yuan et al. (US 20230299906 A1) in view of Gerami et al. (US 20220386336 A1).
Consider claim 8, Yuan discloses a processor of a user equipment (UE) configured to perform operations (read as UE 702 performing the operations shown in figure 7, par [0087]-[0094]) comprising:
receiving a first repetition configuration, wherein the first repetition configuration is received in a downlink control information (DCI) and comprises an enhanced physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) repetition configuration, wherein the enhanced PUCCH repetition configuration is UE-specific (read as at 740, UE 702 (UE-specific) would receive, from the base station 704, downlink control information (DCI), e.g., DCI 732, indicating a codepoint associated with the number of PUCCH repetitions, the codepoint including at least one PUCCH resource indicator (PM) associated with a PUCCH resource of one or more PUCCH resource sets, the at least one PRI corresponding to the number of PUCCH repetitions, the codepoint of the DCI may include at least one K1 value, and the at least one K1 value may correspond to the number of PUCCH repetitions, figure 7, par [0092]);
receiving a second repetition configuration, wherein the second repetition configuration is received in a radio resource control (RRC) message and comprises a PUCCH repetition parameter nrofslots, wherein the PUCCH repetition parameter nrofslots is UE-specific (read as at 720, UE 702 (US-specific) would receive, from base station 704, a radio resource control (RRC) message, e.g., message 712, including an indication of a number of physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) repetitions. The indication may correspond to a resource list, figure 7, par [0089]);
generating, for transmission, a PUCCH transmission with a configured number of repetitions based on the first repetition configuration or the second repetition configuration (read as at 760, UE 702 may transmit, to the base station 704, a PUCCH, e.g., PUCCH 762, via the PUCCH resource of the one or more PUCCH resource sets (DCI or RRC), the transmitted PUCCH corresponding to the number of PUCCH repetitions, figure 7, par [0094]).
However, Yuan discloses determine whether to use the first repetition configuration or the second repetition configuration (read as at 750, UE 702 may select one PUCCH resource set of the one or more PUCCH resource sets based on an uplink control information (UCI) size; in some instances, the DCI may indicate the UCI size, the at least one PRI may correspond to the selected one PUCCH resource set, figure 7, par [0093])) does not specifically disclose when there is a conflict between the first repetition configuration and the second repetition configuration.
Nonetheless, Gerami discloses determining to select either DCI or RRC, which the DCI containing the K repetitions value can override (i.e. conflict) RRC configured K repetitions; and selection of DCI or RRC is perform under various conditions/conflicts, par [0145]-[0148].
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Gerami into the teachings of Yuan to modify Yuan’s PUCCH repetition control with the dynamic DCI signaling of Gerami provides more flexibility and responsiveness.
Consider claim 10, as applied to claim 8 above, Yuan, as modified by Gerami, discloses wherein the DCI includes a field which explicitly indicates the configured number of repetitions (read as downlink control information (DCI) indicating a codepoint associated with the number of PUCCH repetitions, par [0043]).
Consider claim 11, as applied to claim 8 above, Yuan, as modified by Gerami, discloses wherein the DCI includes an extended bitwidth field which explicitly indicates the configured number of repetitions in addition to an additional indication (read as downlink control information (DCI) indicating a codepoint associated with the number of PUCCH repetitions (i.e. 1 bit, 3 bits or 4 bits codepoints), the codepoint including at least one PUCCH resource indicator (PRI), par [0043] and [0074]-[0075]).
Claims 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yuan et al. (US 20230299906 A1) in view of Gerami et al. (US 20220386336 A1), and in further view of Ling et al. (US 20230198684 A1).
Consider claim 12, as applied to claim 8 above, Yuan, as modified by Gerami, discloses the claimed invention above but does not specifically disclose wherein the DCI includes a "PDSCH- to-HARQfeedback timing indicator" field that indicates one of multiple entries of a "DL- DataToUL-ACK" table, wherein each of the multiple entries indicates (i) a slot offset between a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) transmission and a hybrid automatic repeat request acknowledgement (HARQ-ACK), and (ii) the configured number of repetitions.
Nonetheless, in related art, Ling disclose a system for PUCCH repetition number indication, comprising HARQ-ACK corresponding to a scheduled DL transmission is transmitted on a PUCCH resource and that the DCI scheduling the DL transmission also schedules the PUCCH resource and indicates the repetition number (par [0060]-[0061]); also the repetition number of the PUCCH carrying HARQ-ACK corresponding to the scheduled DL transmission would be indicated in the PDSCH-to-HARQ feedback timing indicator filed of the DCI, and that the value m of the PDSCH-to-HARQ feedback timing indicator field indicates a row m+1 of a table configured by the DL-DataToUL-ACK (see par [0069]); furthermore, each row of the DL-DataToUL-ACK list includes parameters where k indicates the time offset between the PDSCH and the PUCCH carrying the HARQ-ACK, and an additional parameter (nrofSlots) indicates the repetition number of the PUCCH, such that each entry/row of the DL-DataToUL-ACK list/table indicates both the HARQ timing offset and the PUCCH repetition number (see par [0070]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Ling into the teachings of Yuan, as modified by Gerami, to further modify the DCI-based uplink control with the DL-DataToUL-UL-ACK based HARQ timing and PUCCH repetition indication to improve transmission reliability (see par [0073] of Ling).
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Junpeng Chen whose telephone number is (571) 270-1112. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Thursday, 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m., 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, Anthony S Addy can be reached on 571-272-7795. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/Junpeng Chen/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2645
Prosecution Insights