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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 1/7/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-14, 16, 18, 20-24, 28-29, 31, 33, 36, 38, 42-44, 61-62 and 124-125 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.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in acco rdance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Regarding claim 124, the limitation are interpreted as follows
“means for receiving” Receive Processor 238 and Antennas 234
“means for determining” Processor 240 and Memory 242.
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.
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 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.
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.
Claims 1-7, 14, 16, 18, 20-24, 30-31, 36, 38, 42-44, 61-63, and 124-125 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 being unpatentable over Takeda; Kazuki et al. US PGPUB 20220046666 A1 in view of Islam; Toufiqul et al. US PGPUB 20220159683 A1.
Regarding claim 1, Takeda teaches A method of wireless communication performed by a user equipment (UE), comprising:
receiving a cancellation indication ([0073] in a case where the base station schedules dynamic grant-based UL transmission, a resource of dynamic grant-based UL transmission is configured at a position timewise before a starting position of a configured grant-based resource.)
wherein the cancellation indication identifies one or more of one or more symbols or one or more resource blocks for which a transmit power is reduced to a value greater than zero based at least in part on receiving the cancellation indication” ([0045] Note that, here, cancellation of configured grant-based UL transmission (for example, PUSCH transmission) is interpreted as that configured grant-based UL transmission (for example, PUSCH transmission) that has started transmission is stopped before the UL transmission is completed. Furthermore, stopping transmission may mean that transmission power is reduced to zero or the transmission power is significantly lowered as compared to the UL transmission.)
determining, based at least in part on the reception of the cancellation indication associated with the uplink transmission on the shared radio frequency spectrum band, whether the uplink transmission is to be cancelled or transmitted at a reduced transmit power; ([0045] Furthermore, stopping transmission may mean that transmission power is reduced to zero or the transmission power is significantly lowered as compared to the UL transmission. Transmission power at which transmission is determined to be stopped may be, for example, a value less than Minimum output power (for example, −40 dBm) or a value defined as OFF power (for example, −50 dBm) or less. Transmission power at which transmission is determined to be stopped may be, for example, a value less than Minimum output power (for example, −40 dBm) or a value defined as OFF power (for example, −50 dBm) or less.) and
when the uplink transmission is to be transmitted at the reduced transmit power, transmitting the uplink transmission at the reduced transmit power. ([0045] the transmission power is significantly lowered as compared to the UL transmission.) wherein the reduced transmit power comprises the value greater than zero. ([0045] Transmission power at which transmission is determined to be stopped may be, for example, a value less than Minimum output power (for example, −40 dBm) or a value defined as OFF power (for example, −50 dBm) or less.)
Takeda does not teach
receiving configuration information that includes a grant for an uplink transmission on a shared radio frequency spectrum band and an indication of one or more open loop power control (OLPC) parameters to be utilized for transmission of the uplink transmission based at least in part on reception of a cancellation indication associated with the uplink transmission, wherein the shared radio frequency spectrum band has a listen-before-talk (LBT) channel access mechanism to access the shared radio frequency spectrum band;
However, Islam teaches
receiving configuration information that includes a grant for an uplink transmission on a shared radio frequency spectrum band ([0333] Alternatively, the time/frequency region can be indicated by a typical time domain or frequency domain allocation in a grant. ) and an indication of one or more open loop power control (OLPC) parameters to be utilized for transmission of the uplink transmission ([0337] Power control parameters (e.g., if UE needs to adjust transmit power in impacted area) [0338] As an example, given two bits: the value 00 can indicate a cancellation, and the values 01/10/11 can indicate an adjustment of power on an overlapping transmission.) based at least in part on reception of a cancellation indication associated with the uplink transmission, )
wherein the shared radio frequency spectrum band has a listen-before-talk (LBT) channel access mechanism to access the shared radio frequency spectrum band; ([0055] To operate in the unlicensed spectrum, the UEs 101 and the RAN nodes 111 may operate using LAA, eLAA, and/or feLAA mechanisms…. The medium/carrier sensing operations may be performed according to a listen-before-talk (LBT) protocol.)
in order to reduce end to end latency ([0090])
Takeda and Islam are analogous art in the same field of endeavor of wireless communication. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person with ordinary skill in the art to modify the method in Takeda with the technique of UL grant in Islam in order to reduce end to end latency.
Regarding claim 2. Takeda and Islam teach The method of claim 1, Takeda teaches wherein the uplink transmission is a first uplink transmission, and wherein the first uplink transmission is transmitted at the reduced transmit power based at least in part on the UE being configured to transmit a second uplink transmission subsequent to the first uplink transmission. ([0044] In order to avoid such a conflict between configured grant-based UL transmission and dynamic grant-based UL transmission, the present inventors have focused on the fact that configured grant-based UL transmission (for example, PUSCH transmission) can be cancelled by using a given signal.)
Regarding claim 3. Takeda and Islam teach The method of claim 2, Takeda teaches further comprising: transmitting the second uplink transmission without performing an LBT operation between the first uplink transmission and the second uplink transmission. ([0045] Note that, here, cancellation of configured grant-based UL transmission (for example, PUSCH transmission) is interpreted as that configured grant-based UL transmission (for example, PUSCH transmission) that has started transmission is stopped before the UL transmission is completed.)
Regarding claim 4. Takeda and Islam teach The method of claim 1, Takeda teaches wherein the determination is based at least in part on whether the uplink transmission overlaps another uplink transmission. ([0043] In such a case, in a resource capable of both grant-based transmission and configured grant-based transmission (for example, a PUSCH resource), transmission timing of a configured grant-based PUSCH and transmission timing of a PUSCH scheduled by DCI may conflict with each other. In a case where a conflicting PUSCH cannot be transmitted, resource utilization efficiency may decrease. Furthermore, UL transmission may be delayed and communication quality may deteriorate.)
Regarding claim 5. Takeda and Islam teach The method of claim 1, Takeda teaches wherein the uplink transmission is a first uplink transmission, and wherein the first uplink transmission is cancelled based at least in part on a second uplink transmission of the UE being non-consecutive with the first uplink transmission. ([0043] In such a case, in a resource capable of both grant-based transmission and configured grant-based transmission (for example, a PUSCH resource), transmission timing of a configured grant-based PUSCH and transmission timing of a PUSCH scheduled by DCI may conflict with each other. In a case where a conflicting PUSCH cannot be transmitted, resource utilization efficiency may decrease. Furthermore, UL transmission may be delayed and communication quality may deteriorate.
Examiner takes broadest reasonable interpretation of the term “non-consecutive”, being different types of PUSCH (grant-based vs. DCI scheduled) is determined to read on “non-consecutive” transmission. )
Regarding claim 6. Takeda and Islam teach The method of claim 1, Takeda teaches wherein the determination is based at least in part on the cancellation indication, and wherein the cancellation indicates whether the uplink transmission is to be cancelled or transmitted at the reduced transmit power. ([0052] Thus, it is possible to cancel configured grant-based PUSCH transmission in the UE to which a configured grant-based resource is configured by notification of downlink Control Information from the base station, and to use the configured grant-based resource for dynamic grant-based PUSCH transmission.)
Regarding claim 7. Takeda and Islam teach The method of claim 6, Takeda does not teach wherein the cancellation indication is received in the grant.
However, Islam teaches
wherein the indication is received in a grant associated with the uplink transmission. ([0305] In some implementations, a UL grant such as format 0_0 or format 0_1 can include an indication in a data field (e.g., a 1 bit) specifying whether the corresponding scheduled PUSCH can be preempted or canceled, if a subsequent cancellation indication is received and indicates a resource that overlaps with that of the scheduled PUSCH.)
in order to improve efficiency and reliability of packet transmission ([0217])
Takeda and Islam are analogous art in the same field of endeavor of wireless communication. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person with ordinary skill in the art to modify the method in Takeda with the technique of UL grant indicator in Islam in order to improve efficiency and reliability of packet transmission.
Regarding claim 14. Takeda and Islam teach The method of claim 1, Takeda teaches wherein, when the uplink transmission is to be transmitted at the reduced transmit power, the cancellation indication is associated with a first processing timeline, and when the uplink transmission is to be cancelled, the cancellation indication is associated with a second processing timeline. ([0068] In the present aspect, an L1 signal (downlink Control Information) illustrated in FIG. 2 cancels transmission of a configured grant base in units of subbands according to the present aspect in a case where a period up to a slot #4 to which a configured grant-based resource is configured exceeds required processing time (T_proc_1), that is, in a case where the L1 signal is received with respect to a configured grant-based resource configured in the L1 signal before the processing time (T_proc_1).)
Regarding claim 16. Takeda and Islam teach The method of claim 1, Takeda teaches wherein, when the cancellation indication is associated with a collision between the uplink transmission and a higher-priority transmission of the UE, a processing timeline of the higher-priority transmission is increased relative to a baseline processing timeline. ([0078] Furthermore, in a case where a plurality of configuration grant-based PUSCH resources can be configured in the same BWP or cell, whether or not to perform LBT may be configured separately for each of the plurality of configured grant-based PUSCH resources. In this case, highly flexible operation is possible in which a configured grant-based PUSCH resource configured to transmit UL data with high priority is caused not to perform LBT but to perform reliable transmission, and a configured grant-based PUSCH resource configured to transmit UL data with low priority is caused to perform LBT and to stop transmission in a case where there is another transmission.)
Regarding claim 18. Takeda and Islam teach The method of claim 1, Takeda teaches wherein the cancellation indication is based at least in part on an overlap between the uplink transmission and a transmission by another UE or a higher-priority transmission by the UE. ([0078] Furthermore, in a case where a plurality of configuration grant-based PUSCH resources can be configured in the same BWP or cell, whether or not to perform LBT may be configured separately for each of the plurality of configured grant-based PUSCH resources. In this case, highly flexible operation is possible in which a configured grant-based PUSCH resource configured to transmit UL data with high priority is caused not to perform LBT but to perform reliable transmission, and a configured grant-based PUSCH resource configured to transmit UL data with low priority is caused to perform LBT and to stop transmission in a case where there is another transmission.)
Regarding claim 20. Takeda teaches A method of wireless communication performed by a base station, comprising: transmitting, to the UE, the cancellation indication ([0073] in a case where the base station schedules dynamic grant-based UL transmission, a resource of dynamic grant-based UL transmission is configured at a position timewise before a starting position of a configured grant-based resource.)
wherein the cancellation indication identifies one or more of one or more symbols or one or more resource blocks for which a transmit power is reduced to a value greater than zero based at least in part on receiving the cancellation indication” ([0045] Note that, here, cancellation of configured grant-based UL transmission (for example, PUSCH transmission) is interpreted as that configured grant-based UL transmission (for example, PUSCH transmission) that has started transmission is stopped before the UL transmission is completed. Furthermore, stopping transmission may mean that transmission power is reduced to zero or the transmission power is significantly lowered as compared to the UL transmission.)
when the uplink transmission is to be transmitted at the reduced transmit power, receiving the uplink transmission at the reduced transmit power. ([0045] Furthermore, stopping transmission may mean that transmission power is reduced to zero or the transmission power is significantly lowered as compared to the UL transmission. Transmission power at which transmission is determined to be stopped may be, for example, a value less than Minimum output power (for example, −40 dBm) or a value defined as OFF power (for example, −50 dBm) or less. Transmission power at which transmission is determined to be stopped may be, for example, a value less than Minimum output power (for example, −40 dBm) or a value defined as OFF power (for example, −50 dBm) or less.) wherein the reduced transmit power comprises the value greater than zero. ([0045] Transmission power at which transmission is determined to be stopped may be, for example, a value less than Minimum output power (for example, −40 dBm) or a value defined as OFF power (for example, −50 dBm) or less.)
Takeda does not teach
transmitting, to a user equipment (UE), configuration information that includes a grant for an uplink transmission on a shared radio frequency spectrum band and an indication of one or more open loop power control (OLPC) parameters to be utilized for transmission of the uplink transmission based at least in part on reception of a cancellation indication associated with the uplink transmission, wherein the shared radio frequency spectrum band has a listen-before-talk (LBT) channel access mechanism to access the shared radio frequency spectrum band;
However, Islam teaches
transmitting, to a user equipment (UE), configuration information that includes a grant for an uplink transmission on a shared radio frequency spectrum band ([0333] Alternatively, the time/frequency region can be indicated by a typical time domain or frequency domain allocation in a grant. ) and an indication of one or more open loop power control (OLPC) parameters to be utilized for transmission of the uplink transmission ([0337] Power control parameters (e.g., if UE needs to adjust transmit power in impacted area) [0338] As an example, given two bits: the value 00 can indicate a cancellation, and the values 01/10/11 can indicate an adjustment of power on an overlapping transmission.) based at least in part on reception of a cancellation indication associated with the uplink transmission, )
wherein the shared radio frequency spectrum band has a listen-before-talk (LBT) channel access mechanism to access the shared radio frequency spectrum band; ([0055] To operate in the unlicensed spectrum, the UEs 101 and the RAN nodes 111 may operate using LAA, eLAA, and/or feLAA mechanisms…. The medium/carrier sensing operations may be performed according to a listen-before-talk (LBT) protocol.)
in order to reduce end to end latency ([0090])
Takeda and Islam are analogous art in the same field of endeavor of wireless communication. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person with ordinary skill in the art to modify the method in Takeda with the technique of UL grant in Islam in order to reduce end to end latency.
Regarding claim 21. Takeda and Islam teach The method of claim 20, Takeda teaches wherein the uplink transmission is a first uplink transmission, and wherein the first uplink transmission is associated with the reduced transmit power based at least in part on the UE being configured to transmit a second uplink transmission subsequent to the first uplink transmission. . ([0044] In order to avoid such a conflict between configured grant-based UL transmission and dynamic grant-based UL transmission, the present inventors have focused on the fact that configured grant-based UL transmission (for example, PUSCH transmission) can be cancelled by using a given signal.)
Regarding claim 22. Takeda and Islam teach The method of claim 20, Takeda teaches further comprising determining whether the uplink transmission is to be cancelled or transmitted at the reduced transmit power based at least in part on whether the uplink transmission overlaps with another uplink transmission. ([0043] In such a case, in a resource capable of both grant-based transmission and configured grant-based transmission (for example, a PUSCH resource), transmission timing of a configured grant-based PUSCH and transmission timing of a PUSCH scheduled by DCI may conflict with each other. In a case where a conflicting PUSCH cannot be transmitted, resource utilization efficiency may decrease. Furthermore, UL transmission may be delayed and communication quality may deteriorate.)
Regarding claim 23. Takeda and Islam teach The method of claim 20, Takeda teaches wherein the uplink transmission is a first uplink transmission, and wherein the first uplink transmission is cancelled based at least in part on a second uplink transmission of the UE being non-consecutive with the first uplink transmission. ([0043] In such a case, in a resource capable of both grant-based transmission and configured grant-based transmission (for example, a PUSCH resource), transmission timing of a configured grant-based PUSCH and transmission timing of a PUSCH scheduled by DCI may conflict with each other. In a case where a conflicting PUSCH cannot be transmitted, resource utilization efficiency may decrease. Furthermore, UL transmission may be delayed and communication quality may deteriorate.
Examiner takes broadest reasonable interpretation of the term “non-consecutive”, being different types of PUSCH (grant-based vs. DCI scheduled) is determined to read on “non-consecutive” transmission. )
Regarding claim 24. Takeda and Islam The method of claim 20, Takeda teaches further comprising: transmitting an indication of whether the uplink transmission is to be cancelled or transmitted at the reduced transmit power. ([0052] Thus, it is possible to cancel configured grant-based PUSCH transmission in the UE to which a configured grant-based resource is configured by notification of downlink Control Information from the base station, and to use the configured grant-based resource for dynamic grant-based PUSCH transmission.)
Regarding claim 30. Takeda and Islam The method of claim 20, Takeda teaches wherein the transmission of the cancellation indication is associated with reducing the transmit power of the UE on a symbol that overlaps with a symbol of a higher-priority transmission of another UE. ([0078] Furthermore, in a case where a plurality of configuration grant-based PUSCH resources can be configured in the same BWP or cell, whether or not to perform LBT may be configured separately for each of the plurality of configured grant-based PUSCH resources. In this case, highly flexible operation is possible in which a configured grant-based PUSCH resource configured to transmit UL data with high priority is caused not to perform LBT but to perform reliable transmission, and a configured grant-based PUSCH resource configured to transmit UL data with low priority is caused to perform LBT and to stop transmission in a case where there is another transmission.)
Regarding claim 31. Takeda and Islam The method of claim 20, Takeda teaches wherein the cancellation indication is associated with one or more non-overlapped symbols of the uplink transmission. . ([0078] Furthermore, in a case where a plurality of configuration grant-based PUSCH resources can be configured in the same BWP or cell, whether or not to perform LBT may be configured separately for each of the plurality of configured grant-based PUSCH resources. In this case, highly flexible operation is possible in which a configured grant-based PUSCH resource configured to transmit UL data with high priority is caused not to perform LBT but to perform reliable transmission, and a configured grant-based PUSCH resource configured to transmit UL data with low priority is caused to perform LBT and to stop transmission in a case where there is another transmission.)
Regarding claim 36. Takeda and Islam The method of claim 20, Takeda teaches wherein, when the uplink transmission is to be transmitted at the reduced transmit power, the cancellation indication is associated with a first processing timeline, and when the uplink transmission is to be cancelled, the cancellation indication is associated with a second processing timeline. ([0068] In the present aspect, an L1 signal (downlink Control Information) illustrated in FIG. 2 cancels transmission of a configured grant base in units of subbands according to the present aspect in a case where a period up to a slot #4 to which a configured grant-based resource is configured exceeds required processing time (T_proc_1), that is, in a case where the L1 signal is received with respect to a configured grant-based resource configured in the L1 signal before the processing time (T_proc_1).)
Regarding claim 38. Takeda and Islam The method of claim 20, Takeda teaches wherein, when the cancellation indication is associated with a collision between the uplink transmission and a higher-priority transmission of the UE, a processing timeline of the higher-priority transmission is increased relative to a baseline processing timeline. ([0078] Furthermore, in a case where a plurality of configuration grant-based PUSCH resources can be configured in the same BWP or cell, whether or not to perform LBT may be configured separately for each of the plurality of configured grant-based PUSCH resources. In this case, highly flexible operation is possible in which a configured grant-based PUSCH resource configured to transmit UL data with high priority is caused not to perform LBT but to perform reliable transmission, and a configured grant-based PUSCH resource configured to transmit UL data with low priority is caused to perform LBT and to stop transmission in a case where there is another transmission.)
Regarding claim 42-44. Takeda and Islam teach A user equipment (UE) for wireless communication, comprising: one or more memories; and one or more processors coupled to the one or more memories (Fig. 10, Processor and Memory 1001 and 1002) and configured to perform the method in claim 1-3. It is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 61-63. Takeda and Islam teach A base station for wireless communication, comprising: one or more memories; and one or more processors coupled to the one or more memories (Fig. 10, Processor and Memory 1001 and 1002) and configured perform the method cited in claims 20-22.
Regarding claim 124. Takeda teaches An apparatus for wireless communication, comprising: means for receiving the cancellation indication ([0073] in a case where the base station schedules dynamic grant-based UL transmission, a resource of dynamic grant-based UL transmission is configured at a position timewise before a starting position of a configured grant-based resource.)
wherein the cancellation indication identifies one or more of one or more symbols or one or more resource blocks for which a transmit power is reduced to a value greater than zero based at least in part on receiving the cancellation indication” ([0045] Note that, here, cancellation of configured grant-based UL transmission (for example, PUSCH transmission) is interpreted as that configured grant-based UL transmission (for example, PUSCH transmission) that has started transmission is stopped before the UL transmission is completed. Furthermore, stopping transmission may mean that transmission power is reduced to zero or the transmission power is significantly lowered as compared to the UL transmission.)
means for determining, based at least in part on the reception of the cancellation indication associated with the uplink transmission on the shared radio frequency spectrum band, whether the uplink transmission is to be cancelled or transmitted at a reduced transmit power; ([0045] Furthermore, stopping transmission may mean that transmission power is reduced to zero or the transmission power is significantly lowered as compared to the UL transmission. Transmission power at which transmission is determined to be stopped may be, for example, a value less than Minimum output power (for example, −40 dBm) or a value defined as OFF power (for example, −50 dBm) or less. Transmission power at which transmission is determined to be stopped may be, for example, a value less than Minimum output power (for example, −40 dBm) or a value defined as OFF power (for example, −50 dBm) or less.) and
when the uplink transmission is to be transmitted at the reduced transmit power, transmitting the uplink transmission at the reduced transmit power. ([0045] the transmission power is significantly lowered as compared to the UL transmission.) wherein the reduced transmit power comprises the value greater than zero. ([0045] Transmission power at which transmission is determined to be stopped may be, for example, a value less than Minimum output power (for example, −40 dBm) or a value defined as OFF power (for example, −50 dBm) or less.)
Takeda does not teach
means for receiving configuration information that includes a grant for an uplink transmission on a shared radio frequency spectrum band and an indication of one or more open loop power control (OLPC) parameters to be utilized for transmission of the uplink transmission based at least in part on reception of a cancellation indication associated with the uplink transmission, wherein the shared radio frequency spectrum band has a listen-before-talk (LBT) channel access mechanism to access the shared radio frequency spectrum band;
However, Islam teaches
means for receiving configuration information that includes a grant for an uplink transmission on a shared radio frequency spectrum band ([0333] Alternatively, the time/frequency region can be indicated by a typical time domain or frequency domain allocation in a grant. ) and an indication of one or more open loop power control (OLPC) parameters to be utilized for transmission of the uplink transmission ([0337] Power control parameters (e.g., if UE needs to adjust transmit power in impacted area) [0338] As an example, given two bits: the value 00 can indicate a cancellation, and the values 01/10/11 can indicate an adjustment of power on an overlapping transmission.) based at least in part on reception of a cancellation indication associated with the uplink transmission, )
wherein the shared radio frequency spectrum band has a listen-before-talk (LBT) channel access mechanism to access the shared radio frequency spectrum band; ([0055] To operate in the unlicensed spectrum, the UEs 101 and the RAN nodes 111 may operate using LAA, eLAA, and/or feLAA mechanisms…. The medium/carrier sensing operations may be performed according to a listen-before-talk (LBT) protocol.)
in order to reduce end to end latency ([0090])
Takeda and Islam are analogous art in the same field of endeavor of wireless communication. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person with ordinary skill in the art to modify the method in Takeda with the technique of UL grant in Islam in order to reduce end to end latency.
Regarding claim 125. Takeda and Islam teach The apparatus of claim 124, Takeda teaches wherein the uplink transmission is a first uplink transmission, and wherein the first uplink transmission is transmitted at the reduced transmit power based at least in part on the apparatus being configured to transmit a second uplink transmission subsequent to the first uplink transmission. ([0044] In order to avoid such a conflict between configured grant-based UL transmission and dynamic grant-based UL transmission, the present inventors have focused on the fact that configured grant-based UL transmission (for example, PUSCH transmission) can be cancelled by using a given signal.)
Claims 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takeda and Islam as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Lim; Junsung et al. US PGPUB 20190281546 A1
Regarding claim 8. Takeda and Islam The method of claim 1, Takeda teaches wherein, but it does not teach when the uplink transmission is associated with a multi-transmission-time-interval (multi-TTI) grant, an uplink shared channel with slot aggregation, or an aperiodic reference signal, the method further comprises: cancelling a final TTI, repetition, or reference signal of the uplink transmission, and transmitting, at the reduced transmit power, one or more preceding TTIs, repetitions, or reference signals of the uplink transmission.
However, Lim teaches
when the uplink transmission is associated with a multi-transmission-time-interval (multi-TTI) grant, an uplink shared channel with slot aggregation, or an aperiodic reference signal, the method further comprises: cancelling a final TTI, repetition, or reference signal of the uplink transmission, and transmitting, at the reduced transmit power, one or more preceding TTIs, repetitions, or reference signals of the uplink transmission. ([0013] Consequently, the UE may also suspend (or cancel) the scheduled transmission of the CSI report corresponding to the scheduled CSI-RS transmission that was canceled by the base station due to the transmission of the aperiodic CSI-RS.)
in order to reduce battery consumption of UE ([0013] the UE may measure the CSI and transmit the periodic CSI report as scheduled without having to exist the low-power or sleep state prematurely. )
Takeda and Lim are analogous art in the same field of endeavor of wireless communication. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person with ordinary skill in the art to modify the method in Takeda with the technique of CSI-RS transmission in Lim in order to reduce battery consumption during low power state.
Regarding claim 9. Takeda and Islam teach The method of claim 1, but it does not teach wherein the reduced transmit power is selected based at least in part on the uplink transmission being associated with a periodic or semi-persistent reference signal.
However, Lim teaches
wherein the reduced transmit power is selected based at least in part on the uplink transmission being associated with a periodic or semi-persistent reference signal. ([0013] Consequently, the UE may also suspend (or cancel) the scheduled transmission of the CSI report corresponding to the scheduled CSI-RS transmission that was canceled by the base station due to the transmission of the aperiodic CSI-RS.)
in order to reduce battery consumption of UE ([0013] the UE may measure the CSI and transmit the periodic CSI report as scheduled without having to exist the low-power or sleep state prematurely. )
Takeda and Lim are analogous art in the same field of endeavor of wireless communication. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person with ordinary skill in the art to modify the method in Takeda with the technique of CSI-RS transmission in Lim in order to reduce battery consumption during low power state.
Claims 10 and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takeda and Islam as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of RYU; Jung Ho et al. US PGPUB 20210037477 A1.
Regarding claim 10. Takeda and Islam teach The method of claim 1, but it does not teach wherein the reduced transmit power is associated with an open-loop power control parameter that is applied for the more one or more symbols
However, Ryu teaches
reduced transmit power is associated with an open-loop power control parameter that is applied for the one or more symbols ([0038] Thus, as noted above, when transmitting on a side-link, a UE may take into consideration the interference that the sidelink transmissions can cause on the access links or other side-links. In some cases, to reduce interference that side-link transmissions can cause on the access links or other side-links, a UE may be configured to perform open loop power control to adjust the transmission power of the side-link transmissions, taking into account a priority associated with the information to be transmitted via the side link.)
in order to reduce interference ([0038])
Takeda and Ryu are analogous art in the same field of endeavor of wireless communication. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person with ordinary skill in the art to modify the method in Takeda with the technique of open-loop power control in Ryu in order to reduce interference.
Regarding claim 28. Takeda and Islam teach The method of claim 20, but it does not teach wherein the reduced transmit power is associated with an open-loop power control parameter that is associated with the one or more symbols
However, Ryu teaches
reduced transmit power is associated with an open-loop power control parameter that is applied for the one or more symbols ([0038] Thus, as noted above, when transmitting on a side-link, a UE may take into consideration the interference that the sidelink transmissions can cause on the access links or other side-links. In some cases, to reduce interference that side-link transmissions can cause on the access links or other side-links, a UE may be configured to perform open loop power control to adjust the transmission power of the side-link transmissions, taking into account a priority associated with the information to be transmitted via the side link.)
in order to reduce interference ([0038])
Takeda and Ryu are analogous art in the same field of endeavor of wireless communication. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person with ordinary skill in the art to modify the method in Takeda with the technique of open-loop power control in Ryu in order to reduce interference.
Claims 11-13 and 33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takeda and Islam as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of KIM; Hakseong et al. US 20170303215 A1.
Regarding claim 11. Takeda and Islam teach The method of claim 1, but they do not teach wherein the uplink transmission is a first uplink transmission that includes one or more overlapped symbols and one or more non-overlapped symbols relative to a second uplink transmission, and wherein the one or more overlapped symbols are associated with one or more first open-loop power control (OLPC) parameters and the one or more non-overlapped symbols are associated with one or more second OLPC parameters.
However, Kim teaches
wherein the uplink transmission is a first uplink transmission that includes one or more overlapped symbols and one or more non-overlapped symbols relative to a second uplink transmission, ([1128] To sum up, in the case of FIG. 56, the terminal reduces (or lowers0 D2D power to transmit the D2D signal only in the overlapped duration 5610 and transmits the D2D signal with normal power thereafter (i.e., in the non-overlapped duration 5620).) and wherein the one or more overlapped symbols are associated with one or more first open-loop power control (OLPC) parameters and the one or more non-overlapped symbols are associated with one or more second OLPC parameters. ([1100] Of course, the TPC included and transmitted in the D2D grant may also be used for the purpose of existing open loop power control (OLPC) or closed loop power control (CLPC).
[1101] Or, the TPC included and transmitted in the D2D grant may be used for the purpose of indicating (emergency) maximum power transmission and OLPC/CLPC in the two cases discussed above.)
In order to improve frequency efficiency ([0171])
Takeda and Kim are analogous art in the same field of endeavor of wireless communication. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person with ordinary skill in the art to modify the method in Takeda with the technique of power control loop adjustment in Kim in order to improve frequency efficiency.
Regarding claim 12. Takeda and Islam and Kim teach The method of claim 11, Takeda and Islam do not teach wherein the one or more first OLPC parameters comprise at least one of: an OLPC parameter associated with a symbol that is to use a higher transmit power than the reduced transmit power, an OLPC parameter associated with creating an LBT gap for another UE, or an OLPC parameter associated with avoiding a collision with the second uplink transmission.
However, Kim teaches
wherein the one or more first OLPC parameters comprise at least one of: an OLPC parameter associated with a symbol that is to use a higher transmit power than the reduced transmit power ([1128] To sum up, in the case of FIG. 56, the terminal reduces (or lowers0 D2D power to transmit the D2D signal only in the overlapped duration 5610 and transmits the D2D signal with normal power thereafter (i.e., in the non-overlapped duration 5620).
In order to improve frequency efficiency ([0171])
Takeda and Kim are analogous art in the same field of endeavor of wireless communication. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person with ordinary skill in the art to modify the method in Takeda with the technique of power control loop adjustment in Kim in order to improve frequency efficiency.
Regarding claim 13. Takeda, Islam and Kim teach The method of claim 11, Takeda and Islam don’t teach wherein a plurality of OLPC parameters, including the one or more first OLPC parameters, are applied for respective overlapped symbols including the one or more overlapped symbols.
However Kim teaches
wherein a plurality of OLPC parameters, including the one or more first OLPC parameters, are applied for respective overlapped symbols including the one or more overlapped symbols. ([1100] Of course, the TPC included and transmitted in the D2D grant may also be used for the purpose of existing open loop power control (OLPC) or closed loop power control (CLPC).
[1101] Or, the TPC included and transmitted in the D2D grant may be used for the purpose of indicating (emergency) maximum power transmission and OLPC/CLPC in the two cases discussed above.)
In order to improve frequency efficiency ([0171])
Takeda and Kim are analogous art in the same field of endeavor of wireless communication. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person with ordinary skill in the art to modify the method in Takeda with the technique of power control loop adjustment in Kim in order to improve frequency efficiency.
In order to improve frequency efficiency ([0171])
Takeda and Kim are analogous art in the same field of endeavor of wireless communication. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person with ordinary skill in the art to modify the method in Takeda with the technique of power control loop adjustment in Kim in order to improve frequency efficiency.
Regarding claim 33. Takeda and Islam teach The method of claim 20, but they do not teach wherein the uplink transmission is a first uplink transmission that includes one or more overlapped symbols and one or more non-overlapped symbols relative to a second uplink transmission, and wherein the one or more overlapped symbols are associated with one or more first open-loop power control (OLPC) parameters and the one or more non-overlapped symbols are associated with one or more second OLPC parameters.
However, Kim teaches
wherein the uplink transmission is a first uplink transmission that includes one or more overlapped symbols and one or more non-overlapped symbols relative to a second uplink transmission, ([1128] To sum up, in the case of FIG. 56, the terminal reduces (or lowers0 D2D power to transmit the D2D signal only in the overlapped duration 5610 and transmits the D2D signal with normal power thereafter (i.e., in the non-overlapped duration 5620).) and wherein the one or more overlapped symbols are associated with one or more first open-loop power control (OLPC) parameters and the one or more non-overlapped symbols are associated with one or more second OLPC parameters. ([1100] Of course, the TPC included and transmitted in the D2D grant may also be used for the purpose of existing open loop power control (OLPC) or closed loop power control (CLPC).
[1101] Or, the TPC included and transmitted in the D2D grant may be used for the purpose of indicating (emergency) maximum power transmission and OLPC/CLPC in the two cases discussed above.)
In order to improve frequency efficiency ([0171])
Takeda and Kim are analogous art in the same field of endeavor of wireless communication. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person with ordinary skill in the art to modify the method in Takeda with the technique of power control loop adjustment in Kim in order to improve frequency efficiency.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZHAOHUI YANG whose telephone number is (571)270-7527. The examiner can normally be reached 9 AM to 5 PM M-F.
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, Marcus Smith can be reached at 571 270-1096. 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.
/ZHAOHUI YANG/Examiner, Art Unit 2468
/MARCUS SMITH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2468