DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This Office Action is in response to the Appeal Brief correspondence filed on 11/26/2025.
Claims 1-10, 12-24, 26-28, 30-33 are rejected
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Appeal Brief, filed 11/26/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claims 1-10, 12-24, 26-28, 30-33 under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of appeal brief arguments and further search.
In view of the Appeal Brief filed on 11/26/2025, PROSECUTION IS HEREBY REOPENED. New grounds of rejection are set forth below.
To avoid abandonment of the application, appellant must exercise one of the following two options:
(1) file a reply under 37 CFR 1.111 (if this Office action is non-final) or a reply under 37 CFR 1.113 (if this Office action is final); or,
(2) initiate a new appeal by filing a notice of appeal under 37 CFR 41.31 followed by an appeal brief under 37 CFR 41.37. The previously paid notice of appeal fee and appeal brief fee can be applied to the new appeal. If, however, the appeal fees set forth in 37 CFR 41.20 have been increased since they were previously paid, then appellant must pay the difference between the increased fees and the amount previously paid.
A Supervisory Patent Examiner (SPE) has approved of reopening prosecution by signing 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 (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 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.
Claims 1-10, 12-24, 26-28, & 30-33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nammi et al (US20230083914A1) in view of Lindoff et al (US20090135748A1) in view of 3GPP TSH RAN WG1 #104-e “Feature lead summary on support of Type A PUSCH repetitions for Msg3 (02-2021).
Regarding claim 16 (and method claim 1), Nammi teaches A scheduling entity for wireless communication, comprising:
one or more processors ([0146], processor and memories communicatively connected); and
a memory communicatively coupled to the one or more processors ([0146], processor and memories communicatively connected), wherein the one or more processors are configured, individually or collectively, to cause the scheduling entity to:
transmit an indication of a first repetition count to a first user equipment (UE) ([0045], [0047], [0055]-[0056], discloses that the network configures a UE for a repeated PUSCH transmissions over multiple slots and determines the number of repetitions to be used; teaches that the network may configure 2,4,8 multi-slots for the UE to repeat the transport block(s), and may use DCI and configuration signaling to schedule the repetitions; thus the network provides an indication corresponding to a repetition count to the UE));
receive, from the first UE, repetitions of a first uplink transmission on a first subset of the plurality of first slots on the first carrier ([0048]-[0054], [0060]-[0066], teaches repeated PUSCH transmissions over plural slots/mini-slots), wherein a first quantity of the repetitions that are received is based on the first repetition count ([[0048]-[0052], teaches that the number of repeated PUSCH transmission is based on the configured repetition amount such as 2, 4, or 8 multi-slots),
But Nammi does not fully teach but Lindoff teaches transmit, to the first UE, a first resource allocation for a set of a plurality of first slots on a first carrier ([0029]-[0030 discloses that a serving BS signals a specific allocation of UL and DL subframes to a mobile terminal and further discloses transmitting a resource allocation message that completely defines a repeating pattern of UL and DL subframes applicable to a series of frames; the signaled UL subframes represent a resource allocation across a plurality of transmission intervals/slots assigned to the UE), the first carrier paired with a second carrier and separated from the second carrier in frequency ([0004], [0006], discloses a frequency division duplex system in which UL and DL communications occur on district frequency bands separated by a duplex distance between transmit and receive frequencies), wherein the first UE is configured to operate in a half-duplex communication ([0002]-[0004], [0026], expressly discloses mobile terminals that support only half-duplex operation and therefore do not perform simultaneous transmission and reception); and
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Nammi with Lindoff because Lindoff teaches allocating UL/DL subframes to half-duplex and full-duplex terminals in paired-frequency/FDD systems, while Nammi teaches configuring repeated PUSCH transmissions using a repetition count over multiple slots. A POSITA would have been motivated to apply Nammi’s PUSCH repetition configuration to Lindoff’s scheduled UL subframe framework to improve UL reliability and coverage while preserving Lindoff’s half-duplex scheduling constraints. The combination merely applies Nammi’s known repetition-count-based UL transmission technique to Lindoff’s known plural-slot/subframe resource allocation system, yielding predictable repeated UL transmissions on allocated UL resources.
Nammi and Lindoff fail to teach but 3GPP teaches and wherein the repetitions of the first uplink transmission are associated with a first repetition counting procedure based on a count of available uplink slots (Section 2.4 issue #7, proposal 7 also; teaches that Msg3 PUSCH repetitions are associated with a repetition counting procedure based on available UL slots because teaches that enhanced PUSCH repetition Type A for Msg3 includes “the number of repetitions counted on the basis of available slots,” and further specifies that “the number of repetitions is counted on the basis of available UL slots for Msg 3 repetition; same section Proposal 7 states the number of repetitions is counted on the basis of available UL slots for repetitions of Msg3 initial and re-transmission which directly corresponds to the claimed “repetition counting procedure based on a count of available uplink slots).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Nammi with Lindoff and 3GPP because Lindoff teaches allocating UL/DL subframes to half-duplex and full-duplex terminals in paired-frequency/FDD systems, while Nammi teaches configuring repeated PUSCH transmissions using a repetition count over multiple slots. Lastly, 3GPP teaches configuring a scheduling multi-slot PUSCH repetitions for a half-duplex UE by determining available UL slots/symbols within a plurality of configured slots and transmitting repeated UL transmissions only in those available UL resources, including through DCI, RRC signaling, slot-format configuration, and PUSCH aggregation-factor configuration. A POSITA would have been motivated to apply Nammi’s PUSCH repetition configuration to Lindoff’s scheduled UL subframe framework to improve UL reliability and coverage while preserving Lindoff’s half-duplex scheduling constraints. The combination merely applies Nammi’s known repetition-count-based UL transmission technique to Lindoff’s known plural-slot/subframe resource allocation system, yielding predictable repeated UL transmissions on allocated UL resources.
Regarding claim 17 (and method claim 2), Nammi teaches the scheduling entity of claim 16, wherein the one or more processors are further configured, individually or collectively, to cause the scheduling entity to:
transmit an indication of a second repetition count to a second UE ([0048]-[0054], [0060]-[0066], transmitting a second repetition count to another UE for repeated PUSCH transmission);
transmit, to the second UE, a second resource allocation for a set of a plurality of second slots on a third carrier, the third carrier paired with a fourth carrier and separated from the fourth carrier in frequency, wherein the second UE is configured to operate in a full-duplex communication ([0048]-[0054], [0060]-[0066], transmitting a second repetition count to another UE for repeated PUSCH transmission); and
receive, from the second UE, repetitions of a second uplink transmission on a second subset of the plurality of second slots on the third carrier, wherein a second quantity of the repetitions of the second uplink transmission that are received is based on the second repetition count ([0048]-[0054], [0060]-[0066], teaches repeated PUSCH transmissions over plural slots/mini-slots), wherein a first quantity of the repetitions that are received is based on the first repetition count ([[0048]-[0052], teaches that the number of repeated PUSCH transmission is based on the configured repetition amount such as 2, 4, or 8 multi-slots).
However, Nammi does not fully disclose but Lindoff teaches transmit, to the second UE, a second resource allocation for a set of a plurality of second slots on a third carrier, the third carrier paired with a fourth carrier and separated from the fourth carrier in frequency, wherein the second UE is configured to operate in a full-duplex communication ([0029]-[0030 discloses that a serving BS signals a specific allocation of UL and DL subframes to a mobile terminal and further discloses transmitting a resource allocation message that completely defines a repeating pattern of UL and DL subframes applicable to a series of frames; the signaled UL subframes represent a resource allocation across a plurality of transmission intervals/slots assigned to the UE);
receive, from the second UE, repetitions of a second uplink transmission on a second subset of the plurality of second slots on the third carrier, wherein a second quantity of the repetitions of the second uplink transmission that are received is based on the second repetition count ([0029]-[0030 discloses that a serving BS signals a specific allocation of UL and DL subframes to a mobile terminal and further discloses transmitting a resource allocation message that completely defines a repeating pattern of UL and DL subframes applicable to a series of frames; the signaled UL subframes represent a resource allocation across a plurality of transmission intervals/slots assigned to the UE).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Nammi with Lindoff and 3GPP because Lindoff teaches allocating UL/DL subframes to half-duplex and full-duplex terminals in paired-frequency/FDD systems, while Nammi teaches configuring repeated PUSCH transmissions using a repetition count over multiple slots. Lastly, 3GPP teaches configuring a scheduling multi-slot PUSCH repetitions for a half-duplex UE by determining available UL slots/symbols within a plurality of configured slots and transmitting repeated UL transmissions only in those available UL resources, including through DCI, RRC signaling, slot-format configuration, and PUSCH aggregation-factor configuration. A POSITA would have been motivated to apply Nammi’s PUSCH repetition configuration to Lindoff’s scheduled UL subframe framework to improve UL reliability and coverage while preserving Lindoff’s half-duplex scheduling constraints. The combination merely applies Nammi’s known repetition-count-based UL transmission technique to Lindoff’s known plural-slot/subframe resource allocation system, yielding predictable repeated UL transmissions on allocated UL resources.
Regarding claim 18 (and method claim 3), Nammi teaches the scheduling entity of claim 17, wherein the repetitions of the second uplink transmission are associated with a second repetition counting procedure ([0050]-[0058], [0060]-[0066], teaches that repeated PUSCH transmissions are associated with a repetition procedure because the UE transmits repetitions according to configured repetition parameters over plural slots or mini-slots).
However, Nammi does not fully disclose but 3GPP teaches wherein the repetitions of the second uplink transmission are associated with a second repetition counting procedure (Section 2.4 issue #7, proposal 7 also; teaches that Msg3 PUSCH repetitions are associated with a repetition counting procedure based on available UL slots because teaches that enhanced PUSCH repetition Type A for Msg3 includes “the number of repetitions counted on the basis of available slots,” and further specifies that “the number of repetitions is counted on the basis of available UL slots for Msg 3 repetition; same section Proposal 7 states the number of repetitions is counted on the basis of available UL slots for repetitions of Msg3 initial and re-transmission which directly corresponds to the claimed “repetition counting procedure based on a count of available uplink slots).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Nammi with Lindoff and 3GPP because Lindoff teaches allocating UL/DL subframes to half-duplex and full-duplex terminals in paired-frequency/FDD systems, while Nammi teaches configuring repeated PUSCH transmissions using a repetition count over multiple slots. Lastly, 3GPP teaches configuring a scheduling multi-slot PUSCH repetitions for a half-duplex UE by determining available UL slots/symbols within a plurality of configured slots and transmitting repeated UL transmissions only in those available UL resources, including through DCI, RRC signaling, slot-format configuration, and PUSCH aggregation-factor configuration. A POSITA would have been motivated to apply Nammi’s PUSCH repetition configuration to Lindoff’s scheduled UL subframe framework to improve UL reliability and coverage while preserving Lindoff’s half-duplex scheduling constraints. The combination merely applies Nammi’s known repetition-count-based UL transmission technique to Lindoff’s known plural-slot/subframe resource allocation system, yielding predictable repeated UL transmissions on allocated UL resources.
Regarding claim 19 (and method claim 4), Nammi and Lindoff fail to teach but 3GPP teaches the scheduling entity of claim 16, wherein, for the first repetition counting procedure, the first quantity of the repetitions transmitted is based on the count of available uplink slots of the set of the plurality of first slots from a first repetition of the first uplink transmission until the count reaches the first repetition count (Section 2.4 issue #7, proposal 7 also; teaches that Msg3 PUSCH repetitions are associated with a repetition counting procedure based on available UL slots because teaches that enhanced PUSCH repetition Type A for Msg3 includes “the number of repetitions counted on the basis of available slots,” and further specifies that “the number of repetitions is counted on the basis of available UL slots for Msg 3 repetition; same section Proposal 7 states the number of repetitions is counted on the basis of available UL slots for repetitions of Msg3 initial and re-transmission which directly corresponds to the claimed “repetition counting procedure based on a count of available uplink slots).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Nammi with Lindoff and 3GPP because Lindoff teaches allocating UL/DL subframes to half-duplex and full-duplex terminals in paired-frequency/FDD systems, while Nammi teaches configuring repeated PUSCH transmissions using a repetition count over multiple slots. Lastly, 3GPP teaches configuring a scheduling multi-slot PUSCH repetitions for a half-duplex UE by determining available UL slots/symbols within a plurality of configured slots and transmitting repeated UL transmissions only in those available UL resources, including through DCI, RRC signaling, slot-format configuration, and PUSCH aggregation-factor configuration. A POSITA would have been motivated to apply Nammi’s PUSCH repetition configuration to Lindoff’s scheduled UL subframe framework to improve UL reliability and coverage while preserving Lindoff’s half-duplex scheduling constraints. The combination merely applies Nammi’s known repetition-count-based UL transmission technique to Lindoff’s known plural-slot/subframe resource allocation system, yielding predictable repeated UL transmissions on allocated UL resources.
Regarding claim 20 (and method claim 5), Nammi and Lindoff fails to teach but 3GPP teaches the scheduling entity of claim 18, wherein for the second repetition counting procedure, the second quantity of the repetitions transmitted is based on a count of uplink and downlink slots of the set of the plurality of second slots from a first repetition of the second uplink transmission until the count reaches the second repetition count (Section 2.4 issue #7, proposal 7 also; teaches that Msg3 PUSCH repetitions are associated with a repetition counting procedure based on available UL slots because teaches that enhanced PUSCH repetition Type A for Msg3 includes “the number of repetitions counted on the basis of available slots,” and further specifies that “the number of repetitions is counted on the basis of available UL slots for Msg 3 repetition; same section Proposal 7 states the number of repetitions is counted on the basis of available UL slots for repetitions of Msg3 initial and re-transmission which directly corresponds to the claimed “repetition counting procedure based on a count of available uplink slots).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Nammi with Lindoff and 3GPP because Lindoff teaches allocating UL/DL subframes to half-duplex and full-duplex terminals in paired-frequency/FDD systems, while Nammi teaches configuring repeated PUSCH transmissions using a repetition count over multiple slots. Lastly, 3GPP teaches configuring a scheduling multi-slot PUSCH repetitions for a half-duplex UE by determining available UL slots/symbols within a plurality of configured slots and transmitting repeated UL transmissions only in those available UL resources, including through DCI, RRC signaling, slot-format configuration, and PUSCH aggregation-factor configuration. A POSITA would have been motivated to apply Nammi’s PUSCH repetition configuration to Lindoff’s scheduled UL subframe framework to improve UL reliability and coverage while preserving Lindoff’s half-duplex scheduling constraints. The combination merely applies Nammi’s known repetition-count-based UL transmission technique to Lindoff’s known plural-slot/subframe resource allocation system, yielding predictable repeated UL transmissions on allocated UL resources.
Regarding claim 21 (and method claim 6), Nammi teaches the scheduling entity of claim 18, wherein the one or more processors are further configured, individually or collectively, to cause the scheduling entity to:
transmit, to the first UE, a first indication of the first repetition counting procedure ([0050]-[0058], [0060]-[0063], teaches transmitting/configuring repetition procedures through network signaling, including DCI/RRC/slot-format-related-configuration for repeated PUSCH operation); and
transmit, to the second UE, a second indication of the second repetition counting procedure ([0050]-[0058], [0060]-[0063], teaches transmitting/configuring repetition procedures through network signaling, including DCI/RRC/slot-format-related-configuration for repeated PUSCH operation).
However, Nammi does not fully teach but 3GPP teaches transmit, to the first UE, a first indication of the first repetition counting procedure (Section 2.4 issue #7, proposal 7 also; teaches that Msg3 PUSCH repetitions are associated with a repetition counting procedure based on available UL slots because teaches that enhanced PUSCH repetition Type A for Msg3 includes “the number of repetitions counted on the basis of available slots,” and further specifies that “the number of repetitions is counted on the basis of available UL slots for Msg 3 repetition; same section Proposal 7 states the number of repetitions is counted on the basis of available UL slots for repetitions of Msg3 initial and re-transmission which directly corresponds to the claimed “repetition counting procedure based on a count of available uplink slots);
transmit, to the second UE, a second indication of the second repetition counting procedure (Section 2.4 issue #7, proposal 7 also; teaches that Msg3 PUSCH repetitions are associated with a repetition counting procedure based on available UL slots because teaches that enhanced PUSCH repetition Type A for Msg3 includes “the number of repetitions counted on the basis of available slots,” and further specifies that “the number of repetitions is counted on the basis of available UL slots for Msg 3 repetition; same section Proposal 7 states the number of repetitions is counted on the basis of available UL slots for repetitions of Msg3 initial and re-transmission which directly corresponds to the claimed “repetition counting procedure based on a count of available uplink slots).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Nammi with Lindoff and 3GPP because Lindoff teaches allocating UL/DL subframes to half-duplex and full-duplex terminals in paired-frequency/FDD systems, while Nammi teaches configuring repeated PUSCH transmissions using a repetition count over multiple slots. Lastly, 3GPP teaches configuring a scheduling multi-slot PUSCH repetitions for a half-duplex UE by determining available UL slots/symbols within a plurality of configured slots and transmitting repeated UL transmissions only in those available UL resources, including through DCI, RRC signaling, slot-format configuration, and PUSCH aggregation-factor configuration. A POSITA would have been motivated to apply Nammi’s PUSCH repetition configuration to Lindoff’s scheduled UL subframe framework to improve UL reliability and coverage while preserving Lindoff’s half-duplex scheduling constraints. The combination merely applies Nammi’s known repetition-count-based UL transmission technique to Lindoff’s known plural-slot/subframe resource allocation system, yielding predictable repeated UL transmissions on allocated UL resources.
Regarding claim 22 (and method claim 7), Nammi teaches the scheduling entity of claim 18, wherein the first repetition counting procedure is fixedly associated with the first UE and wherein the second repetition counting procedure is fixedly associated with the second UE ([0050]-[0058], teaches UE-specific repetition configuration, which supports repetition counting procedure associated with a particular UE).
However, Nammi does not fully teach but 3GPP teaches wherein the first repetition counting procedure is fixedly associated with the first UE and wherein the second repetition counting procedure is fixedly associated with the second UE (Section 2.4 issue #7, proposal 7 also; teaches that Msg3 PUSCH repetitions are associated with a repetition counting procedure based on available UL slots because teaches that enhanced PUSCH repetition Type A for Msg3 includes “the number of repetitions counted on the basis of available slots,” and further specifies that “the number of repetitions is counted on the basis of available UL slots for Msg 3 repetition; same section Proposal 7 states the number of repetitions is counted on the basis of available UL slots for repetitions of Msg3 initial and re-transmission which directly corresponds to the claimed “repetition counting procedure based on a count of available uplink slots).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Nammi with Lindoff and 3GPP because Lindoff teaches allocating UL/DL subframes to half-duplex and full-duplex terminals in paired-frequency/FDD systems, while Nammi teaches configuring repeated PUSCH transmissions using a repetition count over multiple slots. Lastly, 3GPP teaches configuring a scheduling multi-slot PUSCH repetitions for a half-duplex UE by determining available UL slots/symbols within a plurality of configured slots and transmitting repeated UL transmissions only in those available UL resources, including through DCI, RRC signaling, slot-format configuration, and PUSCH aggregation-factor configuration. A POSITA would have been motivated to apply Nammi’s PUSCH repetition configuration to Lindoff’s scheduled UL subframe framework to improve UL reliability and coverage while preserving Lindoff’s half-duplex scheduling constraints. The combination merely applies Nammi’s known repetition-count-based UL transmission technique to Lindoff’s known plural-slot/subframe resource allocation system, yielding predictable repeated UL transmissions on allocated UL resources.
Regarding claim 23 (and method claim 8), Nammi teaches the scheduling entity of claim 18, wherein the one or more processors are further configured, individually or collectively, to cause the scheduling entity to:
transmit, to the first UE, a first indication of the first repetition counting procedure ([0050]-[0058], [0060]-[0063], teaches transmitting an indication of the repetition counting/repetition procedure through configuration signaling for repeated PUSCH transmission), and
wherein the second repetition counting procedure is fixedly associated with the second UE ([0050]-[0058], [0060]-[0063], teaches transmitting an indication of the repetition counting/repetition procedure through configuration signaling for repeated PUSCH transmission).
However, Nammi does not fully teach but 3GPP teaches transmit, to the first UE, a first indication of the first repetition counting procedure (Section 2.4 issue #7, proposal 7 also; teaches that Msg3 PUSCH repetitions are associated with a repetition counting procedure based on available UL slots because teaches that enhanced PUSCH repetition Type A for Msg3 includes “the number of repetitions counted on the basis of available slots,” and further specifies that “the number of repetitions is counted on the basis of available UL slots for Msg 3 repetition; same section Proposal 7 states the number of repetitions is counted on the basis of available UL slots for repetitions of Msg3 initial and re-transmission which directly corresponds to the claimed “repetition counting procedure based on a count of available uplink slots);
wherein the second repetition counting procedure is fixedly associated with the second (Section 2.4 issue #7, proposal 7 also; teaches that Msg3 PUSCH repetitions are associated with a repetition counting procedure based on available UL slots because teaches that enhanced PUSCH repetition Type A for Msg3 includes “the number of repetitions counted on the basis of available slots,” and further specifies that “the number of repetitions is counted on the basis of available UL slots for Msg 3 repetition; same section Proposal 7 states the number of repetitions is counted on the basis of available UL slots for repetitions of Msg3 initial and re-transmission which directly corresponds to the claimed “repetition counting procedure based on a count of available uplink slots).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Nammi with Lindoff and 3GPP because Lindoff teaches allocating UL/DL subframes to half-duplex and full-duplex terminals in paired-frequency/FDD systems, while Nammi teaches configuring repeated PUSCH transmissions using a repetition count over multiple slots. Lastly, 3GPP teaches configuring a scheduling multi-slot PUSCH repetitions for a half-duplex UE by determining available UL slots/symbols within a plurality of configured slots and transmitting repeated UL transmissions only in those available UL resources, including through DCI, RRC signaling, slot-format configuration, and PUSCH aggregation-factor configuration. A POSITA would have been motivated to apply Nammi’s PUSCH repetition configuration to Lindoff’s scheduled UL subframe framework to improve UL reliability and coverage while preserving Lindoff’s half-duplex scheduling constraints. The combination merely applies Nammi’s known repetition-count-based UL transmission technique to Lindoff’s known plural-slot/subframe resource allocation system, yielding predictable repeated UL transmissions on allocated UL resources.
Regarding claim 9, Nammi teaches the method of claim 3, further comprising:
transmitting, to the second UE, a second indication of the second repetition counting procedure ([0050]-[0058], [0060]-[0063], teaches transmitting an indication of the repetition counting/repetition procedure through configuration signaling for repeated PUSCH transmission), and
wherein the first repetition counting procedure is fixedly associated with the first UE ([0050]-[0058], [0060]-[0063], teaches transmitting an indication of the repetition counting/repetition procedure through configuration signaling for repeated PUSCH transmission).
However, Nammi does not fully teach but 3GPP teaches transmitting, to the second UE, a second indication of the second repetition counting procedure (Section 2.4 issue #7, proposal 7 also; teaches that Msg3 PUSCH repetitions are associated with a repetition counting procedure based on available UL slots because teaches that enhanced PUSCH repetition Type A for Msg3 includes “the number of repetitions counted on the basis of available slots,” and further specifies that “the number of repetitions is counted on the basis of available UL slots for Msg 3 repetition; same section Proposal 7 states the number of repetitions is counted on the basis of available UL slots for repetitions of Msg3 initial and re-transmission which directly corresponds to the claimed “repetition counting procedure based on a count of available uplink slots).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Nammi with Lindoff and 3GPP because Lindoff teaches allocating UL/DL subframes to half-duplex and full-duplex terminals in paired-frequency/FDD systems, while Nammi teaches configuring repeated PUSCH transmissions using a repetition count over multiple slots. Lastly, 3GPP teaches configuring a scheduling multi-slot PUSCH repetitions for a half-duplex UE by determining available UL slots/symbols within a plurality of configured slots and transmitting repeated UL transmissions only in those available UL resources, including through DCI, RRC signaling, slot-format configuration, and PUSCH aggregation-factor configuration. A POSITA would have been motivated to apply Nammi’s PUSCH repetition configuration to Lindoff’s scheduled UL subframe framework to improve UL reliability and coverage while preserving Lindoff’s half-duplex scheduling constraints. The combination merely applies Nammi’s known repetition-count-based UL transmission technique to Lindoff’s known plural-slot/subframe resource allocation system, yielding predictable repeated UL transmissions on allocated UL resources.
Regarding claim 24 (and method claim 10), Nammi teaches the scheduling entity of claim 16, wherein the one or more processors are further configured, individually or collectively, to cause the scheduling entity to:
transmit, to the first UE, a first indication of a first repetition counting procedure, wherein the repetitions of the first uplink transmission are associated with the first repetition counting procedure ([0050]-[0058], [0060]-[0063], teaches transmitting an indication of the repetition counting/repetition procedure through configuration signaling for repeated PUSCH transmission).
However, Nammi does not fully teach but 3GPP teaches transmit, to the first UE, a first indication of a first repetition counting procedure, wherein the repetitions of the first uplink transmission are associated with the first repetition counting procedure (Section 2.4 issue #7, proposal 7 also; teaches that Msg3 PUSCH repetitions are associated with a repetition counting procedure based on available UL slots because teaches that enhanced PUSCH repetition Type A for Msg3 includes “the number of repetitions counted on the basis of available slots,” and further specifies that “the number of repetitions is counted on the basis of available UL slots for Msg 3 repetition; same section Proposal 7 states the number of repetitions is counted on the basis of available UL slots for repetitions of Msg3 initial and re-transmission which directly corresponds to the claimed “repetition counting procedure based on a count of available uplink slots).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Nammi with Lindoff and 3GPP because Lindoff teaches allocating UL/DL subframes to half-duplex and full-duplex terminals in paired-frequency/FDD systems, while Nammi teaches configuring repeated PUSCH transmissions using a repetition count over multiple slots. Lastly, 3GPP teaches configuring a scheduling multi-slot PUSCH repetitions for a half-duplex UE by determining available UL slots/symbols within a plurality of configured slots and transmitting repeated UL transmissions only in those available UL resources, including through DCI, RRC signaling, slot-format configuration, and PUSCH aggregation-factor configuration. A POSITA would have been motivated to apply Nammi’s PUSCH repetition configuration to Lindoff’s scheduled UL subframe framework to improve UL reliability and coverage while preserving Lindoff’s half-duplex scheduling constraints. The combination merely applies Nammi’s known repetition-count-based UL transmission technique to Lindoff’s known plural-slot/subframe resource allocation system, yielding predictable repeated UL transmissions on allocated UL resources.
Regarding claim 26 (and method claim 12), Nammi teaches a user equipment (UE) for wireless communication, comprising:
one or more processors ([0146], processor and memories communicatively connected); and
a memory communicatively coupled to the one or more processors ([0146], processor and memories communicatively connected), wherein the one or more processors are configured, individually or collectively, to cause the UE to:
receive an indication of a repetition count from a scheduling entity ([0048]-[0052], [0060]-[0064], teaches repeated PUSCH transmission over multiple slots, including repetition configurations such as 2,4, or 8 multi-slots; network-side configuration of repeated PUSCH transmissions maps to transmitting an indication of a repetition count to the UE);
transmit repetitions of an uplink transmission on a subset of the plurality of slots on the first carrier ([0048]-[0052], [0060]-[0064], teaches repeated PUSCH transmission over multiple slots, including repetition configurations such as 2,4, or 8 multi-slots; network-side configuration of repeated PUSCH transmissions maps to transmitting an indication of a repetition count to the UE),
wherein a quantity of the repetitions transmitted is based on the repetition count ([[0048]-[0052], teaches that the number of repeated PUSCH transmission is based on the configured repetition amount such as 2, 4, or 8 multi-slots),
However, Nammi fails to teach but Lindoff teaches receive a resource allocation for a set of a plurality of slots on a first carrier ([0029]-[0030 discloses that a serving BS signals a specific allocation of UL and DL subframes to a mobile terminal and further discloses transmitting a resource allocation message that completely defines a repeating pattern of UL and DL subframes applicable to a series of frames; the signaled UL subframes represent a resource allocation across a plurality of transmission intervals/slots assigned to the UE), the first carrier paired with a second carrier and separated from the second carrier in frequency, wherein the UE is configured to operate in a half duplex communication ([0004], [0006], discloses a frequency division duplex system in which UL and DL communications occur on district frequency bands separated by a duplex distance between transmit and receive frequencies); and
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Nammi with Lindoff because Lindoff teaches allocating UL/DL subframes to half-duplex and full-duplex terminals in paired-frequency/FDD systems, while Nammi teaches configuring repeated PUSCH transmissions using a repetition count over multiple slots. A POSITA would have been motivated to apply Nammi’s PUSCH repetition configuration to Lindoff’s scheduled UL subframe framework to improve UL reliability and coverage while preserving Lindoff’s half-duplex scheduling constraints. The combination merely applies Nammi’s known repetition-count-based UL transmission technique to Lindoff’s known plural-slot/subframe resource allocation system, yielding predictable repeated UL transmissions on allocated UL resources.
However, Nammi and Lindoff do not fully teach but 3GPP teaches and wherein the repetitions of the uplink transmission are associated with a repetition counting procedure based on a count of available uplink slots (Section 2.4 issue #7, proposal 7 also; teaches that Msg3 PUSCH repetitions are associated with a repetition counting procedure based on available UL slots because teaches that enhanced PUSCH repetition Type A for Msg3 includes “the number of repetitions counted on the basis of available slots,” and further specifies that “the number of repetitions is counted on the basis of available UL slots for Msg 3 repetition; same section Proposal 7 states the number of repetitions is counted on the basis of available UL slots for repetitions of Msg3 initial and re-transmission which directly corresponds to the claimed “repetition counting procedure based on a count of available uplink slots).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Nammi with Lindoff and 3GPP because Lindoff teaches allocating UL/DL subframes to half-duplex and full-duplex terminals in paired-frequency/FDD systems, while Nammi teaches configuring repeated PUSCH transmissions using a repetition count over multiple slots. Lastly, 3GPP teaches configuring a scheduling multi-slot PUSCH repetitions for a half-duplex UE by determining available UL slots/symbols within a plurality of configured slots and transmitting repeated UL transmissions only in those available UL resources, including through DCI, RRC signaling, slot-format configuration, and PUSCH aggregation-factor configuration. A POSITA would have been motivated to apply Nammi’s PUSCH repetition configuration to Lindoff’s scheduled UL subframe framework to improve UL reliability and coverage while preserving Lindoff’s half-duplex scheduling constraints. The combination merely applies Nammi’s known repetition-count-based UL transmission technique to Lindoff’s known plural-slot/subframe resource allocation system, yielding predictable repeated UL transmissions on allocated UL resources.
Regarding claim 27 (and method claim 13), Nammi teaches the UE of claim 26, wherein the one or more processors are further configured, individually or collectively, to cause the UE to:
receive an indication of the repetition counting procedure for counting of the quantity of the repetitions ([0050]-[0058], [0060]-[0063], teaches receiving signaling/configuration that defines the repetition procedure for repeated PUSCH transmission).
However, Nammi does not fully teach but 3GPP teaches receive an indication of the repetition counting procedure for counting of the quantity of the repetitions (Section 2.4 issue #7, proposal 7 also; teaches that Msg3 PUSCH repetitions are associated with a repetition counting procedure based on available UL slots because teaches that enhanced PUSCH repetition Type A for Msg3 includes “the number of repetitions counted on the basis of available slots,” and further specifies that “the number of repetitions is counted on the basis of available UL slots for Msg 3 repetition; same section Proposal 7 states the number of repetitions is counted on the basis of available UL slots for repetitions of Msg3 initial and re-transmission which directly corresponds to the claimed “repetition counting procedure based on a count of available uplink slots).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Nammi with Lindoff and 3GPP because Lindoff teaches allocating UL/DL subframes to half-duplex and full-duplex terminals in paired-frequency/FDD systems, while Nammi teaches configuring repeated PUSCH transmissions using a repetition count over multiple slots. Lastly, 3GPP teaches configuring a scheduling multi-slot PUSCH repetitions for a half-duplex UE by determining available UL slots/symbols within a plurality of configured slots and transmitting repeated UL transmissions only in those available UL resources, including through DCI, RRC signaling, slot-format configuration, and PUSCH aggregation-factor configuration. A POSITA would have been motivated to apply Nammi’s PUSCH repetition configuration to Lindoff’s scheduled UL subframe framework to improve UL reliability and coverage while preserving Lindoff’s half-duplex scheduling constraints. The combination merely applies Nammi’s known repetition-count-based UL transmission technique to Lindoff’s known plural-slot/subframe resource allocation system, yielding predictable repeated UL transmissions on allocated UL resources.
Regarding claim 14, Nammi and Lindoff do no fully teach but 3GPP teaches the method of claim 12, wherein the quantity of the repetitions transmitted is based on the count of available uplink slots of the set of the plurality of slots from a first repetition of the uplink transmission until the count reaches the repetition count (Section 2.4 issue #7, proposal 7 also; teaches that Msg3 PUSCH repetitions are associated with a repetition counting procedure based on available UL slots because teaches that enhanced PUSCH repetition Type A for Msg3 includes “the number of repetitions counted on the basis of available slots,” and further specifies that “the number of repetitions is counted on the basis of available UL slots for Msg 3 repetition; same section Proposal 7 states the number of repetitions is counted on the basis of available UL slots for repetitions of Msg3 initial and re-transmission which directly corresponds to the claimed “repetition counting procedure based on a count of available uplink slots).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Nammi with Lindoff and 3GPP because Lindoff teaches allocating UL/DL subframes to half-duplex and full-duplex terminals in paired-frequency/FDD systems, while Nammi teaches configuring repeated PUSCH transmissions using a repetition count over multiple slots. Lastly, 3GPP teaches configuring a scheduling multi-slot PUSCH repetitions for a half-duplex UE by determining available UL slots/symbols within a plurality of configured slots and transmitting repeated UL transmissions only in those available UL resources, including through DCI, RRC signaling, slot-format configuration, and PUSCH aggregation-factor configuration. A POSITA would have been motivated to apply Nammi’s PUSCH repetition configuration to Lindoff’s scheduled UL subframe framework to improve UL reliability and coverage while preserving Lindoff’s half-duplex scheduling constraints. The combination merely applies Nammi’s known repetition-count-based UL transmission technique to Lindoff’s known plural-slot/subframe resource allocation system, yielding predictable repeated UL transmissions on allocated UL resources.
Regarding claim 28, Nammi and Lindoff do not fully teach but 3GPP teaches wherein the quantity of the repetitions transmitted is based on the count of available uplink slots of the set of the plurality of slots from a first repetition of the uplink transmission until the count reaches the repetition count (Section 2.4 issue #7, proposal 7 also; teaches that Msg3 PUSCH repetitions are associated with a repetition counting procedure based on available UL slots because teaches that enhanced PUSCH repetition Type A for Msg3 includes “the number of repetitions counted on the basis of available slots,” and further specifies that “the number of repetitions is counted on the basis of available UL slots for Msg 3 repetition; same section Proposal 7 states the number of repetitions is counted on the basis of available UL slots for repetitions of Msg3 initial and re-transmission which directly corresponds to the claimed “repetition counting procedure based on a count of available uplink slots).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Nammi with Lindoff and 3GPP because Lindoff teaches allocating UL/DL subframes to half-duplex and full-duplex terminals in paired-frequency/FDD systems, while Nammi teaches configuring repeated PUSCH transmissions using a repetition count over multiple slots. Lastly, 3GPP teaches configuring a scheduling multi-slot PUSCH repetitions for a half-duplex UE by determining available UL slots/symbols within a plurality of configured slots and transmitting repeated UL transmissions only in those available UL resources, including through DCI, RRC signaling, slot-format configuration, and PUSCH aggregation-factor configuration. A POSITA would have been motivated to apply Nammi’s PUSCH repetition configuration to Lindoff’s scheduled UL subframe framework to improve UL reliability and coverage while preserving Lindoff’s half-duplex scheduling constraints. The combination merely applies Nammi’s known repetition-count-based UL transmission technique to Lindoff’s known plural-slot/subframe resource allocation system, yielding predictable repeated UL transmissions on allocated UL resources.
Regarding claim 30 (and method claim 15), Nammi teaches the UE of claim 26, wherein the repetitions are transmitted on one or more corresponding physical uplink shared channels (PUSCHs) corresponding to the subset of the plurality of slots ([0048]-[0054], [0060]-[0066], expressly teaches that the repetitions are PUSCH repetitions over one or more corresponding PUSCH occasions/resources).
Regarding claim 31 (and scheduling entity claim 16, and UE claim 33), Nammi fails to teach but Lindoff teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the first resource allocation is a paired spectrum allocation ([0002], [0004]-[0006], teaches that the first resource allocation is a paired spectrum allocation because the UL and DL resources are on distinct frequency bands separated by duplex spacing in an FDD system, [0029]-[0030 discloses that a serving BS signals a specific allocation of UL and DL subframes to a mobile terminal and further discloses transmitting a resource allocation message that completely defines a repeating pattern of UL and DL subframes applicable to a series of frames; the signaled UL subframes represent a resource allocation across a plurality of transmission intervals/slots assigned to the UE).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Nammi with Lindoff and 3GPP because Lindoff teaches allocating UL/DL subframes to half-duplex and full-duplex terminals in paired-frequency/FDD systems, while Nammi teaches configuring repeated PUSCH transmissions using a repetition count over multiple slots. Lastly, 3GPP teaches configuring a scheduling multi-slot PUSCH repetitions for a half-duplex UE by determining available UL slots/symbols within a plurality of configured slots and transmitting repeated UL transmissions only in those available UL resources, including through DCI, RRC signaling, slot-format configuration, and PUSCH aggregation-factor configuration. A POSITA would have been motivated to apply Nammi’s PUSCH repetition configuration to Lindoff’s scheduled UL subframe framework to improve UL reliability and coverage while preserving Lindoff’s half-duplex scheduling constraints. The combination merely applies Nammi’s known repetition-count-based UL transmission technique to Lindoff’s known plural-slot/subframe resource allocation system, yielding predictable repeated UL transmissions on allocated UL resources.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Yang et al (US20200053661A1) discloses Dynamic inference management in NR dynamic TDD systems
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL WILLIAM ABBATINE whose telephone number is (571)272-0192. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 0830-1700 EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Nishant Divecha can be reached at (571) 270-3125. 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.
/MICHAEL WILLIAM ABBATINE JR./Examiner, Art Unit 2419
/Nishant Divecha/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2419
Prosecution Insights