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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s Amendments and Arguments filed 02/06/2026 have been considered for examination.
With regard to the objections to Claims, Applicant’s arguments filed 02/06/2026 in view of the amendments have been fully considered and are persuasive. Thus, the objections to Claims have been withdrawn.
With regard to the 103 rejections, Applicant’s arguments filed 02/06/2026 in view of the amendments have been fully considered but are not persuasive at least in view of reasons set forth below.
On page 19 of Remarks, Applicant argued:
As can be seen, XU merely describes multiple PRis configuring multiple PUCCH resource sets. However, XU is silent regarding using multiple PRis for configuring PUCCH resources over "a first component carrier" and "a second component carrier" of carrier aggregation. Accordingly, XU does not teach or suggest, at least, "receive a downlink control information (DCI) that includes a first physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) resource indicator (PRI) and a second PRI, the first PRI identifying one or more first PUCCH resources in a first component carrier of carrier aggregation and the second PRI identifying one or more second PUCCH resources in a second component carrier of the carrier aggregation," as recited in amended claim 1. The Office Action does not rely upon LI or HE to cure the deficiencies of XU discussed above, and the cited portions of LI and HE do not cure the deficiencies of LI discussed above.
In response to the above Applicant’s argument, Examiner respectfully disagrees.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). In order to establish prima facie obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103, Xu is only applied to cure deficiencies of Li and He for “multiple PRIs” (first PRI and second PRI as claimed), not for “first and second components carriers of carrier aggregation” since He already clearly discloses, receive configuration information identifying one or more first physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) resources in a first component carrier of carrier aggregation and one or more second PUCCH resources in a second component carrier of carrier aggregation, as set forth below.
On page 19 of Remarks, Applicant argued:
As discussed during the interview, paragraph [0349] of LI merely describes a PUCCH 1
having 3 symbols and a PUCCH 2 having 3 symbols. However, as discussed during the interview, LI is silent regarding "a first configuration" (associated with one or more first PUCCH
resources in a first component carrier) and "a second configuration" (associated with one or more second PUCCH resources in a second component carrier) having the same "PUCCH format."
In response to the above Applicant’s argument, Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Unlike the applicant argument, Li clearly discloses, wherein the first configuration is the same as the second configuration with respect to a PUCCH format [¶0115, at least two of the N PUCCH resources have a same PUCCH format, and/or have a same frequency domain resource].
On page 20 of Remarks, Applicant argued:
Independent claims 20, 29, and 30, as amended, recite similar features. Therefore, independent claims 1, 20, 29, and 30, and the claims that depend thereon, are patentable over the cited portions of the applied references.
In response to the above Applicant’s argument, Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Since claims 1, 20, 29 and 30 recite similar features to claim 1 without further patentable features, claims 20, 29 and 30 are unpatentable in view of the same reasons set forth above regarding claim 1.
On page 20 of Remarks, Applicant argued:
Claims 4-6, 10, 12, 13, and 15-19 depend from independent claim 1, and claims 23-25
depend from independent claim 20. Therefore, these claims are patentable for at least the reasons set forth above with respect to their parent claims and for their additional distinguishing features recited therein.
In response to the above Applicant’s argument, Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Since independent claims are unpatentable over the cited references of record as set forth above, patentability of other dependent claims should be determined based on the claimed limitations recited thereon, rather than their respective independent claims. The dependent claims are also unpatentable in view of the corresponding cited references of records as set forth below.
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.
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 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.
Claims 1, 3-4, 7-9, 14, 20, 22-23 and 26-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al (US Publication No. 2022/0361164) in view of He et al (US Publication No. 2023/036193) and further in view of Xu et al (US Publication No. 2022/0210770).
Regarding claim 1, Li discloses, a user equipment (UE) for wireless communication [FIG. 9; its related descriptions; ¶0305-0310, terminal device for wireless communication with network device], comprising:
memory [FIG. 16; its related descriptions; ¶0417, storage element 1632; note that every terminal device has at least one memory]; and
one or more processors coupled to the memory, the memory including instructions executable by the one or more processors to cause the UE [FIG. 16; its related descriptions; ¶0417, processing element 1631; note that every terminal device has at least one processor coupled to the memory comprising instructions executable by the processor] to:
receive a downlink control information (DCI) that includes a physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) resource indicator (PRI) and a PRI, the PRI [¶0310, the network device indicates the N PUCCH resources by using PUCCH resource indication information (PUCCH resource indicator, PRI) or a semi-persistent indication parameter in DCI. For example, with reference to the following Table 6, the PRI is used to indicate a PUCCH resource 2-1, a PUCCH resource 2-2, and a PUCCH resource 2-3 in a row corresponding to an index value 2 in Table 6] identifying one or more first PUCCH resources … and the PRI identifying one or more second PUCCH resources … [FIG. 9; its related descriptions; ¶0305, the terminal device receives the indication information (i.e., configuration information); ¶0306, the terminal device determines the target PUCCH resource subset (see ¶0303, including at least two PUCCH resources) in the at least one PUCCH resource set based on the indication information; further see ¶0307, the network device and the terminal device repeatedly transmit the uplink control information UCI for M times by using N PUCCH resources in the target PUCCH resource subset, where M and N are positive integers; note that in order to transmit the UCI by using N PUCCH resources in the target PUCCH resource subset based on the indication information, the indication information needs to identify at least one PUCCH resource and at least one other PUCCH resource from the N PUCCH resources], wherein the one or more first PUCCH resources are associated with a first configuration . . . and the one or more second PUCCH resources are associated with a second configuration [FIG. 9; its related descriptions; ¶0305 and ¶0306, ¶0307, the network device and the terminal device repeatedly transmit the uplink control information UCI for M times by using N PUCCH resources in the target PUCCH resource subset, where M and N are positive integers; note that each PUCCH resource is associated with its own corresponding configuration]; and
transmit a first one or more PUCCH communications using the one or more first PUCCH resources in accordance with the first configuration and a second one or more PUCCH communications using the one or more second PUCCH resources in accordance with the second configuration information [FIG. 9; its related descriptions; ¶0306-0307 the terminal device repeatedly transmit the uplink control information UCI for M times by using N PUCCH resources in the target PUCCH resource subset, where M and N are positive integers based on the indication information; note that in order to transmit the UCI by using N PUCCH resources in the target PUCCH resource subset based on the indication information, the indication information needs to identify at least one PUCCH resource and at least one other PUCCH resource from the N PUCCH resources, and each PUCCH resource is associated with its own corresponding configuration], wherein the first one or more PUCCH communications comprise a first one or more repetitions of an uplink control information (UCI) message and the second one or more PUCCH communications comprise a second one or more repetitions of the UCI message [FIG. 9; its related descriptions; ¶0306-0307, PUCCH communications corresponding to the UCI for M times includes at least one PUCCH repetition of the UCI and at least other PUCCH repetition of the UCI].
Although the aspect of Li with respect to FIG. 9 discloses, “transmit the first one or more PUCCH communications and the second one or more PUCCH communications” as set forth above, the aspect of Li with respect to FIG. 9 does not explicitly disclose (see, italicized limitations), but another aspect of Li discloses, wherein the one or more first PUCCH resources comprise a first quantity of resource elements and the one or more second PUCCH resources comprise a second quantity of resource elements, wherein the first configuration is the same as the second configuration with respect to a PUCCH format [¶0115, at least two of the N PUCCH resources have a same PUCCH format, and/or have a same frequency domain resource], and wherein the first quantity is equal to the second quantity [FIGS. 12A-12C; its related descriptions; ¶0349, note that the PUCCH1 has 3 symbols and the PUCCH2 has 3 symbols].
It is noted that the above-mentioned feature is a known technique in the field Applicant's endeavor, e.g., telecommunication art.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the system of the aspect of Li with respect of FIG. 9 with "the above-mentioned known feature(s)" taught by the another aspect of Li with respect to ¶0115 and ¶0349 to reach the claimed invention as set forth above. Since one having ordinary skill in the art could have recognized that applying the known technique taught by the another aspect of Li into the system of the aspect of Li with respect to FIG. 9 would have yield predictable results and/or resulted in the improved system, such as e.g., improving reliability through diversity over the equal sizes of resource elements, such a modification (or application) would have involved the mere application of a known technique to a piece of prior art ready for improvement," the claim is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a). Ex Parte Smith, 83 USPQ.2d 1509, 1518-19 (BPAI, 2007) (citing KSR v. Teleflex, 127 S.Ct. 1727, 1740, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007)).
Further, although Li discloses, “receive configuration information in a physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) resource indicator (PRI) identifying one or more first physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) resources … and one or more second PUCCH resources …” as set forth above, Li does not explicitly disclose (see, italicized and bold limitations), receive configuration information identifying one or more first physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) resources in a first component carrier of carrier aggregation and one or more second PUCCH resources in a second component carrier of carrier aggregation.
However, He discloses, one or more first physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) resources in a first component carrier of carrier aggregation and one or more second PUCCH resources in a second component carrier of carrier aggregation [FIG. 7; its related descriptions; ¶0045, FIG. 7 illustrates example 700 of a HARQ-ACK bit retransmission including a HARQ-ACK Window Indicator IE with uniform HARQ-ACK window sizes for Carrier Aggregation (CA), according to some embodiments of the disclosure. . . . Example 700 illustrates HARQ-ACK Window 710 with PUCCH Group 1 720 and PUCCH Group 2 730. PUCCH Group 1 720 includes Component Carriers (CCs) 720a, 720b, through 720i, and PUCCH Group 2 730 includes CCs 730a through 730n].
It is noted that the above-mentioned feature is a known technique in the field Applicant's endeavor, e.g., telecommunication art.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the system of Li with "the above-mentioned known feature(s)" taught by He to reach the claimed invention as set forth above. Since one having ordinary skill in the art could have recognized that applying the known technique taught by He into the system of Li would have yield predictable results and/or resulted in the improved system, such as e.g., ensuring to improve frequency diversity of uplink transmission over PUCCH resources, such a modification (or application) would have involved the mere application of a known technique to a piece of prior art ready for improvement," the claim is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a). Ex Parte Smith, 83 USPQ.2d 1509, 1518-19 (BPAI, 2007) (citing KSR v. Teleflex, 127 S.Ct. 1727, 1740, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007)).
Still further, although Li in view of He discloses, “receive a downlink control information (DCI) that includes a physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) resource indicator (PRI) and a PRI, the PRI identifying one or more first PUCCH resources in a first component carrier of a carrier aggregation and the PRI identifying one or more second PUCCH resources in a second component carrier of the carrier aggregation” as set forth above, Li in view of He does not explicitly disclose (see, italicized limitations), but Xu discloses, the DCI includes a first PRI identifying one or more first PUCCH resources and a second PRI identifying one or more second PUCCH resources [FIG. 1; its related descriptions; ,I0049, there may be multiple PUCCH resource sets indicated based on the PUCCH resource indicators; note that multiple PUCCH resource sets are indicated
based on different PUCCH resource indicators (i.e., first and second PRls as claimed].
It is noted that the above-mentioned feature is a known technique in the field Applicant's
endeavor, e.g., telecommunication art.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date to combine the system of Li in view of He with "the above-mentioned known
feature(s)" taught by the aspect of Xu to reach the claimed invention as set forth above. Since
one having ordinary skill in the art could have recognized that applying the known technique
taught by Xu into the system of Li in view of He would have yield predictable results and/or
resulted in the improved system, such as e.g., allowing efficient use of uplink resources by
matching payload size with appropriate format, thus enhancing flexibility and scheduling
efficiency, such a modification (or application) would have involved the mere application of a
known technique to a piece of prior art ready for improvement," the claim is unpatentable under
35 U.S.C. 103(a). Ex Parte Smith, 83 USPQ.2d 1509, 1518-19 (BPAI, 2007) (citing KSR v.
Teleflex, 127 S.Ct. 1727, 1740, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007)).
Regarding claim 3, Li in view of He and Xu discloses, the UE of claim 1 as set forth above.
The aspect of Li with respect to FIG. 9 does not explicitly disclose (see, italicized limitations), but another aspect of Li discloses, determine a first PUCCH resource set and a second PUCCH resource set based at least in part on an uplink control information payload [FIG. 6C; its related descriptions; ¶0249, determining PUCCH resource set 1 and PUCCH resource set 2 based on a quantity of bits of the to-be-sent UCI]; and
determine the one or more first PUCCH resources from the first PUCCH resource set and the one or more second PUCCH resources from the second PUCCH resource set [FIG. 6C; its related descriptions; ¶0249, determining a PUCCH from the PUCCH resource set 1 and a PUCCH set from the PUCCH resource set 2 based on a PRI; further see ¶0248, “Assuming that the indication information is a PRI in the DCI, and the PRI is “1”, the terminal device may determine, in Table 2 corresponding to the PUCCH resource set 1, the PUCCH resource 1 and the quantity 3 of repeated transmissions that correspond to the index value “1”].
It is noted that the above-mentioned feature is a known technique in the field Applicant's endeavor, e.g., telecommunication art.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the system of the aspect of Li with respect of FIG. 9 with "the above-mentioned known feature(s)" taught by the aspect of Li with respect to FIG. 6C to reach the claimed invention as set forth above. Since one having ordinary skill in the art could have recognized that applying the known technique taught by the aspect of Li with respect to FIG. 6C into the system of the aspect of Li with respect to FIG. 9 would have yield predictable results and/or resulted in the improved system, such as e.g., allowing efficient use of uplink resources by matching payload size with appropriate format, thus enhancing flexibility and scheduling efficiency, such a modification (or application) would have involved the mere application of a known technique to a piece of prior art ready for improvement," the claim is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a). Ex Parte Smith, 83 USPQ.2d 1509, 1518-19 (BPAI, 2007) (citing KSR v. Teleflex, 127 S.Ct. 1727, 1740, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007)).
Regarding claim 4, Li in view of He and Xu discloses, the UE of claim 1 as set forth above.
Although Li discloses, determine a first PUCCH resource set and a second PUCCH resource set based at least in part on an uplink control information payload [FIG. 6C; its related descriptions; ¶0249, determining PUCCH resource set 1 and PUCCH resource set 2 based on a quantity of bits of the to-be-sent UCI], Li in view of He does not explicitly disclose (see, italicized limitations), but Xu discloses, determine the one or more first PUCCH resources from the first PUCCH resource set based at least in part on a first PUCCH resource indicator and the one or more second PUCCH resources from the second PUCCH resource set based at least in part on a second PUCCH resource indicator [FIG. 1; its related descriptions; ¶0049, there may be multiple PUCCH resource sets indicated based on the PUCCH resource indicators; note that multiple PUCCH resource sets are indicated based on different PUCCH resource indicators (i.e., first and second PRIs as claimed].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the above-mentioned feature(s) as taught by Xu in the system of Li in view of He for similar rationales set forth above in claim 1.
Regarding claim 7, Li in view of He and Xu discloses, the UE of claim 1 as set forth above.
The aspect of Li with respect to FIG. 9 does not explicitly disclose (see, italicized limitations), but another aspect of Li further discloses, wherein PUCCH transmission is not scheduled by downlink control information (DCI) [¶0288, the signaling in this embodiment of this application may be one or more of radio resource control (RRC) signaling, a media access control (MAC) control element (CE), or physical layer signaling. The physical layer signaling herein may be downlink control information (DCI); which includes a case where one of RRC signaling and MAC CE is used for scheduling without the physical layer signaling (DCI)].
It is noted that the above-mentioned feature is a known technique in the field Applicant's endeavor, e.g., telecommunication art.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the system of the aspect of Li with respect of FIG. 9 with "the above-mentioned known feature(s)" taught by the aspect of Li with respect to ¶0288 to reach the claimed invention as set forth above. Since one having ordinary skill in the art could have recognized that applying the known technique taught by the aspect of Li with respect to ¶0288 into the system of the aspect of Li with respect to FIG. 9 would have yield predictable results and/or resulted in the improved system, such as e.g., ensure to increase flexibility in selecting a manner to transmit an indication, such a modification (or application) would have involved the mere application of a known technique to a piece of prior art ready for improvement," the claim is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a). Ex Parte Smith, 83 USPQ.2d 1509, 1518-19 (BPAI, 2007) (citing KSR v. Teleflex, 127 S.Ct. 1727, 1740, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007)).
Regarding claim 8, Li in view of He and Xu discloses, the UE of claim 1 as set forth above.
The aspect of Li does not explicitly disclose (see, italicized limitations), but another aspect of Li discloses, determine a radio resource control configuration for PUCCH transmission based at least in part on radio resource control signaling [¶0225, the terminal device further receives a configuration message from higher layer RRC signaling, and the configuration message indicates the quantity of repeated transmissions; further see ¶0291, the terminal device may receive the higher layer RRC signaling and the DCI from the network device, where the higher layer RRC signaling includes the second indication information, and the DCI includes the first indication information],
wherein the radio resource control signaling is associated with a channel state information report configuration or a semi-persistent scheduling configuration [¶0289, the terminal device may enable or disable the parameter, namely, the quantity of repeated transmissions, by using a higher layer performance semi-persistent configuration; see ¶0200, higher layer signaling such as RRC layer signaling]; and transmit the first one or more PUCCH communications and the second one or more PUCCH communications in accordance with the radio resource control configuration [¶0225, the terminal device further receives a configuration message from higher layer RRC signaling, and the configuration message indicates the quantity of repeated transmissions; further see ¶0291, the terminal device may receive the higher layer RRC signaling and the DCI from the network device, where the higher layer RRC signaling includes the second indication information, and the DCI includes the first indication information; further see ¶0291 and ¶0295].
It is noted that the above-mentioned feature is a known technique in the field Applicant's endeavor, e.g., telecommunication art.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the above-mentioned feature(s) as taught by another aspect of Li with respect to the above-cited portions in the system of the aspect of Li with respect to FIG. 9 for similar rationales set forth above in claim 8.
Regarding claim 9, Li in view of He and Xu discloses, the UE of claim 8 as set forth above.
The aspect of Li does not explicitly disclose (see, italicized limitations), but another aspect of Li discloses, the radio resource control configuration indicates at least one of the one or more first PUCCH resources or the one or more second PUCCH resources [¶0225, the terminal device further receives a configuration message from higher layer RRC signaling, and the configuration message indicates the quantity of repeated transmissions; further see ¶0291, the terminal device may receive the higher layer RRC signaling and the DCI from the network device, where the higher layer RRC signaling includes the second indication information, and the DCI includes the first indication information],
It is noted that the above-mentioned feature is a known technique in the field Applicant's endeavor, e.g., telecommunication art.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the above-mentioned feature(s) as taught by another aspect of Li with respect to the above-cited portions in the system of the aspect of Li with respect to FIG. 9 for similar rationales set forth above in claim 8.
Regarding claim 14, Li in view of He and Xu discloses, the UE of claim 1 as set forth above.
Although the aspect of Li with respect to FIG. 9 discloses, “transmit the first one or more PUCCH communications and the second one or more PUCCH communications” as set forth above, the aspect of Li with respect to FIG. 9 does not explicitly disclose (see, italicized limitations), but another aspect of Li discloses, transmit the first one or more PUCCH communications and the second one or more PUCCH communications, wherein the first configuration is the same as the second configuration with respect to at least one of: a quantity of symbols. [FIGS. 12A-12C; its related descriptions; ¶0349, note that the PUCC1 has 3 symbols and the PUCCH2 has 3 symbols].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the above-mentioned feature(s) as taught by another aspect of Li with respect to the above-cited portions in the system of the aspect of Li with respect to FIG. 9 for similar rationales set forth above in claim 11.
Regarding claim 20, Li discloses, a network node for wireless communication [FIG. 9; its related descriptions; ¶0305-0310, network node for wireless communication with network device], comprising:
memory [FIG. 17; its related descriptions; ¶0421 and 01424, storage element 17032; note that every network node has at least one memory]; and
one or more processors coupled to the memory, the memory comprising instructions executable by the one or more processors to cause the network node to [FIG. 17; its related descriptions; ¶0421 and 0424, processing element 17031; note that every network node has at least one processor coupled to the memory comprising instructions executable by the processor].
Since claim 20 is merely different from claim 1 in that it recites claimed features from the perspective of a network node, but recites similar features to claim 1 without further additional features, claim 20 is rejected at least based on a similar rationale applied to claim 1.
Regarding claim 22, claim 22 is rejected at least based on a similar rationale applied to claim 3.
Regarding claim 23, claim 23 is rejected at least based on a similar rationale applied to claim 4.
Regarding claim 26, claim 26 is rejected at least based on a similar rationale applied to claim 7.
‘Regarding claim 27, claim 27 is rejected at least based on a similar rationale applied to claim 8.
Regarding claim 28, claim 28 is rejected at least based on a similar rationale applied to claim 9.
Regarding claim 29, since claim 29 recites similar features to claim 1 without further additional features, claim 29 is rejected at least based on a similar rationale applied to claim 1.
Regarding claim 30, since claim 30 is merely different from claim 1 in that it recites claimed features from the perspective of a network node, but recites similar features to claim 1 without further additional features, claim 30 is rejected at least based on a similar rationale applied to claim 1.
Regarding claim 31, claim 31 is rejected at least based on a similar rationale applied to claim 2.
Claims 5-6, 10 and 24-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al (US Publication No. 2022/0361164) in view of He et al (US Publication No. 2023/036193) and further in view of Xu et al (US Publication No. 2022/0210770) and further in view of Yi et al (US Publication No. 2021/0360616).
Regarding claim 5, Li in view of He and Xu discloses, the UE of claim 1 as set forth above.
Although Li discloses, determine a first configuration for the first one or more PUCCH communications based at least in part on at least one of an uplink control information payload size [FIG. 6C; its related descriptions; ¶0249, determining a PUCCH resource set 1 based on a quantity of bits of the to-be-sent UCI; which requires determining a configuration for the PUCCH resource set 1]; and wherein the instructions, executable to cause the UE to transmit the first one or more PUCCH communications and the second one or more PUCCH communications, are executable to cause the UE [see supra rejection set forth above in claim 1] to: transmit the first one or more PUCCH communications in accordance with the first configuration and the second one or more PUCCH communications in accordance with the second configuration [FIG. 9; its related descriptions; ¶0306-0307 the terminal device repeatedly transmit the uplink control information UCI for M times by using N PUCCH resources in the target PUCCH resource subset, where M and N are positive integers based on the indication information], Li in view of He and Xu does not explicitly disclose (see, italicized limitations), but Yi discloses, determine a second configuration for the second one or more PUCCH communications based at least in part on a mapping of the one or more second PUCCH resources to the one or more first PUCCH resources [¶0310, the wireless device may determine the second PUCCH resource set based on the mapping and the first PUCCH resource set].
It is noted that the above-mentioned feature is a known technique in the field Applicant's endeavor, e.g., telecommunication art.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the system of Li in view of He and Xu with "the above-mentioned known feature(s)" taught by Yi to reach the claimed invention as set forth above. Since one having ordinary skill in the art could have recognized that applying the known technique taught by Yi into the system of Li in view of He and Xu would have yield predictable results and/or resulted in the improved system, such as e.g., ensuring to simplify resource management and reduce signaling overhead by leveraging existing configurations, such a modification (or application) would have involved the mere application of a known technique to a piece of prior art ready for improvement," the claim is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a). Ex Parte Smith, 83 USPQ.2d 1509, 1518-19 (BPAI, 2007) (citing KSR v. Teleflex, 127 S.Ct. 1727, 1740, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007)).
Regarding claim 6, Li in view of He, Xu and Yi discloses, the UE of claim 5 as set forth above. Li view of He and Xu does not explicitly disclose (see, italicized limitations), but Yi discloses, wherein the mapping is based at least in part on a defined mapping rule [¶0310, the base station may configure a mapping between one of the one or more first PUCCH resource sets and one of the one or more second PUCCH resource sets].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the above-mentioned feature(s) as taught by Yi in the system of Li in view of He and Xu for similar rationales set forth above in claim 5.
Regarding claim 10, Li in view of He, Xu and Yi discloses, the UE of claim 1 as set forth above.
Although Li discloses, determine a first configuration for the one or more first PUCCH resources [FIG. 6C; its related descriptions; ¶0249, determining a PUCCH resource set 1 based on a quantity of bits of the to-be-sent UCI; which requires determining a configuration for the PUCCH resource set 1] based at least in part on radio resource control signaling [¶0288, the signaling in this embodiment of this application may be one or more of radio resource control (RRC) signaling, a media access control (MAC) control element (CE), or physical layer signaling], wherein the radio resource control signaling is associated with a channel state information report configuration or a semi-persistent scheduling configuration [¶0289, the terminal device may enable or disable the parameter, namely, the quantity of repeated transmissions, by using a higher layer performance semi-persistent configuration; see ¶0200, higher layer signaling such as RRC layer signaling]; and wherein the instructions, executable to cause the UE to transmit the first one or more PUCCH communications and the second one or more PUCCH communications, are executable to cause the UE [see supra rejection set forth above in claim 1] to: transmit the first one or more PUCCH communications in accordance with the first configuration and the second one or more PUCCH communications in accordance with the second configuration [FIG. 9; its related descriptions; ¶0306-0307 the terminal device repeatedly transmit the uplink control information UCI for M times by using N PUCCH resources in the target PUCCH resource subset, where M and N are positive integers based on the indication information], Li in view of He and Xu does not explicitly disclose (see, italicized limitations), but Yi discloses, determine a second configuration for the first one or more PUCCH communications based at least in part on a mapping of the one or more second PUCCH resources to the one or more first PUCCH resources [¶0310, the wireless device may determine the second PUCCH resource set based on the mapping and the first PUCCH resource set].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the above-mentioned feature(s) as taught by Yi in the system of Li in view of He and Xu for similar rationales set forth above in claim 5.
Regarding claim 24, claim 24 is rejected at least based on a similar rationale applied to claim 5.
Regarding claim 25, claim 25 is rejected at least based on a similar rationale applied to claim 6.
Claims 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al (US Publication No. 2022/0361164) in view of He et al (US Publication No. 2023/036193) and further in view of Xu et al (US Publication No. 2022/0210770) and further in view of Ling et al (US Publication No. 2023/0354340).
Regarding claim 12, Li in view of He and Xu discloses, the UE of claim 1 as set forth above.
Li in view of He and Xu does not explicitly disclose (see, italicized limitations), but Ling discloses, wherein the first quantity of resource elements and the second quantity of resource elements include one or more demodulation reference signal resource elements [FIG. 6; its related descriptions; ¶0192, FIG. 6 illustrates an exemplary DMRS pattern across 4 repetitions, in which one repetition is transmitted in one slot. In this example, the DMRS pattern can be “1 0 1 0”. It means the first slot (slot n) and the third slot (slot n+2) will use a default DMRS configuration, and the other two slots will not use any DMRS].
It is noted that the above-mentioned feature is a known technique in the field Applicant's endeavor, e.g., telecommunication art.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the system of Li in view of He and Xu with "the above-mentioned known feature(s)" taught by Ling to reach the claimed invention as set forth above. Since one having ordinary skill in the art could have recognized that applying the known technique taught by Ling into the system of Li in view of He and Xu would have yield predictable results and/or resulted in the improved system, such as e.g., enabling accurate channel estimation for reliable demodulation in varying channel conditions, such a modification (or application) would have involved the mere application of a known technique to a piece of prior art ready for improvement," the claim is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a). Ex Parte Smith, 83 USPQ.2d 1509, 1518-19 (BPAI, 2007) (citing KSR v. Teleflex, 127 S.Ct. 1727, 1740, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007)).
Regarding claim 13, Li in view of He and Xu discloses, the UE of claim 1 as set forth above.
Li in view of He and Xu does not explicitly disclose (see, italicized limitations), but Ling discloses, wherein none of the first quantity of resource elements and the second quantity of resource elements include one or more demodulation reference signal resource elements [FIG. 6; its related descriptions; ¶0192, FIG. 6 illustrates an exemplary DMRS pattern across 4 repetitions, in which one repetition is transmitted in one slot. In this example, the DMRS pattern can be “1 0 1 0”. It means the first slot (slot n) and the third slot (slot n+2) will use a default DMRS configuration, and the other two slots will not use any DMRS].
It is noted that the above-mentioned feature is a known technique in the field Applicant's endeavor, e.g., telecommunication art.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the system of Li in view of He and Xu with "the above-mentioned known feature(s)" taught by Ling to reach the claimed invention as set forth above. Since one having ordinary skill in the art could have recognized that applying the known technique taught by Ling into the system of Li in view of He and Xu would have yield predictable results and/or resulted in the improved system, such as e.g., reducing overhead and save power, such a modification (or application) would have involved the mere application of a known technique to a piece of prior art ready for improvement," the claim is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a). Ex Parte Smith, 83 USPQ.2d 1509, 1518-19 (BPAI, 2007) (citing KSR v. Teleflex, 127 S.Ct. 1727, 1740, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007)).
Claims 15, 17-18 and 31-33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al (US Publication No. 2022/0361164) in view of He et al (US Publication No. 2023/036193) and further in view of Xu et al (US Publication No. 2022/0210770) and further in view of Jang et al (US Publication No. 2023/0087223).
Regarding claim 15, Li in view of He and Xu discloses, the UE of claim 1 as set forth above.
Li in view of He and Xu does not explicitly disclose (see, italicized limitations), but Jang discloses, forgo transmission of the second one or more PUCCH communications in the second component carrier when a transmission condition is not satisfied [¶0420, remaining PUCCH repetitive transmission may be dropped when the number of times of PUCCH repetitive transmission already performed is taken into account as a condition].
It is noted that the above-mentioned feature is a known technique in the field Applicant's endeavor, e.g., telecommunication art.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the system of Li in view of He and Xu with "the above-mentioned known feature(s)" taught by Jang to reach the claimed invention as set forth above. Since one having ordinary skill in the art could have recognized that applying the known technique taught by Jang into the system of Li in view of He and Xu would have yield predictable results and/or resulted in the improved system, such as e.g., reducing unnecessary resource usage and improving uplink transmission efficiency, such a modification (or application) would have involved the mere application of a known technique to a piece of prior art ready for improvement," the claim is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a). Ex Parte Smith, 83 USPQ.2d 1509, 1518-19 (BPAI, 2007) (citing KSR v. Teleflex, 127 S.Ct. 1727, 1740, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007)).
Regarding claim 17, Li in view of He and Xu discloses, the UE of claim 1 as set forth above.
Li in view of He and Xu does not explicitly disclose (see, italicized limitations), but Jang discloses, wherein the one or more first PUCCH resources are configured for a particular quantity of repetitions [¶0420, the number of PUCCH repetitive transmission is 4 (see, “ For example, when the total number of times of repetitive transmission is 8, the reference value is 4”)], and the one or more second PUCCH resources are configured for the particular quantity of repetitions [¶0420, the number of remaining PUCCH repetitive transmission is 4], and wherein a quantity of transmitted repetitions of the UCI message across the one or more first PUCCH resources and the one or more second PUCCH resources is the particular quantity of repetitions [¶0420, when the number of times of PUCCH repetitive transmission already performed is taken into account as a condition, the remaining PUCCH repetitive transmission may be dropped; which means that among 8 PUCCH repetitive transmissions, only 4 PUCCH repetitive transmission are performed corresponding to the particular quantity of repetitions which is “4”].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the above-mentioned feature(s) as taught by Jang in the system of Li in view of He and Xu for similar rationales set forth above in claim 15.
Regarding claim 18, Li in view of He and Xu discloses, the UE of claim 1 as set forth above.
Li in view of He and Xu does not explicitly disclose (see, italicized limitations), but Jang discloses, wherein the one or more first PUCCH resources are configured for a first quantity of repetitions [¶0420, the number of PUCCH repetitive transmission is 4 (see, “ For example, when the total number of times of repetitive transmission is 8, the reference value is 4”)], and the one or more second PUCCH resources are configured for a second quantity of repetitions [¶0420, the number of remaining PUCCH repetitive transmission is 4], and wherein a quantity of transmitted repetitions of the UCI message across the one or more first PUCCH resources and the one or more second PUCCH resources is the first quantity of repetitions and or the second quantity of repetitions [¶0420, when the number of times of PUCCH repetitive transmission already performed is taken into account as a condition, the remaining PUCCH repetitive transmission may be dropped; which means that among 8 PUCCH repetitive transmissions, only 4 PUCCH repetitive transmission are performed corresponding to one of the number of first PUCCH repetitive transmission or the number of remaining PUCCH repetitive transmission].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the above-mentioned feature(s) as taught by Jang in the system of Li in view of He and Xu for similar rationales set forth above in claim 15.
Regarding claims 31-33, each claim is rejected at least based on a similar rationale applied to claim 17.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al (US Publication No. 2022/0361164) in view of He et al (US Publication No. 2023/036193) and further in view of Xu et al (US Publication No. 2022/0210770) and further in view of Sun et al (US Publication No. 2023/0284222).
Regarding claim 16, Li in view of He and Xu discloses, the UE of claim 1 as set forth above.
Although Li discloses, “transmit the first one or more PUCCH communications and the second one or more PUCCH communications” as set forth above, Li in view of He and Xu does not explicitly disclose (see, italicized limitations), but Sun discloses, transmit the first one or more PUCCH communications and the second one or more PUCCH communications when polar code is enabled for PUCCH transmission [¶0122, The above method can be applied to other channels that use polar codes for repetition (including UCI transmission in PUSCH, PUCCH format 3/4, etc)].
It is noted that the above-mentioned feature is well known/established in the telecommunication art as recited in 3GPP standard [see, e.g., ¶0110 of Sun].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide well-established standard of providing the above-mentioned well-known feature, as taught by Sun in the system of Li in view of He and Xu, so that it would provide interoperability and compatibility between telecommunication equipment vendors and service providers, thereby providing users with easier and faster seamless transition regardless where the users are located in the country/world.
Claims 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al (US Publication No. 2022/0361164) in view of He et al (US Publication No. 2023/036193) and further in view of Xu et al (US Publication No. 2022/0210770)and further in view of Liu et al (US Publication No. 2024/0306137).
Regarding claim 19, Li in view of He and Xu discloses, the UE of claim 1 as set forth above.
Li in view of He and Xu does not explicitly disclose (see, italicized limitations), but Liu discloses, wherein the one or more first PUCCH resources are configured for a first quantity of repetitions [¶0086, the number of repetition transmission corresponding to the first target PUCCH resource is two] and the one or more second PUCCH resources are configured for a second quantity of repetitions [¶0086, the number of repetition transmission corresponding to the second target PUCCH resource is one], and wherein a quantity of transmitted repetitions of uplink control information across the one or more first PUCCH resources and the one or more second PUCCH resources is a total of the first quantity of repetitions and the second quantity of repetitions [¶0086, in one slot, based on the number of repetition transmissions corresponding to the first target PUCCH resource, the first target PUCCH resource is used to repeatedly transmit the UCI to multiple TRPs of the base station, and based on the number of repetition transmissions corresponding to the second target PUCCH resources, the second target PUCCH resource is used to repeatedly transmit the UCI to multiple TRPs of the base station].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the above-mentioned feature(s) as taught by Liu in the system of Li in view of He and Xu in order to cause the system to be able to realize joint transmission of multiple PUCCH resources to meet communication requirements in regard to delay and transmission quality in a wireless communication network [e.g., ¶0004 of Liu].
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 SUN JONG KIM whose telephone number is (571)270-3216. The examiner can normally be reached on 7:30am-5:30pm (M-T).
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.f attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ian Moore can be reached on (571) 272-3085. 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/SUN JONG KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2469