DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
This communication is in response to the amendment filed 6/22/2026. The amendment has been entered and considered.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4, 6, 8-10, 12, 13, 20, 21, 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou et al. “Zhou” US 2020/0260391 submitted in Applicant’s IDS in view of Bagheri et al. “Bagheri” US 2020/0146034 and further in view of BAE et al. “Bae” US 2019/0393988.
Regarding claims 1, 20 and 21, Zhou teaches a method, medium (Paragraph 512) and a communication device, comprising: a transceiver, a memory and a processor respectively connected to the transceiver and the memory, wherein the processor is configured to:
receive a repetition indication message related to repetition transmission sent by a base station wherein the repetition indication message includes one of a repeating message or stopping repeating message (the base station sends configuration parameters to the UE which include repetition information such as quantity/number; Paragraph 488 see Figure 35. The quantity/number of repetitions is viewed as a “repeating message”); and
send a redundancy version (RV) corresponding to the repetition indication message to the base station via an uplink channel based on the repetition indication message (based on the received information from the base station, the UE will transmit using RV3 on a PUSCH; Paragraph 488, see Figure 35).
Zhou teaches sending a first initial RV message to the UE to send RV0 at a first moment and receiving a second initial RV based on transmission repetitions (Figure 35 shows that in response to the base station sending a RRC/DCI, the UE transmits a repetition. The first repetition sent is equivalent to the initial transmission and any of the subsequent ones are viewed as non-first initial transmissions; Paragraph. Zhou does not expressly disclose a transmission state of the UE which is a new transmission state and in a repetition state.
Bagheri teaches that the UE receives configuration information from the base station which causes the UE to start new transmissions or send additional transmission for a configured number of repetitions; Paragraph 102, See also Figure 7 paragraphs 117-126. The first/new transmission is viewed as a “new transmission state” and the second/subsequent transmissions is viewed as the UE is in repetition state. “New” and “repetition” states have no inherent meaning, thus the fact that the user sends initial/new transmissions and then further transmission for repetitions is all that is required to read on the claim language.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing to modify the teachings of Zhou to include sending RVs/repetitions based on the UE state as taught by Bagheri.
One would be motivated to make the modification such that the base station can configure the UE to send information at particular times as taught by Bagheri; paragraphs 102 and 117.
The prior art does not expressly disclose the amended limitations; however, Bae teaches:
obtaining an ith RV sent at a previous sending moment, where i is a positive integer less than or equal to N and determining the repetition indication identifier is repeating, and repeatedly sending the ith RV at a current sending moment (the UE continues to repeat the transmission Paragraph 232); and
determining, based on the stopping repeating message an (i + 1 RV) based on the preset order, and sending the (i + 1) RV at the current sending moment (when the UE repeats a certain number of transmissions of a RV, it may receive a NACK for the last repeated transmission and the UE stops transmitting. The UE then increases the repetition by T1 and transmits (i.e. sending i+1) at the current moment; Paragraph 232. The current moment is viewed as the time at which the current transmission is happening). The Examiner notes the system only needs one of the repeating or stopping message, thus the art need only to repeatedly send, or stop, not both.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing to modify the teachings of Zhou to include sending the same RV, stopping, and then sending i+1 as taught by Bae.
One would be motivated to make the modification such that unnecessary retransmission can be avoided as taught by Bae; Paragraph 232.
Regarding claim 2, Zhou teaches wherein sending the RV includes sending a preset RV sequence to the base station wherein the preset RV includes a plurality of RV version numbers and a number of repetitions of each of the plurality of RV version numbers is determined by the repetition indication message (The UE starts transmission of the K repetitions to the base station based on a configured RV sequence of 0, 2, 3, 1; Paragraphs 484-485);
Wherein the plurality of RV version numbers comprise 1st to Nth RV and the 1st to nth are arranged in a preset order and N is positive (The UE starts transmission of the K repetitions to the base station based on a configured RV sequence of 0, 2, 3, 1; Paragraphs 484-485. 0, 2, 3, 1 are the RV numbers from 1 to Nth and these are all positive integers).
Regarding claim 4, Zhou teaches N = 4 and the present RV sequence is 0, 2, 3, 1 wherein 0, 1, 2, 3, are versions of the RB (The UE starts transmission of the K repetitions to the base station based on a configured RV sequence of 0, 2, 3, 1; Paragraphs 484-485).
Regarding claim 6, Zhou teaches the repetition indication is DCI or MAC (DCI; Paragraph 488).
Regarding claim 8, Zhou teaches determining an initial RV and sending the initial RV at a first sending moment (The UE receives the information from the base station and transmits an initial transmission (3506-1); Paragraph 488. This is viewed as the first moment).
Regarding claims 9 and 24, Zhou teaches a method and device for uplink coverage enhancement, performed by a base station, the method comprising:
detecting a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) channel quality of a user equipment (UE) and generating a repetition indication message based on the PUSCH channel quality and sending the repetition indication message to the UE wherein the repetition indication message includes one of a repeating message or stopping repeating message (the base station sends configuration parameters to the UE which include repetition information such as quantity/number; Paragraph 488 see Figure 35. The quantity/number of repetitions is viewed as a “repeating message”. MCS, among other quality information, is used with respect to PUSCH; Paragraph 491 and figure 36)); and
receiving a redundancy version (RV) sent by the UE based on the repetition indication message (based on the received information from the base station, the UE will transmit using RV3 on a PUSCH; Paragraph 488, see Figure 35).
Zhou teaches receiving a first initial TV message to the UE to send RV0 at a first moment and receiving a second initial RV based on transmission repetitions (Figure 35 shows that in response to the base station sending a RRC/DCI, the UE transmit a repetition. The first repetition sent is equivalent to the initial transmission and any of the subsequent ones are viewed as non-first initial transmissions; Paragraph. Zhou does not expressly disclose a transmission state of the UE which is a new transmission state and in a repetition state.
Bagheri teaches that the UE receives configuration information from the base station which causes the UE to start new transmissions or send additional transmission for a configured number of repetitions; Paragraph 102, See also Figure 7 paragraphs 117-126. The first/new transmission is viewed as a “new transmission state” and the second/subsequent transmissions is viewed as the UE is in repetition state. “New” and “repetition” states have no inherent meaning, thus the fact that the user sends initial/new transmissions and then further transmission for repetitions is all that is required to read on the claim language.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing to modify the teachings of Zhou to include sending RVs/repetitions based on the UE state as taught by Bagheri.
One would be motivated to make the modification such that the base station can configure the UE to send information at particular times as taught by Bagheri; paragraphs 102 and 117.
The prior art does not expressly disclose the amended limitations; however, Bae teaches:
The message instructs the UE to repeatedly send the ith RV at a current sending moment (the UE continues to repeat the transmission Paragraph 232); and
stopping repeating message an (i + 1 RV) based on the preset order, and sending the (i + 1) RV at the current sending moment (when the UE repeats a certain number of transmissions of a RV, it may receive a NACK for the last repeated transmission and the UE stops transmitting. The UE then increases the repetition by T1 and transmits (i.e. sending i+1) at the current moment; Paragraph 232. The current moment is viewed as the time at which the current transmission is happening). The Examiner notes the system only needs one of the repeating or stopping message, thus the art need only to repeatedly send, or stop, not both.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing to modify the teachings of Zhou to include sending the same RV, stopping, and then sending i+1 as taught by Bae.
One would be motivated to make the modification such that unnecessary retransmission can be avoided as taught by Bae; Paragraph 232.
Regarding claim 10, Zhou teaches wherein sending the RV includes sending a preset RV sequence to the base station wherein the preset RV includes a plurality of RV version numbers and a number of repetitions of each of the plurality of RV version numbers is determined by the repetition indication message (The UE starts transmission of the K repetitions to the base station based on a configured RV sequence of 0, 2, 3, 1; Paragraphs 484-485);
Wherein the plurality of RV version numbers comprise 1st to Nth RV and the 1st to nth are arranged in a preset order and N is positive (The UE starts transmission of the K repetitions to the base station based on a configured RV sequence of 0, 2, 3, 1; Paragraphs 484-485. 0, 2, 3, 1 are the RV numbers from 1 to Nth and these are all positive integers).
Regarding claim 12, Zhou teaches N = 4 and the present RV sequence is 0, 2, 3, 1 wherein 0, 1, 2, 3, are versions of the RB (The UE starts transmission of the K repetitions to the base station based on a configured RV sequence of 0, 2, 3, 1; Paragraphs 484-485).
Regarding claim 13, Zhou teaches the repetition indication is DCI or MAC (DCI; Paragraph 488).
Claim(s) 14 and 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou in view of Bagheri in view of Bae and further in view of Karlsson et al. “Karlsson” US 2018/0375622.
Regarding claim 14, Zhou teaches the PUSCH quality is reflected by SNR or MCS (Paragraph 491), but Zhou does not disclose determining quality is greater than or equal to a threshold and sending a first repetition indication to have the UE switch to a next RV. Karlsson teaches that when a bit error rate (i.e. quality of the channel) is above a threshold, a control message is sent which causes the UE to send the next RV; Paragraph 174.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing to modify the teachings of the prior art to include changing the RV based on thresholds as taught by Karlsson.
One would be motivated to make the modification such that the UE knows whether to repeat the RV or send the next one as taught by Karlsson; Paragraph 174.
Regarding claim 23, Zhou teaches the PUSCH quality is reflected by SNR or MCS (Paragraph 491), but Zhou does not disclose determining quality is less than a threshold and sending a first repetition indication to have the UE to repeatedly send a current RV. Karlsson teaches that when a bit error rate (i.e. quality of the channel) is below a threshold, a control message is sent which causes the UE to repeat sending of the RV; Paragraph 174.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing to modify the teachings of Zhou to include repeat sending the RV based on thresholds as taught by Karlsson.
One would be motivated to make the modification such that the UE knows whether to repeat the RV as taught by Karlsson; Paragraph 174.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/22/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claim 1, Applicant argues the prior art, Bae, does not teach or suggest the amended limitations of claim 1 (previous claim 25) because Bae teaches a NACK/Collision is an implicit indication rather than the claimed explicit message “repeating message” or “stopping repeating”.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. At the outset, the Examiner notes the claim language is written using an “or”. The repetition indication only needs to include a repeating message or a stopping repeating message (not both) as these are mutually exclusive. Paragraphs 232 and 237 of Bae teaches a UE can receive a NACK and then stop the repeated transmission and initiate a new transmission (i.e. stop the repeating message and send (i+1) RV. The new transmission is the “preset order”. Depending on where the UE is with respect to repeated transmissions, the NACK/Collision message causes the UE can continue the repeated transmission (i.e. repeating message); Paragraphs 235-236 and 238. With respect to the argument that the claimed message is explicit vs implicit, the Examiner notes, in one example, the NACK causes the UE to stop the repeated transmission; Paragraph 232, thus being an explicit message.
Regarding item ii) on pages 8 and 9 of the arguments, Applicant argues Zhou teaches the BS sends RRC/DCI and the UE sends RV3, RV1, RV0, RV2 and thus at most, Zhou teaches the UE sends the RV sequentially at the ordered 4 PUSCH transmission occasions in response to the DCI indicating repetitions and RV sequences and thus fails to teach sending the RV at the same PUSCH transmission occasion based on a different initial RV indication message from the base station.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. With respect to issue ii) the Examiner notes the four limitations listed are optional, and only one needs to be addressed. Paragraph 488 and Figure 35 of Zhou shows that in response to the base station sending a RRC/DCI, the UE transmits a repetition. The RRC/DCI includes configuration parameters which include RV information. Thus one can see the RV information is received from a base station and in response to this received RV indication message, the UE transmits the RV0.
Applicant’s argument regarding Zhou failing to teach sending the RV at the same PUSCH transmission occasion based on different initial RV indication messages from the base station is moot as the claim language does not require this to occur.
Applicant’s arguments regarding Bagheri are also moot because the foundation of the arguments are based on something that is not claimed. There is no requirement for a first, second third and fourth initial RV.
The arguments presented are not required by the claim language. Only one initial RV indication is required, not 4. The Examiner suggests removing all “one of” phrasing to then require there to be a repeating message and stop repeating message as well as requiring 4 initial RV indication messages.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRANDON M RENNER whose telephone number is (571)270-3621. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7am-5pm 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, Derrick Ferris can be reached at (571)-272-3123. 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.
/BRANDON M RENNER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2411
Prosecution Insights