DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This office action is a response to an application filed on 06/09/2026 in which claims 1-3, 5, 7-9, 11, 13-16 and 18-20 are pending. Claims 4, 6, 10, 12 and 17 were canceled.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 06/09/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s Arguments/Remarks filed on 04/23/2026 with respect to amended independent claim 1 have been fully considered. Based on the amendments to the claims, further consideration and search were performed resulting in a new ground(s) of rejection presented below. The claims have not overcome the claim rejections as shown below.
Claims 1-3, 5, 7-9, 11, 13-16 and 18-20 are pending.
Claims 4, 6, 10, 12 and 17 were canceled.
Response to Arguments
Regarding amended independent claim 1, Applicant argues that Jia fails to disclose or teach or suggest the limitation “determining, by the transmitting device, to use a second type of channel listening for channel listening based on a channel listening result of a first type of channel listening, wherein determining, by the transmitting device, to use the second type of channel listening for channel listening based on the channel listening result of the first type of channel listening comprises: when a number of channel listening failures for the first type of channel listening is greater than or equal to a first threshold, determining, by the transmitting device, to use the second type of channel listening for channel listening, wherein the first type of channel listening is the omnidirectional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the directional channel listening, or the first type of channel listening is the directional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the omnidirectional channel listening”.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. The prior art of Goyal et al. (US 2020/0314906), hereinafter “Goyal” (previously cited in the conclusion of the Final Action mailed on 03/10/2026) discloses the amended features as shown below.
Therefore, the independent claim 1 is rendered unpatentable. Independent claims 7 and 13 recite similar distinguishing features as claim 1 discussed above, thus are rendered unpatentable for the reasons discussed above. As a result the features of the claims are shown by the cited references as set forth below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-3, 5, 7-9, 11, 13-16 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shibaike et al. (EP 4175341) (provided in the IDS), hereinafter “Shibaike” in view of Yerramalli et al. (US 2018/0343676), hereinafter “Yerramalli” and further in view of Goyal et al. (US 2020/0314906), hereinafter “Goyal”.
As to claim 1, Shibaike teaches a method of channel listening (Shibaike, Fig. 8, [0105], a communication sequence between a UE and a network to perform LBT/CCA) comprising:
determining, by a transmitting device, a channel listening type (Shibaike, Fig. 8, step S20, [0109], “the UE 200 determines the type of LBT to be executed based on the type of LBT (e.g., Omni-LBT or Directional-LBT) included in the DCI (or the RRC signaling)”); and
performing, by the transmitting device, channel occupancy according to the channel listening type (Shibaike, Fig. 8, step S20, [0110], “The UE 200 executes LBT, for example, Omni-LBT or Directional-LBT, based on the determined type of LBT”);
wherein the channel listening type comprises directional channel listening, omnidirectional channel listening (Shibaike, Fig. 8, step S20, [0110], “The UE 200 executes LBT, for example, Omni-LBT or Directional-LBT, based on the determined type of LBT”).
Shibaike teaches the claimed limitations as stated above As discussed above, Shibaike discloses the UE performing Omni-LBT or Directional-LBT. Shibaike does not explicitly teach the following features: regarding claim 1, wherein the channel listening type comprises channel listening free;
wherein the method further comprises:
determining, by the transmitting device, to use a second type of channel listening for channel listening based on a channel listening result of a first type of channel listening,
wherein determining, by the transmitting device, to use the second type of channel listening for channel listening based on the channel listening result of the first type of channel listening comprises:
when a number of channel listening failures for the first type of channel listening is greater than or equal to a first threshold, determining, by the transmitting device, to use the second type of channel listening for channel listening, wherein the first type of channel listening is the omnidirectional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the directional channel listening, or the first type of channel listening is the directional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the omnidirectional channel listening; or
when a number of successful attempts at channel listening for the first type of channel listening is greater than or equal to a fourth threshold, determining, by the transmitting device, to use the second type of channel listening for channel listening, wherein the first type of channel listening is the directional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the omnidirectional channel listening, or the first type of channel listening is the directional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the channel listening free, or the first type of channel listening is the omnidirectional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the channel listening free, or the first type of channel listening is the omnidirectional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the directional channel listening.
However, Yerramalli teaches wherein the channel listening type comprises channel listening free (Yerramalli, [0040], “the base station may operate in either of the LBT modes, and may adaptively switch between the two LBT modes (e.g., based on a measured or predicted level of traffic interference, an amount of data to transmit, etc.)”, [0071], “base stations 105 may switch between operating using a non-LBT enabled mode and operating using an LBT enabled mode”. [0075], the LBT mode is indicated to a UE in order for the UE to determine the new LBT mode. The teaching of Yerramalli combined with the teachings of Shibaike regarding the Omni-LBT and Directional-LBT discloses the claimed feature).
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 of Shibaike to have the features, as taught by Yerramalli in order to support system acquisition in a shared radio frequency spectrum band, such as an unlicensed radio frequency spectrum band (Yerramalli, [0005]).
Shibaike and Yerramalli teach the claimed limitations as stated above. Shibaike and Yerramalli do not explicitly teach the following features: regarding claim 1, wherein the method further comprises:
determining, by the transmitting device, to use a second type of channel listening for channel listening based on a channel listening result of a first type of channel listening,
wherein determining, by the transmitting device, to use the second type of channel listening for channel listening based on the channel listening result of the first type of channel listening comprises:
when a number of channel listening failures for the first type of channel listening is greater than or equal to a first threshold, determining, by the transmitting device, to use the second type of channel listening for channel listening, wherein the first type of channel listening is the omnidirectional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the directional channel listening, or the first type of channel listening is the directional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the omnidirectional channel listening; or
when a number of successful attempts at channel listening for the first type of channel listening is greater than or equal to a fourth threshold, determining, by the transmitting device, to use the second type of channel listening for channel listening, wherein the first type of channel listening is the directional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the omnidirectional channel listening, or the first type of channel listening is the directional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the channel listening free, or the first type of channel listening is the omnidirectional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the channel listening free, or the first type of channel listening is the omnidirectional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the directional channel listening.
However, Goyal teaches wherein the method further comprises:
determining, by the transmitting device, to use a second type of channel listening for channel listening based on a channel listening result of a first type of channel listening (Goyal, [0410], “switching from a directional LBT to an omnidirectional LBT may be done when the directional LBT senses a channel as idle, but a hidden node problem arises. In some systems, the switching may be performed based on HARQ-ACK feedback. For example, if multiple HARQ-ACK feedbacks are NACKs, then a transmitting node (TX) may switch to an omnidirectional LBT. Otherwise, it may continue with the directional LBT”),
wherein determining, by the transmitting device, to use the second type of channel listening for channel listening based on the channel listening result of the first type of channel listening comprises:
when a number of channel listening failures for the first type of channel listening is greater than or equal to a first threshold, determining, by the transmitting device, to use the second type of channel listening for channel listening (Goyal, [0411], “the transmitting node in the DL case, such as a gNB, may collect HARQ-ACK feedback from a UE, and may determine to switch from a directional LBT to an omnidirectional LBT when a number of NACKs exceeds a particular threshold within a given time period or over a certain number of received HARQ feedbacks”), wherein the first type of channel listening is the omnidirectional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the directional channel listening (Goyal, [0412], “switching from an omnidirectional LBT to a directional LBT may be done when the omniLBT prevents a number (e.g., a predetermined number or a number exceeding a certain threshold) of accesses to a channel”), or the first type of channel listening is the directional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the omnidirectional channel listening (Goyal, [0411], “switch from a directional LBT to an omnidirectional LBT”); or
when a number of successful attempts at channel listening for the first type of channel listening is greater than or equal to a fourth threshold, determining, by the transmitting device, to use the second type of channel listening for channel listening, wherein the first type of channel listening is the directional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the omnidirectional channel listening, or the first type of channel listening is the directional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the channel listening free, or the first type of channel listening is the omnidirectional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the channel listening free, or the first type of channel listening is the omnidirectional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the directional channel listening.
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 of Shibaike and Yerramalli to have the features, as taught by Goyal in order to make use of LBT schemes in a more optimal manner (Goyal, [0407]).
As to claim 2, Shibaike teaches wherein the transmitting device determines the channel listening type comprises:
determining, by the transmitting device, the channel listening type based on indication information (Shibaike, Fig. 8, [0106]-[0109], steps S10-S20, [0115], the device determines the type of LBT to perform (Directional-LBT) based on the information included in the DCI for UL scheduling or the RRC signaling).
As to claim 3, Shibaike teaches wherein the indication information is carried in at least one of:
downlink control information (DCI) for uplink authorization, DCI for indicating channel occupancy time (COT) information, a second message (msg2) in four-step random access, uplink control information carried in uplink configuration authorization, system information, or paging information (Shibaike, Fig. 8, [0106]-[0109], steps S10-S20, [0115], the device determines the type of LBT to perform (Directional-LBT) based on the information included in the DCI for UL scheduling or the RRC signaling).
Shibaike teaches the claimed limitations as stated above. Shibaike does not explicitly teach the following features: regarding claim 5, further comprising:
in the case where the transmitting device determines to use the channel listening free, the transmitting device determines to use the omnidirectional channel listening or the directional channel listening for channel listening based on time information.
As to claim 5, Yerramalli teaches further comprising:
in the case where the transmitting device determines to use the channel listening free (Yerramalli, [0071], “base stations 105 may switch between operating using a non-LBT enabled mode and operating using an LBT enabled mode”. [0075], the LBT mode is indicated to a UE in order for the UE to determine the new LBT mode), the transmitting device determines to use the omnidirectional channel listening or the directional channel listening for channel listening based on time information (Yerramalli, [0076], “Base station 105-a may perform LBT mode switching based on this periodicity, and UE 115-a may correspondingly perform re-synchronization based on the periodicity. For example, base station 105-a may determine whether to perform an LBT mode switch at a set interval (e.g., every hour). If UE 115-a performs access following this set interval, UE 115-a may automatically perform a re-synchronization process. In the re-synchronization process, UE 115-a may determine whether or not base station 105-a switched LBT modes”. The switching to the LBT enable mode is based on a periodicity. The teaching of Yerramalli combined with the teachings of Shibaike regarding omni-directional LBT and directional LBT discloses the claimed feature).
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 of Shibaike to have the features, as taught by Yerramalli in order to support system acquisition in a shared radio frequency spectrum band, such as an unlicensed radio frequency spectrum band (Yerramalli, [0005]).
As to claim 7, Shibaike teaches a device for channel listening (Shibaike, Fig. 8, [0105], Fig. 10, [0141], a UE in communication with a network to perform LBT/CCA), comprising:
a processing unit for (Shibaike, Fig. 8, Fig. 10, [0141], [0145]-[0146], the UE includes a processor 1001 to perform the functions of the UE) determining a channel listening type (Shibaike, Fig. 8, step S20, [0109], “the UE 200 determines the type of LBT to be executed based on the type of LBT (e.g., Omni-LBT or Directional-LBT) included in the DCI (or the RRC signaling)”);
wherein the processing unit is configured to (Shibaike, Fig. 8, Fig. 10, [0141], [0145]-[0146], the UE includes a processor 1001 to perform the functions of the UE) perform channel occupancy according to the channel listening type (Shibaike, Fig. 8, step S20, [0110], “The UE 200 executes LBT, for example, Omni-LBT or Directional-LBT, based on the determined type of LBT”);
wherein the channel listening type comprises directional channel listening, omnidirectional channel listening (Shibaike, Fig. 8, step S20, [0110], “The UE 200 executes LBT, for example, Omni-LBT or Directional-LBT, based on the determined type of LBT”).
Shibaike teaches the claimed limitations as stated above As discussed above, Shibaike discloses the UE performing Omni-LBT or Directional-LBT. Shibaike does not explicitly teach the following features: regarding claim 7, wherein the channel listening type comprises channel listening free;
wherein the processing unit is further configured to determine to use a second type of channel listening for channel listening based on a channel listening result of a first type of channel listening,
wherein determining to use the second type of channel listening for channel listening based on the channel listening result of the first type of channel listening comprises:
when a number of channel listening failures for the first type of channel listening is greater than or equal to a first threshold, determining to use the second type of channel listening for channel listening, wherein the first type of channel listening is the omnidirectional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the directional channel listening, or the first type of channel listening is the directional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the omnidirectional channel listening; or
when a number of successful attempts at channel listening for the first type of channel listening is greater than or equal to a fourth threshold, determining to use the second type of channel listening for channel listening, wherein the first type of channel listening is the directional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the omnidirectional channel listening, or the first type of channel listening is the directional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the channel listening free, or the first type of channel listening is the omnidirectional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the channel listening free, or the first type of channel listening is the omnidirectional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the directional channel listening.
However, Yerramalli teaches wherein the channel listening type comprises channel listening free (Yerramalli, [0040], “the base station may operate in either of the LBT modes, and may adaptively switch between the two LBT modes (e.g., based on a measured or predicted level of traffic interference, an amount of data to transmit, etc.)”, [0071], “base stations 105 may switch between operating using a non-LBT enabled mode and operating using an LBT enabled mode”. [0075], the LBT mode is indicated to a UE in order for the UE to determine the new LBT mode. The teaching of Yerramalli combined with the teachings of Shibaike regarding the Omni-LBT and Directional-LBT discloses the claimed feature).
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 of Shibaike to have the features, as taught by Yerramalli in order to support system acquisition in a shared radio frequency spectrum band, such as an unlicensed radio frequency spectrum band (Yerramalli, [0005]).
Shibaike and Yerramalli teach the claimed limitations as stated above. Shibaike and Yerramalli do not explicitly teach the following features: regarding claim 7, wherein the processing unit is further configured to determine to use a second type of channel listening for channel listening based on a channel listening result of a first type of channel listening,
wherein determining to use the second type of channel listening for channel listening based on the channel listening result of the first type of channel listening comprises:
when a number of channel listening failures for the first type of channel listening is greater than or equal to a first threshold, determining to use the second type of channel listening for channel listening, wherein the first type of channel listening is the omnidirectional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the directional channel listening, or the first type of channel listening is the directional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the omnidirectional channel listening; or
when a number of successful attempts at channel listening for the first type of channel listening is greater than or equal to a fourth threshold, determining to use the second type of channel listening for channel listening, wherein the first type of channel listening is the directional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the omnidirectional channel listening, or the first type of channel listening is the directional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the channel listening free, or the first type of channel listening is the omnidirectional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the channel listening free, or the first type of channel listening is the omnidirectional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the directional channel listening.
However, Goyal teaches wherein the processing unit is further configured to determine to use a second type of channel listening for channel listening based on a channel listening result of a first type of channel listening (Goyal, [0410], “switching from a directional LBT to an omnidirectional LBT may be done when the directional LBT senses a channel as idle, but a hidden node problem arises. In some systems, the switching may be performed based on HARQ-ACK feedback. For example, if multiple HARQ-ACK feedbacks are NACKs, then a transmitting node (TX) may switch to an omnidirectional LBT. Otherwise, it may continue with the directional LBT”),
wherein determining to use the second type of channel listening for channel listening based on the channel listening result of the first type of channel listening comprises:
when a number of channel listening failures for the first type of channel listening is greater than or equal to a first threshold, determining to use the second type of channel listening for channel listening (Goyal, [0411], “the transmitting node in the DL case, such as a gNB, may collect HARQ-ACK feedback from a UE, and may determine to switch from a directional LBT to an omnidirectional LBT when a number of NACKs exceeds a particular threshold within a given time period or over a certain number of received HARQ feedbacks”), wherein the first type of channel listening is the omnidirectional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the directional channel listening (Goyal, [0412], “switching from an omnidirectional LBT to a directional LBT may be done when the omniLBT prevents a number (e.g., a predetermined number or a number exceeding a certain threshold) of accesses to a channel”), or the first type of channel listening is the directional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the omnidirectional channel listening (Goyal, [0411], “switch from a directional LBT to an omnidirectional LBT”); or
when a number of successful attempts at channel listening for the first type of channel listening is greater than or equal to a fourth threshold, determining to use the second type of channel listening for channel listening, wherein the first type of channel listening is the directional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the omnidirectional channel listening, or the first type of channel listening is the directional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the channel listening free, or the first type of channel listening is the omnidirectional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the channel listening free, or the first type of channel listening is the omnidirectional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the directional channel listening.
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 of Shibaike and Yerramalli to have the features, as taught by Goyal in order to make use of LBT schemes in a more optimal manner (Goyal, [0407]).
As to claim 8, Shibaike teaches wherein the processing unit is configured to:
determine the channel listening type based on indicated information (Shibaike, Fig. 8, [0106]-[0109], steps S10-S20, [0115], the device determines the type of LBT to perform (Directional-LBT) based on the information included in the DCI for UL scheduling or the RRC signaling).
As to claim 9, Shibaike teaches wherein the indication information is carried in at least one of:
downlink control information (DCI) for uplink authorization, DCI for indicating channel occupancy time (COT) information, a second message (msg2) in four-step random access, uplink control information carried in uplink configuration authorization, system information, or paging information (Shibaike, Fig. 8, [0106]-[0109], steps S10-S20, [0115], the device determines the type of LBT to perform (Directional-LBT) based on the information included in the DCI for UL scheduling or the RRC signaling).
Shibaike teaches the claimed limitations as stated above. Shibaike does not explicitly teach the following features: regarding claim 11, wherein:
in a case where the processing unit determines to use the channel listening free, the processing unit further determines to use the omnidirectional channel listening or the directional channel listening for channel listening based on time information.
As to claim 11, Yerramalli teaches wherein:
in a case where the processing unit determines to use the channel listening free (Yerramalli, [0071], “base stations 105 may switch between operating using a non-LBT enabled mode and operating using an LBT enabled mode”. [0075], the LBT mode is indicated to a UE in order for the UE to determine the new LBT mode), the processing unit further determines to use the omnidirectional channel listening or the directional channel listening for channel listening based on time information (Yerramalli, [0076], “Base station 105-a may perform LBT mode switching based on this periodicity, and UE 115-a may correspondingly perform re-synchronization based on the periodicity. For example, base station 105-a may determine whether to perform an LBT mode switch at a set interval (e.g., every hour). If UE 115-a performs access following this set interval, UE 115-a may automatically perform a re-synchronization process. In the re-synchronization process, UE 115-a may determine whether or not base station 105-a switched LBT modes”. The switching to the LBT enable mode is based on a periodicity. The teaching of Yerramalli combined with the teachings of Shibaike regarding omni-directional LBT and directional LBT discloses the claimed feature).
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 of Shibaike to have the features, as taught by Yerramalli in order to support system acquisition in a shared radio frequency spectrum band, such as an unlicensed radio frequency spectrum band (Yerramalli, [0005]).
As to claim 13, Shibaike teaches a non-transitory computer readable storage medium, being used to store a computer program, the computer program causing a computer to perform the following (Shibaike, Fig. 8, Fig. 10, [0141], [0144], [0146], the memory includes software executed by the processor to perform the functions of the UE):
determining a channel listening type (Shibaike, Fig. 8, step S20, [0109], “the UE 200 determines the type of LBT to be executed based on the type of LBT (e.g., Omni-LBT or Directional-LBT) included in the DCI (or the RRC signaling)”); and
performing channel occupancy according to the channel listening type (Shibaike, Fig. 8, step S20, [0110], “The UE 200 executes LBT, for example, Omni-LBT or Directional-LBT, based on the determined type of LBT”);
wherein the channel listening type comprises directional channel listening, omnidirectional channel listening (Shibaike, Fig. 8, step S20, [0110], “The UE 200 executes LBT, for example, Omni-LBT or Directional-LBT, based on the determined type of LBT”).
Shibaike teaches the claimed limitations as stated above As discussed above, Shibaike discloses the UE performing Omni-LBT or Directional-LBT. Shibaike does not explicitly teach the following features: regarding claim 13, wherein the channel listening type comprises channel listening free;
wherein the computer further performs:
determining to use a second type of channel listening for channel listening based on a channel listening result of a first type of channel listening,
wherein determining to use the second type of channel listening for channel listening based on the channel listening result of the first type of channel listening comprises:
when a number of channel listening failures for the first type of channel listening is greater than or equal to a first threshold, determining to use the second type of channel listening for channel listening, wherein the first type of channel listening is the omnidirectional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the directional channel listening, or the first type of channel listening is the directional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the omnidirectional channel listening; or
when a number of successful attempts at channel listening for the first type of channel listening is greater than or equal to a fourth threshold, determining to use the second type of channel listening for channel listening, wherein the first type of channel listening is the directional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the omnidirectional channel listening, or the first type of channel listening is the directional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the channel listening free, or the first type of channel listening is the omnidirectional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the channel listening free, or the first type of channel listening is the omnidirectional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the directional channel listening.
However, Yerramalli teaches wherein the channel listening type comprises channel listening free (Yerramalli, [0040], “the base station may operate in either of the LBT modes, and may adaptively switch between the two LBT modes (e.g., based on a measured or predicted level of traffic interference, an amount of data to transmit, etc.)”, [0071], “base stations 105 may switch between operating using a non-LBT enabled mode and operating using an LBT enabled mode”. [0075], the LBT mode is indicated to a UE in order for the UE to determine the new LBT mode. The teaching of Yerramalli combined with the teachings of Shibaike regarding the Omni-LBT and Directional-LBT discloses the claimed feature).
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 of Shibaike to have the features, as taught by Yerramalli in order to support system acquisition in a shared radio frequency spectrum band, such as an unlicensed radio frequency spectrum band (Yerramalli, [0005]).
Shibaike and Yerramalli teach the claimed limitations as stated above. Shibaike and Yerramalli do not explicitly teach the following features: regarding claim 13, wherein the computer further performs:
determining to use a second type of channel listening for channel listening based on a channel listening result of a first type of channel listening,
wherein determining to use the second type of channel listening for channel listening based on the channel listening result of the first type of channel listening comprises:
when a number of channel listening failures for the first type of channel listening is greater than or equal to a first threshold, determining to use the second type of channel listening for channel listening, wherein the first type of channel listening is the omnidirectional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the directional channel listening, or the first type of channel listening is the directional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the omnidirectional channel listening; or
when a number of successful attempts at channel listening for the first type of channel listening is greater than or equal to a fourth threshold, determining to use the second type of channel listening for channel listening, wherein the first type of channel listening is the directional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the omnidirectional channel listening, or the first type of channel listening is the directional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the channel listening free, or the first type of channel listening is the omnidirectional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the channel listening free, or the first type of channel listening is the omnidirectional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the directional channel listening.
However, Goyal teaches wherein the computer further performs:
determining to use a second type of channel listening for channel listening based on a channel listening result of a first type of channel listening (Goyal, [0410], “switching from a directional LBT to an omnidirectional LBT may be done when the directional LBT senses a channel as idle, but a hidden node problem arises. In some systems, the switching may be performed based on HARQ-ACK feedback. For example, if multiple HARQ-ACK feedbacks are NACKs, then a transmitting node (TX) may switch to an omnidirectional LBT. Otherwise, it may continue with the directional LBT”),
wherein determining to use the second type of channel listening for channel listening based on the channel listening result of the first type of channel listening comprises:
when a number of channel listening failures for the first type of channel listening is greater than or equal to a first threshold, determining to use the second type of channel listening for channel listening (Goyal, [0411], “the transmitting node in the DL case, such as a gNB, may collect HARQ-ACK feedback from a UE, and may determine to switch from a directional LBT to an omnidirectional LBT when a number of NACKs exceeds a particular threshold within a given time period or over a certain number of received HARQ feedbacks”), wherein the first type of channel listening is the omnidirectional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the directional channel listening (Goyal, [0412], “switching from an omnidirectional LBT to a directional LBT may be done when the omniLBT prevents a number (e.g., a predetermined number or a number exceeding a certain threshold) of accesses to a channel”), or the first type of channel listening is the directional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the omnidirectional channel listening (Goyal, [0411], “switch from a directional LBT to an omnidirectional LBT”); or
when a number of successful attempts at channel listening for the first type of channel listening is greater than or equal to a fourth threshold, determining to use the second type of channel listening for channel listening, wherein the first type of channel listening is the directional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the omnidirectional channel listening, or the first type of channel listening is the directional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the channel listening free, or the first type of channel listening is the omnidirectional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the channel listening free, or the first type of channel listening is the omnidirectional channel listening and the second type of channel listening is the directional channel listening.
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 of Shibaike and Yerramalli to have the features, as taught by Goyal in order to make use of LBT schemes in a more optimal manner (Goyal, [0407]).
As to claim 14, Shibaike teaches wherein the computer performs: determining the channel listening type based on indication information (Shibaike, Fig. 8, [0106]-[0109], steps S10-S20, [0115], the device determines the type of LBT to perform (Directional-LBT) based on the information included in the DCI for UL scheduling or the RRC signaling).
As to claim 15, Shibaike teaches wherein the indication information is carried in at least one of:
downlink control information (DCI) for uplink authorization, DCI for indicating channel occupancy time (COT) information, a second message (msg2) in four-step random access, uplink control information carried in uplink configuration authorization, system information, or paging information (Shibaike, Fig. 8, [0106]-[0109], steps S10-S20, [0115], the device determines the type of LBT to perform (Directional-LBT) based on the information included in the DCI for UL scheduling or the RRC signaling).
Shibaike teaches the claimed limitations as stated above. Shibaike does not explicitly teach the following features: regarding claim 16, wherein the computer further performs:
in the case where the computer determines to use channel listening free, determining to use omnidirectional channel listening or directional channel listening for channel listening based on time information.
As to claim 16, Yerramalli teaches wherein the computer further performs:
in the case where the computer determines to use channel listening free (Yerramalli, [0071], “base stations 105 may switch between operating using a non-LBT enabled mode and operating using an LBT enabled mode”. [0075], the LBT mode is indicated to a UE in order for the UE to determine the new LBT mode), determining to use omnidirectional channel listening or directional channel listening for channel listening based on time information (Yerramalli, [0076], “Base station 105-a may perform LBT mode switching based on this periodicity, and UE 115-a may correspondingly perform re-synchronization based on the periodicity. For example, base station 105-a may determine whether to perform an LBT mode switch at a set interval (e.g., every hour). If UE 115-a performs access following this set interval, UE 115-a may automatically perform a re-synchronization process. In the re-synchronization process, UE 115-a may determine whether or not base station 105-a switched LBT modes”. The switching to the LBT enable mode is based on a periodicity. The teaching of Yerramalli combined with the teachings of Shibaike regarding omni-directional LBT and directional LBT discloses the claimed feature).
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 of Shibaike to have the features, as taught by Yerramalli in order to support system acquisition in a shared radio frequency spectrum band, such as an unlicensed radio frequency spectrum band (Yerramalli, [0005]).
Shibaike teaches the claimed limitations as stated above As discussed above, Shibaike discloses the UE performing Omni-LBT or Directional-LBT. Shibaike does not explicitly teach the following underlined features: regarding claim 18, further comprising:
determining, by the transmitting device, to switch from a channel listening state to a non-channel-listening state based on a measurement result; or
determining, by the transmitting device, to switch from the non-channel-listening state to the channel listening state based on a measurement result.
As to claim 18, Yerramalli teaches further comprising:
determining, by the transmitting device, to switch from a channel listening state to a non-channel-listening state based on a measurement result (Yerramalli, [0071], “base stations 105 may switch between operating using a non-LBT enabled mode and operating using an LBT enabled mode”, [0074], “base station 105-a may semi-statically or dynamically switch between LBT modes. For example, base station 105-a may determine to switch to non-LBT enabled mode based on a level of congestion or traffic interference on the shared medium exceeding a certain threshold level of congestion or interference”. [0072], [0075], the switch is indicated to the UE in order for the UE to determine the new LBT mode); or
determining, by the transmitting device, to switch from the non-channel-listening state to the channel listening state based on a measurement result (Yerramalli, [0071], “base stations 105 may switch between operating using a non-LBT enabled mode and operating using an LBT enabled mode”, [0074], “base station 105-a may determine to switch to LBT enabled mode based on an amount of data to transmit exceeding a certain threshold size of data”. [0075], the switch is indicated to a UE in order for the UE to determine the new LBT mode).
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 of Shibaike to have the features, as taught by Yerramalli in order to support system acquisition in a shared radio frequency spectrum band, such as an unlicensed radio frequency spectrum band (Yerramalli, [0005]).
Shibaike teaches the claimed limitations as stated above As discussed above, Shibaike discloses the UE performing Omni-LBT or Directional-LBT. Shibaike does not explicitly teach the following underlined features: regarding claim 19, wherein
the processing unit is further configured to determine a switch from the channel listening state to the non-channel-listening state based on a measurement result; or
the processing unit is further configured to determine a switch from the non-channel-listening state to the channel listening state based on a measurement result.
As to claim 19, Yerramalli teaches wherein
the processing unit is further configured to determine a switch from the channel listening state to the non-channel-listening state based on a measurement result (Yerramalli, [0071], “base stations 105 may switch between operating using a non-LBT enabled mode and operating using an LBT enabled mode”, [0074], “base station 105-a may semi-statically or dynamically switch between LBT modes. For example, base station 105-a may determine to switch to non-LBT enabled mode based on a level of congestion or traffic interference on the shared medium exceeding a certain threshold level of congestion or interference”. [0072], [0075], the switch is indicated to the UE in order for the UE to determine the new LBT mode); or
the processing unit is further configured to determine a switch from the non-channel-listening state to the channel listening state based on a measurement result (Yerramalli, [0071], “base stations 105 may switch between operating using a non-LBT enabled mode and operating using an LBT enabled mode”, [0074], “base station 105-a may determine to switch to LBT enabled mode based on an amount of data to transmit exceeding a certain threshold size of data”. [0075], the switch is indicated to a UE in order for the UE to determine the new LBT mode).
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 of Shibaike to have the features, as taught by Yerramalli in order to support system acquisition in a shared radio frequency spectrum band, such as an unlicensed radio frequency spectrum band (Yerramalli, [0005]).
Shibaike teaches the claimed limitations as stated above As discussed above, Shibaike discloses the UE performing Omni-LBT or Directional-LBT. Shibaike does not explicitly teach the following underlined features: regarding claim 20, wherein the computer further performs:
determining to switch from a channel listening state to a non-channel-listening state based on a measurement result; or
determining to switch from the non-channel-listening state to the channel listening state based on a measurement result.
As to claim 20, Yerramalli teaches wherein the computer further performs:
determining to switch from a channel listening state to a non-channel-listening state based on a measurement result (Yerramalli, [0071], “base stations 105 may switch between operating using a non-LBT enabled mode and operating using an LBT enabled mode”, [0074], “base station 105-a may semi-statically or dynamically switch between LBT modes. For example, base station 105-a may determine to switch to non-LBT enabled mode based on a level of congestion or traffic interference on the shared medium exceeding a certain threshold level of congestion or interference”. [0072], [0075], the switch is indicated to the UE in order for the UE to determine the new LBT mode); or
determining to switch from the non-channel-listening state to the channel listening state based on a measurement result (Yerramalli, [0071], “base stations 105 may switch between operating using a non-LBT enabled mode and operating using an LBT enabled mode”, [0074], “base station 105-a may determine to switch to LBT enabled mode based on an amount of data to transmit exceeding a certain threshold size of data”. [0075], the switch is indicated to a UE in order for the UE to determine the new LBT mode).
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 of Shibaike to have the features, as taught by Yerramalli in order to support system acquisition in a shared radio frequency spectrum band, such as an unlicensed radio frequency spectrum band (Yerramalli, [0005]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RICARDO H CASTANEYRA whose telephone number is (571)272-2486. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00am - 5:30pm.
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, Kwang bin Yao can be reached at 571-272-3182. 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.
/RICARDO H CASTANEYRA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2473
Prosecution Insights