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 .
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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 3/25/26 have been fully considered.
Applicant’s arguments, starting on page 10, with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 102 and 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-5,11,15,21,27-29,31,52 and 54-59 have been fully considered and in light of amendment are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Yao (US 20230156646 A1). The examiner notes that claim 22 as amended has been objected to as containing allowable subject matter.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 15, 21, 27-29, 31, 52, 54-56, and 58-60 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin (US 20230038582 A1) in view of Yao (US 20230156646 A1) and Ericsson (ERICSSON , "Feature lead summary on timing relationship enhancements", 3GPP-TSG-RAN WG1 Meeting #102-e, Agenda Item, 08/17/2020, 64 pages).
Regarding claim 1, Lin discloses:
“A method performed by a user equipment (UE), the method comprising: receiving, from a base station, at least one signaling indicating at least one of a timing advance (TA) is between reception on a downlink (DL) channel and transmission on an uplink (UL) channel,” ([para 0027]: “Due to long RTT delay, all the uplink transmissions will apply a very long time advance (TA) value this will impact the downlink reception. A time domain location offset is applied to shift the time of an uplink transmission. Thus, the user equipment, UE, will apply a time domain location offset value (designated here as K_offset) to the initial time domain location scheduled or configured for an uplink transmission.” ; [para 0043]: “In step 211, a second information comprising a first parameter indicating at least one time domain location offset indication is received from a base station.” ; [para 0054]: “When the UE obtains K_offset and if the K_offset is amount of slots, the UE will determine that the actual (delayed) PUCCH time domain resources is in K1+K_offset slot(s) after the slot that the UE receives the scheduled PDSCH.”)
Lin does not explicitly disclose “and wherein the at least one signaling further indicates at least one value corresponding to a misalignment between a DL frame timing associated with the DL channel and an UL frame timing associated with the UL channel at the base station, and wherein the at least one value is different from the TA and the time domain difference; and applying, responsive to the at least one signaling, the at least one value to a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE) activation delay or to a time domain duration between a beam failure recovery (BFR) physical random access channel (PRACH) transmission associated with the UL channel and a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) monitoring associated with the DL channel.”
However, Yao discloses the missing feature “and wherein the at least one signaling further indicates at least one value corresponding to a misalignment between a DL frame timing associated with the DL channel and an UL frame timing associated with the UL channel at the base station, and wherein the at least one value is different from the TA and the time domain difference” ([para 0102]: “At block 926, process 920 receives DCI with an indication of a K value and scaling factor. In some embodiments, the DCI includes an indication of which of the K values (e.g., K.sub.1, K.sub.2, or K.sub.4) is to be scaled with the scaling factor.”; [para 0002]: “For example, K.sub.0 is the time gap between the Downlink Control Information (DCI) and the Physical Downlink Shared Channel (PDSCH). In addition, K.sub.1 is the time gap between PDSCH reception and Physical Uplink Control Channel (PUCCH) transmission and K.sub.2 is the time gap between the DCI and the Physical Uplink Shared Channel (PUSCH).” Note that Fig. 9B is from the perspective of the UE while Fig. 9C is from the perspective of the BS.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, having the teachings of Lin and Yao, to modify the technique as disclosed by Lin, to be applied based on misalignment in UL and DL at the gNB as disclosed in Yao. The motivation for doing so is that it improves efficiency. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Lin with Yao to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim.
Yao also does not disclose “and applying, responsive to the at least one signaling, the at least one value to a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE) activation delay or to a time domain duration between a beam failure recovery (BFR) physical random access channel (PRACH) transmission associated with the UL channel and a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) monitoring associated with the DL channel.”
However, Ericsson discloses the missing feature “and applying, responsive to the at least one signaling, the at least one value to a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE) activation delay or to a time domain duration between a beam failure recovery (BFR) physical random access channel (PRACH) transmission associated with the UL channel and a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) monitoring associated with the DL channel.” (page 27]: “UE assumes MAC CE command is active Y ms after it transmits HARQ ACK corresponding to a received PDSCH carrying the MAC CE command, where Y = X +
K
o
f
f
s
e
t
.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, having the teachings of Lin and Ericsson, to modify the technique as disclosed by Lin, to be applied to MAC CE activation delay as disclosed by Ericsson. The motivation for doing so is that it similarly benefits from the technique, thus preventing misalignments and thus improving service quality. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Lin with Ericsson to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding claim 2, Lin in view of Ericsson and Yao discloses all the features of the parent claim.
Lin further discloses “wherein the transmission on the UL channel is after the reception on the DL channel.” ([para 0054]: “When the UE obtains K_offset and if the K_offset is amount of slots, the UE will determine that the actual (delayed) PUCCH time domain resources is in K1+K_offset slot(s) after the slot that the UE receives the scheduled PDSCH.”)
Regarding claim 3, Lin in view of Ericsson and Yao discloses all the features of the parent claim.
Lin further discloses “wherein the TA or the time domain difference is one value or multiple values shared by multiple user equipments (UEs).” ([para 0030]: “The configuration is performed here for all UEs within a radio cell with a common offset value.”)
Regarding claim 4, Lin in view of Ericsson and Rico discloses all the features of the parent claim.
Lin further discloses “indicating one of the multiple values if the TA or the time domain difference is the multiple values.” ([para 0030]: “The configuration is performed here for all UEs within a radio cell with a common offset value.”)
Regarding claim 5, Lin in view of Ericsson and Yao discloses all the features of the parent claim.
Lin further discloses “wherein the value or one of the multiple values is indicated by at least one of: at least one of radio resource control (RRC) signaling or medium access control (MAC) control element (CE) signaling; a group common downlink control information (DCI); a UE specific DCI; at least one added bit in the UE specific DCI compared with legacy UE specific DCI; using a time domain resource assignment field in the UE specific DCI; or using physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) to hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) feedback timing indicator in the UE specific DCI.” ([para 0028]: “Optionally, the time domain location offset may be signaled in RAR and/or MAC-CE and/or RRC configuration and/or DCI, where specific UE or a group of UEs will apply the signaled offset (UE level).”)
Regarding claim 15, Lin in view of Ericsson and Yao discloses all the features of the parent claim.
Lin further discloses:
“wherein a value of the TA or the time domain difference is at least one of predefined or broadcasted in a system information block (SIB)” ([para 0030]: “The base station, designated by gNB as in 5G 3GPP standard, may use cell level signaling or any cell level configuration signal, e.g. using a system information, like a SIB (System Information Block) (e.g. SIB1, SIB2, SIB3, etc) to indicate the time domain location offset (K_offset) value.”)
“wherein the value is applied to at least one of: the time domain difference between a two-step random access channel (RACH) random access response (RAR) and a physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) transmission; a time duration between RACH retransmissions; a minimum time between a Msg.B RAR and a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) transmission; a minimum time between a Msg.4 RAR and the PUCCH transmission; or a gap between a non-zero power channel state information-reference signal (NZP CSI-RS) and a sounding reference signal (SRS) for a non-codebook based PUSCH transmission.” ([para 0028]: “Optionally, the time domain location offset may be signaled in RAR and/or MAC-CE and/or RRC configuration and/or DCI, where specific UE or a group of UEs will apply the signaled offset (UE level). As a consequence one or more time domain location offset values may correspond to the time domain location offset configuration(s) sent by the base station for one uplink transmission.”)
Regarding claim 21, Lin in view of Ericsson and Yao discloses all the features of the parent claim.
Lin does not explicitly disclose “wherein the at least one signaling indicates at least one value and is based on misalignment between one or more transmissions in the DL channel and one or more receptions in the UL channel at a base station and the reception on the DL channel is after the transmission on the UL channel at a user equipment (UE).”
However, Ericsson discloses the missing feature “wherein the at least one signaling indicates at least one value and is based on misalignment between one or more transmissions in the DL channel and one or more receptions in the UL channel at a base station and the reception on the DL channel is after the transmission on the UL channel at a user equipment (UE).” (page 27]: “UE assumes MAC CE command is active Y ms after it transmits HARQ ACK corresponding to a received PDSCH carrying the MAC CE command, where Y = X +
K
o
f
f
s
e
t
.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, having the teachings of Lin and Ericsson, to modify the technique as disclosed by Lin, to be applied to misalignment in the context of DL after UL as disclosed by Ericsson. The motivation for doing so is that it similarly benefits from the technique, thus preventing misalignments and thus improving service quality. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Lin with Ericsson to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding claim 27, Lin discloses:
“A base station for wireless communication, comprising: at least one memory; and at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory and operable to cause the base station to:” ([para 0015]: “According to a fourth aspect, there is provided a base station, comprising: a processor; a transceiver; and a memory configured to store instructions.”)
“determine at least one of a timing advance (TA) associated with a reference point or a time domain difference between reception on a downlink (DL) channel and transmission on an uplink (UL) channel and transmit at least one signaling indicating the at least one of the TA associated with the reference point or the time domain difference between the reception on the DL channel and the transmission on the UL channel associated with the reference point…” ([para 0027]: “Due to long RTT delay, all the uplink transmissions will apply a very long time advance (TA) value this will impact the downlink reception. A time domain location offset is applied to shift the time of an uplink transmission. Thus, the user equipment, UE, will apply a time domain location offset value (designated here as K_offset) to the initial time domain location scheduled or configured for an uplink transmission.” ; [para 0043]: “In step 211, a second information comprising a first parameter indicating at least one time domain location offset indication is received from a base station.” ; para 0045]: “In step 212, second time domain location of second time domain resources for the uplink transmission are determined such that the second time domain resources are delayed compared to the initial time domain resources based on the one or more time domain location offset values.”; [para 0054]: “When the UE obtains K_offset and if the K_offset is amount of slots, the UE will determine that the actual (delayed) PUCCH time domain resources is in K1+K_offset slot(s) after the slot that the UE receives the scheduled PDSCH.”)
Lin does not explicitly disclose “and wherein the at least one signaling further indicates at least one value corresponding to a misalignment between a DL frame timing associated with the DL channel and an UL frame timing associated with the UL channel at the base station, and wherein the at least one value is different from the TA and the time domain difference; and applying, responsive to the at least one signaling, the at least one value to a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE) activation delay or to a time domain duration between a beam failure recovery (BFR) physical random access channel (PRACH) transmission associated with the UL channel and a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) monitoring associated with the DL channel.”
However, Yao discloses the missing feature “and wherein the at least one signaling further indicates at least one value corresponding to a misalignment between a DL frame timing associated with the DL channel and an UL frame timing associated with the UL channel at the base station, and wherein the at least one value is different from the TA and the time domain difference” ([para 0102]: “At block 926, process 920 receives DCI with an indication of a K value and scaling factor. In some embodiments, the DCI includes an indication of which of the K values (e.g., K.sub.1, K.sub.2, or K.sub.4) is to be scaled with the scaling factor.”; [para 0002]: “For example, K.sub.0 is the time gap between the Downlink Control Information (DCI) and the Physical Downlink Shared Channel (PDSCH). In addition, K.sub.1 is the time gap between PDSCH reception and Physical Uplink Control Channel (PUCCH) transmission and K.sub.2 is the time gap between the DCI and the Physical Uplink Shared Channel (PUSCH).” Note that Fig. 9B is from the perspective of the UE while Fig. 9C is from the perspective of the BS.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, having the teachings of Lin and Yao, to modify the technique as disclosed by Lin, to be applied based on misalignment in UL and DL at the gNB as disclosed in Yao. The motivation for doing so is that it improves efficiency. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Lin with Yao to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim.
Yao also does not disclose “and applying, responsive to the at least one signaling, the at least one value to a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE) activation delay or to a time domain duration between a beam failure recovery (BFR) physical random access channel (PRACH) transmission associated with the UL channel and a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) monitoring associated with the DL channel.”
However, Ericsson discloses the missing feature “and applying, responsive to the at least one signaling, the at least one value to a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE) activation delay or to a time domain duration between a beam failure recovery (BFR) physical random access channel (PRACH) transmission associated with the UL channel and a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) monitoring associated with the DL channel.” (page 27]: “UE assumes MAC CE command is active Y ms after it transmits HARQ ACK corresponding to a received PDSCH carrying the MAC CE command, where Y = X +
K
o
f
f
s
e
t
.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, having the teachings of Lin and Ericsson, to modify the technique as disclosed by Lin, to be applied to MAC CE activation delay as disclosed by Ericsson. The motivation for doing so is that it similarly benefits from the technique, thus preventing misalignments and thus improving service quality. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Lin with Ericsson to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding claim 28, Lin in view of Ericsson and Yao discloses all the features of the parent claim.
Lin further discloses “wherein the transmission on the UL channel is after the reception on the DL channel.” ([para 0054]: “When the UE obtains K_offset and if the K_offset is amount of slots, the UE will determine that the actual (delayed) PUCCH time domain resources is in K1+K_offset slot(s) after the slot that the UE receives the scheduled PDSCH.”)
Regarding claim 29, Lin in view of Ericsson and Yao discloses all the features of the parent claim.
Lin further discloses “wherein the TA or the time domain difference is one value or multiple values shared by multiple user equipments (UEs).” ([para 0030]: “The configuration is performed here for all UEs within a radio cell with a common offset value.”)
Regarding claim 31, Lin in view of Ericsson and Yao discloses all the features of the parent claim.
Lin further discloses “wherein the value or one of the multiple values is indicated by at least one of: at least one of radio resource control (RRC) signaling or medium access control (MAC) control element (CE) signaling; a group common downlink control information (DCI); a UE specific DCI; at least one added bit in the UE specific DCI compared with legacy UE specific DCI; using a time domain resource assignment field in the UE specific DCI; or using physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) to hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) feedback timing indicator in the UE specific DCI.” ([para 0028]: “Optionally, the time domain location offset may be signaled in RAR and/or MAC-CE and/or RRC configuration and/or DCI, where specific UE or a group of UEs will apply the signaled offset (UE level).”)
Claims 52, 54, 55, 56, and 58-59 are similar to claims 1-3, 5, 15, and 21 with the differences amounting to that claims 1-3, 5, 15, and 21 are directed towards a method while claims 52, 54, 55, 56, and 58-59 are directed towards an apparatus containing generic hardware. Such hardware is taught by Lin in paragraph 14. Thus claims 52, 54, 55, 56, and 58-59 are rejected for similar reasons to claims 1-3, 5, 15, and 21.
Claim 60 is similar to claim 27 with the difference amounting to that claim 27 is directed towards an apparatus while claim 60 is directed towards a method. Thus claim 60 is rejected for similar reasons to claim 27.
Claim(s) 11 and 57 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin (US 20230038582 A1) in view of in view of Yao (US 20230156646 A1), Ericsson (ERICSSON , "Feature lead summary on timing relationship enhancements", 3GPP-TSG-RAN WG1 Meeting #102-e, Agenda Item, 08/17/2020, 64 pages), and further in view of Xu (US 20220201770 A1).
Regarding claim 11, Lin in view of Ericsson and Yao discloses all the features of the parent claim.
Lin does not explicitly disclose “receiving a second signaling indicating a relationship between the TA or the time domain difference and a random access channel (RACH) resource.”
However, Xu discloses the missing feature “receiving a second signaling indicating a relationship between the TA or the time domain difference and a random access channel (RACH) resource.” ([para 0202]: “Based on the configuration of PRACH resource, the UE selects an appropriate RACH occasion based on K_offset and determines the PRACH transmission time, where K_offset is a time parameter related to a propagation delay between the communications satellite and the terminal, which is used for the UE to adjust the transmission timing of PRACH, so as to deal with the influence of the propagation delay between the communications satellite and the UE.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, having the teachings of Lin and Xu, to modify the technique as disclosed by Lin, to determine a RACH resource as disclosed by Xu. The motivation for doing so is that it similarly benefits from the technique, thus preventing misalignments and thus improving service quality. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Lin with Xu to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim.
Claim 57 is similar to claim 11 and is rejected for similar reasons.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 22 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 22, of the closest prior arts Lin (US 20230038582 A1) in view of Yao (US 20230156646 A1)and Ericsson (ERICSSON , "Feature lead summary on timing relationship enhancements", 3GPP-TSG-RAN WG1 Meeting #102-e, Agenda Item, 08/17/2020, 64 pages) discloses the all the features of the parent claim. However, Lin in view of Yao and Ericsson does not disclose “the at least one value is indicated by at least one of a system information block (SIB), a radio resource control (RRC) signaling, a MAC CE signaling, or a group common downlink control information (DCI); and the at least one signaling is applied to an additional time domain duration between a configured grant based physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) transmission associated with the UL channel and the PDCCH monitoring.” The cited references fail to anticipate or render the above limitations in combination with all the recited limitations of claims 22 obvious, over any of the prior art of record, alone or in combination.
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 SAAD KHAWAR whose telephone number is (571)272-7948. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00am - 5:00pm.
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, Charles Jiang can be reached on (571)-270-7191. 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.
/SAAD KHAWAR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2412
Prosecution Insights