Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 1/20/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 15, lines 9-12, filed 1/8/2026, with respect to claims 2, 4, 10, 12, 56, 58, 64, and 66 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objections of claims 2, 4, 10, 12, 56, 58, 64, and 66 have been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed 1/8/2026, regarding rejections under 35 U.S.C.103 based on TALARICO and LI have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
As written in the remark:
Applicant respectfully submits that TALARICO and LI do not disclose each and every feature recited in amended claim 1. For example, TALARICO and LI do not disclose "determining that a transmission of hybrid automatic repeat request-acknowledgement (HARQ- ACK) information associated with a first priority and channel state information (CSI) associated with a second priority at least partially overlaps with a resource for a transmission of configured grant-uplink control information (CG-UCI) associated with the second priority," and "transmitting, in response to the RRC configuration enabling multiplexing information of different priorities and determining that the first priority is higher than the second priority, a multiplexed transmission by multiplexing the HARQ-ACK information, the CG-UCI, and the CSI according to a multiplexing priority order, wherein the HARQ-ACK information is before the CG-UCI and the CG-UCI is before the CSI in the multiplexing priority order," as recited in amended claim 1.
The examiner respectfully disagrees with the assertion that TALARICO and LI do not disclose each and every feature recited in amended claim 1. The examiner calls attention to the points below:
determining that a transmission of hybrid automatic repeat request-acknowledgement (HARQ- ACK) information associated with a first priority and channel state information (CSI) associated with a second priority at least partially overlaps with a resource for a transmission of configured grant-uplink control information (CG-UCI) associated with the second priority,
TALARICO writes, “In one embodiment, the mapping order for all other existing UCIs may be defined as follows: CG-UCI is followed by HARQ-ACK, CSI part 1 and CSI part 2 if any, and then data. In another embodiment, the mapping order can be defined as follows: HARQ-ACK, followed by CG-UCI, CSI part 1 and CSI part 2 if any, and then data. In one embodiment, to help avoid blind detection or extra computing at the gNB, the CG-UCI may contain one or two bits indicating whether HARQ-ACK and/or CSI are multiplexed. In certain cases, if one bit is used, this bit may indicate whether multiplexing is performed or not. If two bits are provided, these may indicate whether multiplexing is not performed (for example, ‘00’), as well whether HARQ-ACK feedback (for example, ‘01’) or CSI (for example, ‘10’) or both (e.g., ‘11’) are multiplexed with the CG-UCI” (paragraph 0043). TALARICO adds, “However, in some situations, a CG PUSCH may overlap with other UL transmissions. Some embodiments of the present disclosure addresses situations in which a CG PUSCH overlaps with a PUCCH. For example, various embodiments describe multiplexing or dropping rules to apply when CG PUSCH overlaps with grant-based uplink uplink control information (UCI) occasions. Grant-based UL control information, which may also be referred to as ‘scheduled UCI,’ may include, but is not limited to, HARQ-ACK, scheduling request (SR), and channel state information (CSI)” (paragraph 0034). TALARICO states that the mapping order can be defined as follows: HARQ-ACK, followed by CG-UCI, CSI part 1 and CSI part 2 if any, and then data. TALARICO indicates that the CG-UCI may be multiplexed with HARQ-ACK feedback or CSI or both. TALARICO further declares that grant-based UL control information, which may also be referred to as ‘scheduled UCI,’ may include, but is not limited to, HARQ-ACK, scheduling request (SR), and channel state information (CSI).
transmitting, in response to the RRC configuration enabling multiplexing information of different priorities and determining that the first priority is higher than the second priority, a multiplexed transmission by multiplexing the HARQ-ACK information, the CG-UCI, and the CSI according to a multiplexing priority order, wherein the HARQ-ACK information is before the CG-UCI and the CG-UCI is before the CSI in the multiplexing priority order,
LI writes, “An RRC configuration can be provide to the UE to configure the multiplexing of CG-UCI and HARQ-ACK over CG-PUSCH” (paragraph 0321). LI adds, “Given that CG-UCI needs to be multiplexed with highest priority in a CG-PUSCH transmission, this disclosure considers enhancements to support UCI multiplexing of CG-UCI, HARQ-ACK, and channel state information (CSI) on a CG-PUSCH transmission, including a relative prioritization for multiplexing of CG-UCI, HARQ-ACK, CSI on CG-PUSCH and the corresponding channels that can be utilized in transmitting CG-UCI, HARQ-ACK and CSI, a power prioritization to various channels that a power limited UE may have to simultaneously transmit, and a selection of a PUSCH for UCI multiplexing, among others” (paragraph 0249). LI indicates the RRC configuration can configure the multiplexing. LI explains that the CG-UCI is able to be multiplexed with highest priority in the CG-PUSH transmission, including a relative prioritization for multiplexing of CG-UCI, HARQ-ACK, CSI on CG-PUSCH and the corresponding channels that can be utilized in transmitting CG-UCI, HARQ-ACK and CSI, a power prioritization to various channels that a power limited UE may have to simultaneously transmit, and a selection of a PUSCH for UCI multiplexing, among others.
Therefore, the remarks regarding TALARICO and LI are determined to be not persuasive, and the rejections of the claims remains.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1, 4, 9, 55, 58, 63, 217-218, and 222-223 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over TALARICO et al. (US 20220174722 A1, hereinafter, "TALARICO") in view of LI et al. (US 20210092763 A1, hereinafter, "LI").
Regarding claim 55, TALARICO teaches a user equipment (UE) (paragraph 0105; figure 6, 601a,
601b: UEs) comprising:
one or more antennas (paragraph 0160; figure 8, 811: antenna array);
and a processing system that includes one or more processors and one or more memories that store code and are coupled with the one or more processors (paragraph 0198; figure 9, 910: one or more processors (or processor cores), 920: one or more memory/storage devices), the processing system configured to cause the UE to:
receive a radio resource control (RRC) configuration;
TALARICO writes, “In some embodiments, the determination at 304 may include an initial determination
of CG resources that are available to use. This initial determination may include processing configuration
information received from a gNB using, for example, radio resource control (RRC) signaling” (paragraph
0107).
determine that a transmission of hybrid automatic repeat request-acknowledgement (HARQ-ACK) information associated with a first priority and channel state information (CSI) associated with a second priority at least partially overlaps with a resource for a transmission of configured grant-uplink control information (CG-UCI) associated with the second priority;
TALARICO writes, “In one embodiment, the mapping order for all other existing UCIs may be defined as follows: CG-UCI is followed by HARQ-ACK, CSI part 1 and CSI part 2 if any, and then data. In another embodiment, the mapping order can be defined as follows: HARQ-ACK, followed by CG-UCI, CSI part 1 and CSI part 2 if any, and then data. In one embodiment, to help avoid blind detection or extra computing at the gNB, the CG-UCI may contain one or two bits indicating whether HARQ-ACK and/or CSI are multiplexed. In certain cases, if one bit is used, this bit may indicate whether multiplexing is performed or not. If two bits are provided, these may indicate whether multiplexing is not performed (for example, ‘00’), as well whether HARQ-ACK feedback (for example, ‘01’) or CSI (for example, ‘10’) or both (e.g., ‘11’) are multiplexed with the CG-UCI” (paragraph 0043). TALARICO adds, “However, in some situations, a CG PUSCH may overlap with other UL transmissions. Some embodiments of the present disclosure addresses situations in which a CG PUSCH overlaps with a PUCCH. For example, various embodiments describe multiplexing or dropping rules to apply when CG PUSCH overlaps with grant-based uplink uplink control information (UCI) occasions. Grant-based UL control information, which may also be referred to as ‘scheduled UCI,’ may include, but is not limited to, HARQ-ACK, scheduling request (SR), and channel state information (CSI)” (paragraph 0034). TALARICO states that the mapping order can be defined as follows: HARQ-ACK, followed by CG-UCI, CSI part 1 and CSI part 2 if any, and then data. TALARICO indicates that the CG-UCI may be multiplexed with HARQ-ACK feedback or CSI or both. TALARICO further declares that grant-based UL control information, which may also be referred to as ‘scheduled UCI,’ may include, but is not limited to, HARQ-ACK, scheduling request (SR), and channel state information (CSI).
and determine whether the first priority is higher than the second priority;
TALARICO writes, “When the resulting PUCCH resource(s) overlaps with CG PUSCH, if the timeline
requirement as defined in Section 9.2.5 in TS 38.213 is satisfied, and if one of UCI types in PUCCH(s) has
higher priority than CG-UCI, the CG PUSCH may be dropped and the PUCCH(s) may be transmitted”
(paragraph 0065).
wherein the HARQ-ACK information is before the CG-UCI in the multiplexing priority order;
TALARICO writes, “In one embodiment, the priority may be defined as follows, where the UCI are listed
in descending priority order, that is, where the earlier listed UCI has a relatively higher priority:
HARQ-ACK →SR →CG-UCI →CSI part 1 (for example, part of CSI with fixed payload size)+CSI part 2 (for
example, part of CSI with variable payload size)” (paragraph 0061).
TALARICO fails to explicitly disclose information regarding, “and transmit, in response to the RRC configuration enabling multiplexing information of different priorities and the first priority being higher than the second priority, a multiplexed transmission by multiplexing the HARQ-ACK information, the CG-UCI, and the CSI according to a multiplexing priority order,”
However, in analogous art, LI teaches and transmit, in response to the RRC configuration enabling multiplexing information of different priorities and the first priority being higher than the second priority, a multiplexed transmission by multiplexing the HARQ-ACK information, the CG-UCI, and the CSI according to a multiplexing priority order,
LI writes, “An RRC configuration can be provide to the UE to configure the multiplexing of CG-UCI and HARQ-ACK over CG-PUSCH” (paragraph 0321). LI adds, “Given that CG-UCI needs to be multiplexed with highest priority in a CG-PUSCH transmission, this disclosure considers enhancements to support UCI multiplexing of CG-UCI, HARQ-ACK, and channel state information (CSI) on a CG-PUSCH transmission, including a relative prioritization for multiplexing of CG-UCI, HARQ-ACK, CSI on CG-PUSCH and the corresponding channels that can be utilized in transmitting CG-UCI, HARQ-ACK and CSI, a power prioritization to various channels that a power limited UE may have to simultaneously transmit, and a selection of a PUSCH for UCI multiplexing, among others” (paragraph 0249). LI indicates the RRC configuration can configure the multiplexing. LI explains that the CG-UCI is able to be multiplexed with highest priority in the CG-PUSH transmission, including a relative prioritization for multiplexing of CG-UCI, HARQ-ACK, CSI on CG-PUSCH and the corresponding channels that can be utilized in transmitting CG-UCI, HARQ-ACK and CSI, a power prioritization to various channels that a power limited UE may have to simultaneously transmit, and a selection of a PUSCH for UCI multiplexing, among others.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention and method of TALARICO to include aspects of the method and apparatus described by LI that “relates generally to wireless communication systems, more specifically, the present disclosure relates to window size adaptation with wideband operation in NR unlicensed.” LI provides motivation for modification of the invention indicating, "The present disclosure relates generally to wireless communication systems and, more specifically, to reducing power consumption for a user equipment (UE) communicating with a base station and to transmissions to and receptions from a UE of physical downlink control channels (PDCCHs) for operation with dual connectivity" (paragraph 0075).
Regarding claim 58, TALARICO and LI teach the UE of claim 55, wherein the processing system is further configured to:
Additionally, LI teaches transmit, in response to the RRC configuration disabling multiplexing information of different priorities and the first priority being lower than the second priority, the CG-UCI;
LI writes, “In one embodiment, UCI reporting in CG-PUSCH is provided. An RRC configuration can be
provide to the UE to configure the multiplexing of CG-UCI and HARQ-ACK over CG-PUSCH; and in case of
PUCCH overlapping with CG-PUSCH(s) within a PUCCH group, the CG-UCI and HARQ-ACK are jointly
encoded wherein the CG-UCI is treated as the same type as the HARQ-ACK” (paragraph 0321). LI indicates that the CG-UCI is treated the same as the HARQ-ACK. Therefore, if the HARQ-ACK information can be refrained from transmitting, in response to the RRC configuration disabling multiplexing information of different priorities and the first priority being higher than the second priority, the CG-UCI can also be refrained from transmitting under the same parameters.
and refrain, in response to the RRC configuration disabling multiplexing information of different priorities and the first priority being lower than the second priority, the HARQ-ACK information.
LI writes, “An RRC configuration can be provide to the UE to configure the multiplexing of CG-
UCI and HARQ-ACK over CG-PUSCH…” (paragraph 0321). LI adds, “Subsequently, the UE in step 2002
determines whether enough resources for HARQ-ACK on CG-PUSCH is available. In step 2002, if not
enough, the UE performs step 2003. In step 2003, the UE drops HARQ-ACK or multiplexes it on
PUSCH/PUCCH” (paragraph 0260). LI mentions, “...GC-UCI or for other UCI type(s) with higher priority on
the CG-PUSCH” (paragraph 0258).
Regarding claim 63, TALARICO teaches a user equipment (UE) (paragraph 0105; figure 6, 601a,
601b: UEs) comprising:
one or more antennas (paragraph 0160; figure 8, 811: antenna array);
and a processing system that includes one or more processors and one or more memories that store code and are coupled with the one or more processors (paragraph 0198; figure 9, 910: one or more processors (or processor cores), 920: one or more memory/storage devices), the processing system configured to cause the UE to:
receive a radio resource control (RRC) configuration;
TALARICO writes, “In some embodiments, the determination at 304 may include an initial determination
of CG resources that are available to use. This initial determination may include processing configuration
information received from a gNB using, for example, radio resource control (RRC) signaling” (paragraph
0107).
determine that a transmission of hybrid automatic repeat request- acknowledgement (HARQ-ACK) information associated with a first priority and channel state information (CSI) associated with the first priority at least partially overlaps with a resource for a transmission of configured grant-uplink control information (CG-UCI) associated with a second priority different from the first priority;
TALARICO writes, “In one embodiment, the mapping order for all other existing UCIs may be defined as follows: CG-UCI is followed by HARQ-ACK, CSI part 1 and CSI part 2 if any, and then data. In another embodiment, the mapping order can be defined as follows: HARQ-ACK, followed by CG-UCI, CSI part 1 and CSI part 2 if any, and then data. In one embodiment, to help avoid blind detection or extra computing at the gNB, the CG-UCI may contain one or two bits indicating whether HARQ-ACK and/or CSI are multiplexed. In certain cases, if one bit is used, this bit may indicate whether multiplexing is performed or not. If two bits are provided, these may indicate whether multiplexing is not performed (for example, ‘00’), as well whether HARQ-ACK feedback (for example, ‘01’) or CSI (for example, ‘10’) or both (e.g., ‘11’) are multiplexed with the CG-UCI” (paragraph 0043). TALARICO adds, “However, in some situations, a CG PUSCH may overlap with other UL transmissions. Some embodiments of the present disclosure addresses situations in which a CG PUSCH overlaps with a PUCCH. For example, various embodiments describe multiplexing or dropping rules to apply when CG PUSCH overlaps with grant-based uplink uplink control information (UCI) occasions. Grant-based UL control information, which may also be referred to as ‘scheduled UCI,’ may include, but is not limited to, HARQ-ACK, scheduling request (SR), and channel state information (CSI)” (paragraph 0034). TALARICO states that the mapping order can be defined as follows: HARQ-ACK, followed by CG-UCI, CSI part 1 and CSI part 2 if any, and then data. TALARICO indicates that the CG-UCI may be multiplexed with HARQ-ACK feedback or CSI or both. TALARICO further declares that grant-based UL control information, which may also be referred to as ‘scheduled UCI,’ may include, but is not limited to, HARQ-ACK, scheduling request (SR), and channel state information (CSI).
determine whether the first priority is higher than the second priority;
TALARICO writes, “When the resulting PUCCH resource(s) overlaps with CG PUSCH, if the timeline
requirement as defined in Section 9.2.5 in TS 38.213 is satisfied, and if one of UCI types in PUCCH(s) has
higher priority than CG-UCI, the CG PUSCH may be dropped and the PUCCH(s) may be transmitted”
(paragraph 0065).
and a transceiver (paragraph 0201; figure 9, 930: communication resources) configured to:
wherein the CG-UCI is before the HARQ-ACK information and the HARQ-ACK information is before the CSI in the multiplexing priority order.
TALARICO writes, “In one embodiment, the mapping order for all other existing UCIs may be defined as follows: CG-UCI is followed by HARQ-ACK, CSI part 1 and CSI part 2 if any, and then data” (paragraph 0043).
TALARICO fails to explicitly disclose information regarding, “transmit, in response to the RRC configuration enabling multiplexing information of different priorities and the second priority being higher than the first priority, a multiplexed transmission by multiplexing the HARQ-ACK information, the CG-UCI, and the CSI according to a multiplexing priority order,”
However, in analogous art, LI teaches transmit, in response to the RRC configuration enabling multiplexing information of different priorities and the second priority being higher than the first priority, a multiplexed transmission by multiplexing the HARQ-ACK information, the CG-UCI, and the CSI according to a multiplexing priority order,
LI writes, “An RRC configuration can be provide to the UE to configure the multiplexing of CG-UCI and HARQ-ACK over CG-PUSCH” (paragraph 0321). LI adds, “Given that CG-UCI needs to be multiplexed with highest priority in a CG-PUSCH transmission, this disclosure considers enhancements to support UCI multiplexing of CG-UCI, HARQ-ACK, and channel state information (CSI) on a CG-PUSCH transmission, including a relative prioritization for multiplexing of CG-UCI, HARQ-ACK, CSI on CG-PUSCH and the corresponding channels that can be utilized in transmitting CG-UCI, HARQ-ACK and CSI, a power prioritization to various channels that a power limited UE may have to simultaneously transmit, and a selection of a PUSCH for UCI multiplexing, among others” (paragraph 0249). LI indicates the RRC configuration can configure the multiplexing. LI explains that the CG-UCI is able to be multiplexed with highest priority in the CG-PUSH transmission, including a relative prioritization for multiplexing of CG-UCI, HARQ-ACK, CSI on CG-PUSCH and the corresponding channels that can be utilized in transmitting CG-UCI, HARQ-ACK and CSI, a power prioritization to various channels that a power limited UE may have to simultaneously transmit, and a selection of a PUSCH for UCI multiplexing, among others.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention and method of TALARICO to include aspects of the method and apparatus described by LI that “relates generally to wireless communication systems, more specifically, the present disclosure relates to window size adaptation with wideband operation in NR unlicensed.” LI provides motivation for modification of the invention indicating, "The present disclosure relates generally to wireless communication systems and, more specifically, to reducing power consumption for a user equipment (UE) communicating with a base station and to transmissions to and receptions from a UE of physical downlink control channels (PDCCHs) for operation with dual connectivity" (paragraph 0075).
Regarding claim 222, TALARICO and LI teach the UE of claim 55,
Additionally, TALARICO teaches wherein the multiplexed transmission includes uplink data.
TALARICO writes, “In one embodiment, if the CG PUSCH has sufficient resources to accommodate
multiplexing then the mapping order for the UCIs may be as follows: CG-UCI first, and followed by HARQ-ACK, CSI part 1 and CSI part 2, and then finally data” (paragraph 0070).
Regarding claim 223, TALARICO and LI teach the UE of claim 222,
Additionally, TALARICO teaches wherein the CG-UCI is before the uplink data in the multiplexing priority order.
TALARICO writes, “In one embodiment, if the CG PUSCH has sufficient resources to accommodate
multiplexing then the mapping order for the UCIs may be as follows: CG-UCI first, and followed by HARQ-ACK, CSI part 1 and CSI part 2, and then finally data” (paragraph 0070).
Claims 1, 4, and 9 are method claims corresponding to the apparatus claims 55, 58, and 63 that have already been rejected above. The applicant’s attention is directed to the rejection of claims 55, 58, and 63. Claims 1, 4, and 9 are rejected under the same rational as claims 55, 58, and 63.
Claims 217 and 218 are method claims corresponding to the apparatus claims 222 and 223 that have already been rejected above. The applicant’s attention is directed to the rejection of claims 222 and 223. Claims 217 and 218 are rejected under the same rational as claims 222 and 223.
Claim(s) 2, 7, 10, 12, 16, 56, 61, 64, 66, and 70 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over TALARICO and LI as applied to claims 1, 9, 55, and 63 above, and further in view of PAPASAKELLARIOU (US 20200137695 A1, hereinafter, "PAPASAKELLARIOU").
Regarding claim 56, TALARICO and LI teach the UE of claim 55, wherein the processing system is further configured to:
Additionally, LI teaches and refrain, in response to the RRC configuration disabling multiplexing information of different priorities and the first priority being higher than the second priority, from transmitting the CG-UCI.
LI writes, “In one embodiment, UCI reporting in CG-PUSCH is provided. An RRC configuration can be
provide to the UE to configure the multiplexing of CG-UCI and HARQ-ACK over CG-PUSCH; and in case of
PUCCH overlapping with CG-PUSCH(s) within a PUCCH group, the CG-UCI and HARQ-ACK are jointly
encoded wherein the CG-UCI is treated as the same type as the HARQ-ACK” (paragraph 0321). LI indicates that the CG-UCI is treated the same as the HARQ-ACK. Therefore, if the HARQ-ACK information can be refrained from transmitting, in response to the RRC configuration disabling multiplexing information of different priorities and the first priority being higher than the second priority, the CG-UCI can also be refrained from transmitting under the same parameters.
TALARICO and LI fail to explicitly disclose information regarding, “transmit, in response to the
RRC configuration disabling multiplexing information of different priorities and the first priority being
higher than the second priority, the HARQ-ACK information;”
However, in analogous art, PAPASAKELLARIOU teaches transmit, in response to the RRC
configuration disabling multiplexing information of different priorities and the first priority being higher than the second priority, the HARQ-ACK information;
PAPASAKELLARIOU writes, “The UE of claim 11, wherein when the first PUSCH has higher priority than the first PUCCH, the processor is further configured to: enable the first PUSCH transmission, disable a
transmission of the first PUCCH, and disable multiplexing of the first HARQ-ACK information in the first
PUSCH transmission” (claim 12). PAPASAKELLARIOU adds, “A UE can determine CSI-RS transmission
parameters through DL control signaling or higher layer signaling, such as radio resource control (RRC)
signaling from a gNB” (paragraph 0082).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention and method of TALARICO and LI to include aspects of the method and apparatus described by PAPASAKELLARIOU that “relates generally to control schemes in wireless communication systems. More specifically, this disclosure relates to transmission power control, transmission of scheduling requests, and transmission of uplink control information in wireless communication systems.” PAPASAKELLARIOU provides motivation for modification of the invention indicating, "As described in more detail below, one or more of the UEs 111-116 include circuitry, programing, or a combination thereof, for efficient transmission power control, transmission of scheduling requests, and transmission of uplink control information in an advanced wireless communication system" (paragraph 0057).
Regarding claim 61, TALARICO and LI teach the UE of claim 55, wherein the processing system is further configured to:
TALARICO and LI fail to explicitly disclose, fully, information regarding, “refrain from transmitting one of an uplink transmission comprising the HARQ- ACK information or a configured-grant physical uplink shared channel (CG-PUSCH) transmission based on the RRC configuration disabling multiplexing information of different priorities.”
However, in analogous art and with support from LI, PAPASAKELLARIOU teaches refrain from transmitting one of an uplink transmission comprising the HARQ- ACK information or a configured-grant physical uplink shared channel (CG-PUSCH) transmission based on the RRC configuration disabling multiplexing information of different priorities.
PAPASAKELLARIOU writes, “The UE of claim 11, wherein when the first PUSCH has higher priority than the first PUCCH, the processor is further configured to: enable the first PUSCH transmission, disable a
transmission of the first PUCCH, and disable multiplexing of the first HARQ-ACK information in the first
PUSCH transmission” (claim 12). Additionally, LI writes, “An RRC configuration can be provide to the UE to configure the multiplexing of CG-UCI and HARQ-ACK over CG-PUSCH. In one embodiment, UCI reporting in CG-PUSCH is provided. An RRC configuration can be provide to the UE to configure the multiplexing of CG-UCI and HARQ-ACK over CG-PUSCH;” (paragraph 0321). LI indicates the RRC configuration can be used to configure the multiplexing of the CG-UCI and HARQ-ACK, which can include disabling the multiplexing information of different priorities as described by PAPASAKELLARIOU.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention and method of TALARICO and LI to include aspects of the method and apparatus described by PAPASAKELLARIOU that “relates generally to control schemes in wireless communication systems. More specifically, this disclosure relates to transmission power control, transmission of scheduling requests, and transmission of uplink control information in wireless communication systems.” PAPASAKELLARIOU provides motivation for modification of the invention indicating, "As described in more detail below, one or more of the UEs 111-116 include circuitry, programing, or a combination thereof, for efficient transmission power control, transmission of scheduling requests, and transmission of uplink control information in an advanced wireless communication system" (paragraph 0057).
Regarding claim 64, TALARICO and LI teach the UE of claim 63, wherein the processing system is further configured to:
Additionally, LI teaches and refrain from transmitting the CG-UCI in response to the RRC configuration disabling multiplexing information of different priorities and the second priority being lower than the first priority.
LI writes, “In one embodiment, UCI reporting in CG-PUSCH is provided. An RRC configuration can be
provide to the UE to configure the multiplexing of CG-UCI and HARQ-ACK over CG-PUSCH; and in case of
PUCCH overlapping with CG-PUSCH(s) within a PUCCH group, the CG-UCI and HARQ-ACK are jointly
encoded wherein the CG-UCI is treated as the same type as the HARQ-ACK” (paragraph 0321). LI indicates that the CG-UCI is treated the same as the HARQ-ACK. Therefore, if the HARQ-ACK information can be refrained from transmitting, in response to the RRC configuration disabling multiplexing information of different priorities and the first priority being higher than the second priority, the CG-UCI can also be refrained from transmitting under the same parameters.
TALARICO and LI fail to explicitly disclose information regarding, “transmit, in response to the
RRC configuration disabling multiplexing information of different priorities and the second priority
being higher than the first priority, the HARQ-ACK information;”
However, in analogous art, PAPASAKELLARIOU teaches transmit, in response to the RRC
configuration disabling multiplexing information of different priorities and the second priority being
higher than the first priority, the HARQ-ACK information;
PAPASAKELLARIOU writes, “The UE of claim 11, wherein when the first PUSCH has higher priority than the first PUCCH, the processor is further configured to: enable the first PUSCH transmission, disable a
transmission of the first PUCCH, and disable multiplexing of the first HARQ-ACK information in the first
PUSCH transmission” (claim 12). PAPASAKELLARIOU adds, “A UE can determine CSI-RS transmission
parameters through DL control signaling or higher layer signaling, such as radio resource control (RRC)
signaling from a gNB” (paragraph 0082).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention and method of TALARICO and LI to include aspects of the method and apparatus described by PAPASAKELLARIOU that “relates generally to control schemes in wireless communication systems. More specifically, this disclosure relates to transmission power control, transmission of scheduling requests, and transmission of uplink control information in wireless communication systems.” PAPASAKELLARIOU provides motivation for modification of the invention indicating, "As described in more detail below, one or more of the UEs 111-116 include circuitry, programing, or a combination thereof, for efficient transmission power control, transmission of scheduling requests, and transmission of uplink control information in an advanced wireless communication system" (paragraph 0057).
Regarding claim 66, TALARICO and LI teach the UE of claim 63, wherein the processing system is further configured to:
Additionally, LI teaches and refrain from transmitting the CG-UCI in response to the RRC configuration disabling multiplexing information of different priorities and the first priority being higher than the second priority.
LI writes, “In one embodiment, UCI reporting in CG-PUSCH is provided. An RRC configuration can be
provide to the UE to configure the multiplexing of CG-UCI and HARQ-ACK over CG-PUSCH; and in case of
PUCCH overlapping with CG-PUSCH(s) within a PUCCH group, the CG-UCI and HARQ-ACK are jointly
encoded wherein the CG-UCI is treated as the same type as the HARQ-ACK” (paragraph 0321). LI indicates that the CG-UCI is treated the same as the HARQ-ACK. Therefore, if the HARQ-ACK information can be refrained from transmitting, in response to the RRC configuration disabling multiplexing information of different priorities and the first priority being higher than the second priority, the CG-UCI can also be refrained from transmitting under the same parameters.
TALARICO and LI fail to explicitly disclose information regarding, “transmit, in response to the
RRC configuration disabling multiplexing information of different priorities and the first priority being
higher than the second priority, the HARQ-ACK information;”
However, in analogous art, PAPASAKELLARIOU teaches transmit, in response to the RRC
configuration disabling multiplexing information of different priorities and the first priority being higher than the second priority, the HARQ-ACK information;
PAPASAKELLARIOU writes, “The UE of claim 11, wherein when the first PUSCH has higher priority than the first PUCCH, the processor is further configured to: enable the first PUSCH transmission, disable a
transmission of the first PUCCH, and disable multiplexing of the first HARQ-ACK information in the first
PUSCH transmission” (claim 12). PAPASAKELLARIOU adds, “A UE can determine CSI-RS transmission parameters through DL control signaling or higher layer signaling, such as radio resource control (RRC)
signaling from a gNB” (paragraph 0082).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention and method of TALARICO and LI to include aspects of the method and apparatus described by PAPASAKELLARIOU that “relates generally to control schemes in wireless communication systems. More specifically, this disclosure relates to transmission power control, transmission of scheduling requests, and transmission of uplink control information in wireless communication systems.” PAPASAKELLARIOU provides motivation for modification of the invention indicating, "As described in more detail below, one or more of the UEs 111-116 include circuitry, programing, or a combination thereof, for efficient transmission power control, transmission of scheduling requests, and transmission of uplink control information in an advanced wireless communication system" (paragraph 0057).
Regarding claim 70, TALARICO and LI teach the UE of claim 63, wherein the processing system is further configured to:
TALARICO and LI fail to explicitly disclose, fully, information regarding, “refrain from transmitting one of a configured-grant physical uplink shared channel(CG-PUSCH) transmission or an uplink transmission comprising the HARQ-ACK information based on the RRC configuration disabling multiplexing information of different priorities.”
However, in analogous art and with support from LI, PAPASAKELLARIOU teaches refrain from transmitting one of a configured-grant physical uplink shared channel(CG-PUSCH) transmission or an uplink transmission comprising the HARQ-ACK information based on the RRC configuration disabling multiplexing information of different priorities.
PAPASAKELLARIOU writes, “The UE of claim 11, wherein when the first PUSCH has higher priority than the first PUCCH, the processor is further configured to: enable the first PUSCH transmission, disable a
transmission of the first PUCCH, and disable multiplexing of the first HARQ-ACK information in the first
PUSCH transmission” (claim 12). Additionally, LI writes, “An RRC configuration can be provide to the UE to configure the multiplexing of CG-UCI and HARQ-ACK over CG-PUSCH. In one embodiment, UCI reporting in CG-PUSCH is provided. An RRC configuration can be provide to the UE to configure the multiplexing of CG-UCI and HARQ-ACK over CG-PUSCH;” (paragraph 0321). LI indicates the RRC configuration can be used to configure the multiplexing of the CG-UCI and HARQ-ACK, which can include disabling the multiplexing information of different priorities as described by PAPASAKELLARIOU.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention and method of TALARICO and LI to include aspects of the method and apparatus described by PAPASAKELLARIOU that “relates generally to control schemes in wireless communication systems. More specifically, this disclosure relates to transmission power control, transmission of scheduling requests, and transmission of uplink control information in wireless communication systems.” PAPASAKELLARIOU provides motivation for modification of the invention indicating, "As described in more detail below, one or more of the UEs 111-116 include circuitry, programing, or a combination thereof, for efficient transmission power control, transmission of scheduling requests, and transmission of uplink control information in an advanced wireless communication system" (paragraph 0057).
Claims 2, 7, 10, 12, and 16 are method claims corresponding to the apparatus claims 56, 61, 64, 66, and 70 that have already been rejected above. The applicant’s attention is directed to the rejection of claims 56, 61, 64, 66, and 70. Claims 2, 7, 10, 12, and 16 are rejected under the same rational as claims 56, 61, 64, 66, and 70.
Claim(s) 6 and 60 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over TALARICO and LI as applied to claims 1 and 55 above, and further in view of YI (US 20200154496 A1, hereinafter, "YI").
Regarding claim 60, TALARICO and LI teach the UE of claim 55, wherein the processing system is further configured to:
TALARICO and LI fail to explicitly disclose information regarding, “refrain from transmitting a configured-grant physical uplink shared channel (CG-PUSCH) transmission based on another CG-PUSCH transmission comprising the CG-UCI and uplink data.”
However, in analogous art, YI teaches refrain from transmitting a configured-grant physical uplink shared channel (CG-PUSCH) transmission based on another CG-PUSCH transmission comprising the CG-UCI and uplink data.
YI writes, “...even if the second CG initiates UL transmission, a resource for transmission of the second CG may be punctured, upon detecting UL transmission of the first CG during transmission” (paragraph 0078).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of
the claimed invention, to modify the invention and method of TALARICO and LI to include aspects of the
method and apparatus described by YI that “relates to wireless communication, and more particularly, to a method and apparatus for supporting dual connectivity in a new radio access technology (NR).” YI
provides motivation for modification of the invention indicating, "...if simultaneous UL transmission of LTE and NR occurs, the following procedure may be considered to reduce a peak-to-average power ratio
(PAPR)" (paragraph 0156). YI adds, "...a plurality of connections to different Tx/Rx points (TRPs) may be
supported on the same frequency to obtain a spatial diversity, a transmission point diversity, or the like"
(paragraph 0062).
Claim 6 is a method claim corresponding to the apparatus claim 60 that has already been rejected above. The applicant’s attention is directed to the rejection of claim 60. Claim 6 is rejected under the same rational as claim 60.
Claim(s) 220 and 221 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over TALARICO and LI as applied to claim 219 above, and further in view of KOZIOL et al. (US 20220232581 A1, hereinafter, "KOZIOL").
Regarding claim 220, TALARICO and LI teach the method of claim 219,
TALARICO and LI fail to explicitly disclose information regarding, “wherein the uplink data is
before the HARQ- ACK information in the multiplexing priority order.”
However, in analogous art, KOZIOL teaches wherein the uplink data is before the HARQ- ACK
information in the multiplexing priority order.
KOZIOL writes, “Some embodiments may specify PUSCH grant prioritization based on one or more of LCH priorities and LCP (logical channel prioritization) restrictions for the cases where the MAC layer prioritizes the grant” (paragraph 0172). KOZIOL continues, “Some embodiments may address UL data/control and control/control resource collision by specifying a method to address resource collision between SR associated with high-priority traffic and uplink data of lower-priority traffic for the cases where MAC determines the prioritization. Some embodiments may specify prioritization and/or multiplexing behaviour among HARQ-ACK/SR/CSI and PUSCH for traffic with different priorities, for example including the cases with UCI on PUCCH and UCI on PUSCH” (paragraph 0173).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of
the claimed invention, to modify the invention and method of TALARICO and LI to include aspects of the
method and apparatus described by KOZIOL that “relates to an apparatus, methods, and computer
programs and in particular but not exclusively for apparatus, methods and computer programs to be used in a communications device.” KOZIOL provides motivation for modification of the invention indicating, "Some embodiments may have an advantage that there may be higher chances that an on-going transmission carrying lower priority data can be pre-empted by the new grant carrying higher priority data. Some embodiments may have an advantage of avoiding the situation where lower priority data may pre-empt higher priority data. This situation may arise where priority is associated with grants instead of priority associated with data" (paragraphs 0231-0232).
Regarding claim 221, TALARICO, LI, and KOZIOL teach the method of claim 220,
Additionally, KOZIOL teaches wherein the CG-UCI is before the uplink data in the multiplexing
priority order.
KOZIOL writes, “Some embodiments may specify PUSCH grant prioritization based on one or more of LCH priorities and LCP (logical channel prioritization) restrictions for the cases where the MAC layer prioritizes the grant” (paragraph 0172). KOZIOL continues, “Some embodiments may address UL data/control and control/control resource collision by specifying a method to address resource collision between SR associated with high-priority traffic and uplink data of lower-priority traffic for the cases where MAC determines the prioritization. Some embodiments may specify prioritization and/or multiplexing behaviour among HARQ-ACK/SR/CSI and PUSCH for traffic with different priorities, for example including the cases with UCI on PUCCH and UCI on PUSCH” (paragraph 0173).
Claim(s) 219 and 224-226 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over TALARICO and LI as applied to claims 9 and 63 above, and further in view of WU (US 20210400698 A1, hereinafter, "WU").
Regarding claim 224, TALARICO and LI teach the UE of claim 63,
TALARICO and LI fail to explicitly disclose information regarding, “wherein the multiplexed transmission includes uplink data.”
However, in analogous art, WU teaches wherein the multiplexed transmission includes uplink data.
WU writes, “For the case where the number of information bits of the HARQ-ACK is less than or equal to 2, REs are reserved, the CG-UCI and the CSI Part 2 and/or data can be mapped to the reserved REs, and later the HARQ-ACK will be mapped to the reserved REs through puncturing. The PUSCH mapping in the case where the number of information bits of the HARQ-ACK is less than or equal to 2 is illustrated in FIG. 13” (paragraph 0208).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention and method of TALARICO and LI to include aspects of the method and apparatus described by WU that “relates to the technical field of electronic devices, and in particular, to a transmission method for uplink control information (UCI), and a user equipment.” WU provides motivation for modification of the invention stating, "Implementations of the present disclosure provide a transmission method for uplink control information (UCI), and a user equipment. According to the technical solutions, more UCI resources can be carried" (paragraph 0005).
Regarding claim 225, TALARICO, LI, and WU teach the UE of claim 224,
Additionally, WU teaches wherein the uplink data is before the HARQ-ACK information in the multiplexing priority order.
WU writes, “For the case where the number of information bits of the HARQ-ACK is less than or equal to 2, REs are reserved, the CG-UCI and the CSI Part 2 and/or data can be mapped to the reserved REs, and later the HARQ-ACK will be mapped to the reserved REs through puncturing. The PUSCH mapping in the case where the number of information bits of the HARQ-ACK is less than or equal to 2 is illustrated in FIG. 13” (paragraph 0208).
Regarding claim 226, TALARICO, LI, and WU teach the UE of claim 225,
Additionally, WU teaches wherein the CG-UCI is before the uplink data in the multiplexing priority order.
WU writes, “For the case where the number of information bits of the HARQ-ACK is less than or equal to 2, REs are reserved, the CG-UCI and the CSI Part 2 and/or data can be mapped to the reserved REs, and later the HARQ-ACK will be mapped to the reserved REs through puncturing. The PUSCH mapping in the case where the number of information bits of the HARQ-ACK is less than or equal to 2 is illustrated in FIG. 13” (paragraph 0208).
Claim 219 is a method claim corresponding to the apparatus claim 224 that has already been rejected above. The applicant’s attention is directed to the rejection of claim 224. Claim 219 is rejected under the same rational as claim 224.
Claims 3, 5, 8, 11, 13-15, 17-54, 57, 59, 62, 65, 67-69, and 71-216 have been cancelled by the applicant, respectfully.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER A REYES whose telephone number is (703)756-4558. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 - 5:00 EDT.
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, KHALED KASSIM can be reached at (571) 270-3770. 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.
/Christopher A. Reyes/Examiner, Art Unit 2475 4/19/2026
/KHALED M KASSIM/supervisory patent examiner, Art Unit 2475
Prosecution Insights