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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/03/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, submitted on 08/13/2025, have been fully considered but are moot in view of new ground(s).
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.
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, 13, 14, 17, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He et al. (US 20200322187) in view of Dinan (US 20170290040) and in view of Li et al. (US 20180076946).
Regarding claim 1, He discloses a method comprising:
receiving, by a terminal, from a base station (Fig. 1), configuration information related to a sounding reference signal (SRS), wherein the configuration information includes information on transmission of the SRS (a set of SRS transmission parameters can be configured by higher layers signaling (e.g., through/via RRC messaging). These SRS transmission parameters can then be utilized to derive the configuration of the SRS transmission to be used; [0052]);
receiving, by the terminal, from the base station, downlink control information (DCI) (Reference configurations can also dynamically indicated using DCI format; [0051]); and
transmitting, by the terminal, to the base station, the PUSCH (UE transmits PUSCH according to the identified period in the one or more D-SRS subframes. The SRS can then be transmitted on the second CC (e.g., SRS CC); [0027]),
wherein the terminal is configured with a time duration that is available only for transmission of the SRS and is not available for uplink transmissions other than the transmission of the SRS, wherein the time duration is configured in slot units (“SRS CC” can refer to a TDD CC that is not configured with or for PUSCH transmission or other physical channel transmission (e.g., a physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) or other physical channel), but that can be configured with SRS transmission on an UL transmission; [0025].
dedicated SRS (D-SRS) subframe structures 200 that can be utilized in SRS CC-based switching operations for carrier aggregation in TDD CA systems. These D-SRS subframe structures can enable SRS transmission on SRS CCs and address the identified issues of SRS dropping to minimize the collision between SRS on SRS CCs and PUCCH/PUSCH on normal CCs in order to ensure SRS transmissions that have been triggered. The term “D-SRS subframe” can refer to a subframe (e.g., a DL subframe, a UL subframe or a special subframe) that is used for SRS transmission(s) on one or more SRS CCs; [0041].
Note that a subframe is defined in terms of slot units.).
He does not expressly disclose a downlink control information (DCI) scheduling a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH), and wherein based on the SRS colliding with the PUSCH that is not within the time duration on a single carrier, the SRS is dropped in a time resource where the collision occurs.
In an analogous art, Dinan discloses a downlink control information (DCI) scheduling a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) (DCI may also indicate a PUSCH starting position in a subframe; [0155]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add the features taught by Dinan into the system of He in order to enhance downlink spectral efficiency by reducing control signaling overhead and enhancing uplink radio efficiency by determining which subframes include SRS transmission (Dinan; [0167]).
The combination of He and Dinan does not expressly disclose wherein based on the SRS colliding with the PUSCH that is not within the time duration on a single carrier, the SRS is dropped in a time resource where the collision occurs.
In an analogous art, Li discloses wherein based on the SRS colliding with the PUSCH that is not within the time duration on a single carrier, the SRS is dropped in a time resource where the collision occurs (when an SRS is multiplexed with a channel such as a PUSCH, as shown in FIG. 4, to prevent a conflict between an SRS and these channels, an SRS is dropped. A dedicated SRS subframe is provided in the embodiments of the present invention, and an SRS is transmitted in the dedicated SRS subframe, so that coverage of an SRS is improved, and a conflict with another channel is prevented; [0450-0452].
Note that the collision between SRS and PUSCH is not within the dedicated SRS subframe since it is exclusive for SRS transmissions).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add the features taught by Li into the system of He and Dinan in order to improve coverage of an SRS, and prevent a conflict with another channel, thereby reducing implementation complexity (Li; [0415]).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of He, Li, and Dinan, particularly He discloses wherein the SRS is dropped according to whether a sum of transmission power of the PUSCH and the SRS exceeds a maximum transmission power of the terminal (SRS could be dropped in case of collision with a UCI transmission on PUCCH/PUCCH in a D-SRS subframe 205 due to either power-limitation or restriction of UL CA capability for a given UE; [0049]).
Regarding claim 14, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the reasons cited in claim 1.
Regarding claim 17, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the reasons cited in claim 1.
Regarding claim 18, the combination of He, Li, and Dinan, particularly He discloses wherein the uplink transmissions include at least one of a physical uplink control channel (PUCCH), the PUSCH, and/or an SRS different from the SRS (SRS could be dropped in case of collision with a UCI transmission on PUCCH/PUCCH in a D-SRS subframe 205 due to either power-limitation or restriction of UL CA capability for a given UE; [0049]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Xu et al. (US 20130195086), “TIMING MANAGEMENT IN UPLINK (UL) COORDINATED MULTIPOINT (COMP) TRANSMISSION.”
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 OUSSAMA ROUDANI whose telephone number is (571)272-4727. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 AM - 5:00 PM.
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, UN C CHO can be reached at (571) 272 7919. 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.
/OUSSAMA ROUDANI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2413