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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/30/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant asserts:
Futaki does not disclose whether an RRC includes or does not include information regarding the necessity of LBT, nor does it disclose determining whether LBT is necessary or unnecessary based on whether RRC includes information regarding the necessity of LBT. Futaki does not disclose or suggest Applicant's claimed features, which are related to "radio resource control message.”
As previously cited Futaki very clearly discloses (see at least Fig. 6 – 601) that information regarding necessity of UL LBT can be transmitted from the eNB to the UL in an RRC connection reconfiguration message. The Examiner notes that an RRC connection reconfiguration message is a “radio resource control message.” Further, Futaki states (0082) that “every time the UE receives dedicated signaling (e.g., RRC Connection Reconfiguration message) regarding the configuration of the cell (or component carrier) on the unlicensed frequency, the UE 3 may determine whether UL LBT on the unlicensed frequency is needed.” Applicant cites Futaki (0113) which also clearly states that in “Block 601, the eNB 1 transmits the information regarding necessity of LBT (e.g., Flag or Boolean) to the UE 3 via system information (SIB) or dedicated signaling (RRC Connection Reconfiguration message)” (emphasis added). Therefore, it is clear from the teachings of Futaki that an RRC message is used to convey the necessity of LBT.
The Examiner does not provide any evidence or reasons to arrive at the claimed specific frequency range: "frequency range from 52.6 GHz to 71 GHz."
Futaki clearly discloses that operating frequency is a design choice. As previously cited, Futaki discloses (0068) that the unlicensed frequency is, for example, but not limited to, 5 GHz band (emphasis added by the Examiner). Therefore, it is understood from the teachings of Futaki that a suggestion is made to take into consideration other frequencies. Applicant has not provided any argument or rationale for why one or ordinary skill in the art would not surmise that a frequency other than 5 GHz could not be inclusive of frequencies in the range of 52.6 GHz to 71 GHz. Rather, Applicant appears to simply argue that the Examiner had not provided any evidence to arrive at the claimed frequency range. Examiner is relying upon the suggestion as noted above as evidence that one of ordinary skill in the art would understand from merely reading the aforementioned passage of Futaki that other frequencies may be used. Applicant has not provided any reasoning as to why frequencies in the range of 52.6 GHz to 71 GHz should be treated differently from “other frequencies.” Further, Futaki (see Id.) indicates that the unlicensed frequency is a frequency that is used for radar systems. The Examiner notes that the known operating frequencies for radar applications are inclusive of the claimed frequency range.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the amendments made to the claim(s) 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-5, 7, 8, 11, 17, 19-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20170339717 A1 to Futaki; Hisashi in view of US 20210352728 A1 to Zhang; Guoyu et al.
Re: Claim(s) 1, 19, 20
Futaki discloses an apparatus for transmitting an uplink signal, configured in a terminal equipment (Figs. 6 and 20),
the apparatus comprising: a receiver (Fig. 20 – 2001)
configured to receive a radio resource control (RRC) message (Fig. 6 -601);
a transmitter (Fig. 20 – 2001)
configured to transmit an uplink transmission (Fig. 6 – 605);
and a processor (Fig. 20 – 2002)
configured to: control, when the received radio resource control message does not include first information, to not perform channel access procedure for transmitting the uplink transmission (Fig. 6 – 602. 0113 - FIG. 6 is a sequence diagram showing one example of operations of the eNB 1 and the UE 3 (Process 600) … In Block 602, the UE 3 recognizes (determines), based on the information regarding necessity of LBT received from the eNB 1, whether UL LBT needs to be performed by the UE 3. 0115 - On the other hand, when the UE 3 has been recognized that UL LBT is not needed in Block 602, the UE 3 performs UL data transmission (PUSCH transmission) on the unlicensed frequency without performing UL LBT (Block 605)),
and control, when the received radio resource control message includes the first information, to performs channel access procedure for transmitting the uplink transmission Fig. 6 – 602. 0113 - FIG. 6 is a sequence diagram showing one example of operations of the eNB 1 and the UE 3 (Process 600) … In Block 602, the UE 3 recognizes (determines), based on the information regarding necessity of LBT received from the eNB 1, whether UL LBT needs to be performed by the UE 3. 0115 - When the UE 3 has been recognized in Block 602 that UL LBT is needed, the UE 3 performs UL LBT in response to receiving the UL grant (Block 604). Then the UE 3 performs UL data transmission (PUSCH transmission) on the unlicensed frequency in accordance with the UL grant when the unlicensed frequency channel (resources) for the UL transmission is available (Block 605), but does not perform UL transmission when the channel is not available).
Futaki does/do not appear to explicitly disclose receiving a downlink control information (DCI) or a random access response (RAR), the DCI and the RAR being used for scheduling an uplink transmission. Although Futaki discloses (Fig. 6 – 603) receiving scheduling information, Futaki does not disclose that such information is received via a DCI or RAR message.
Further, Futaki does/do not appear to explicitly disclose that according to information in the DCI or the RAR, determining a type of the channel access procedure for transmitting the uplink transmission, wherein the type of the channel access procedure includes: a type 1 channel access procedure with channel sensing; a type 2 channel access procedure with channel sensing; or a type 3 channel access procedure without channel sensing.
However, attention is directed to Zhang which discloses said limitations (0008 - The non-periodic CSI is triggered by a “CSI request” in uplink scheduling granted DCI, and then transmitted on the PUSCH indicated by the DCI. 0111 - the configuration information is transmitted via downlink control information (DCI), wherein the DCI indicates the channel access type of the PUCCH carrying the HARQ feedback information. 0113 - the DCI contains a channel access type indicator field, the channel access type indicator field being used to indicate the channel access type of the PUCCH transmitting the HARQ feedback information. Figs. 2 and 3 – the channel access type including at least one of the following: a first channel access type not performing channel detection (i.e. the claimed type 3), a second channel access type containing a detection interval (i.e. the claimed type 1), a third channel access type containing a detection interval and a contention window (i.e. the claimed type 2)).
Therefore 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 Futaki invention by employing the teaching as taught by Zhang to provide the ability to schedule an uplink transmission via a DCI or RAR that further included information that allows a UE to determine a channel access type to use prior to the uplink transmission. The motivation for the combination is given by Zhang (0002 and 0012).
Futaki further discloses a corresponding apparatus for receiving an uplink signal (i.e. a network device such as an eNB) comprising a transmitter, receiver (Fig. 19 – 1 comprises 1901) as well as a corresponding system (Figs. 1, 19, and 20) as required by claims 19 and 20, respectively.
Re: Claim(s) 2
Futaki in view of Zhang discloses those limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim(s) 1 above.
Futaki further discloses wherein the radio resource control message comprises broadcasted radio resource control message and/or dedicated radio resource control message for the terminal equipment, and the broadcasted radio resource control message comprises system information block (Fig. 6 – 601. 0113 - In Block 601, the eNB 1 transmits the information regarding necessity of LBT (e.g., Flag or Boolean) to the UE 3 via system information (SIB) or dedicated signaling (RRC Connection Reconfiguration message)).
Re: Claim(s) 3
Futaki in view of Zhang discloses those limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim(s) 1 above.
Futaki further discloses wherein the first information is cell-specific or UE-specific (0095 – disclosed are predetermined criteria that are included in the control information that are cell-specific and UE-specific).
Re: Claim(s) 4
Futaki in view of Zhang discloses those limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim(s) 1 above.
Futaki further discloses wherein the first information is information per cell (0095 - disclosed are predetermined criteria that are included in the control information that are cell-specific)
Re: Claim(s) 5
Futaki in view of Zhang discloses those limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim(s) 1 above.
Futaki further discloses wherein the processor is further configured to: control, when the radio resource control message does not include the first information for a cell, the terminal equipment does not perform channel access procedure for transmitting uplink transmission(s) of the cell, and control, when radio resource control message includes the first information for the cell, the terminal equipment performs channel access procedure for transmitting uplink transmission(s) of the cell (0095 and 0115).
Re: Claim(s) 7
Futaki in view of Zhang discloses those limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim(s) 1 above.
Futaki further discloses wherein the radio resource control message includes second information used to indicate an operating band of a cell, the second information indicating a band index of the operating band of the cell, the operating band being identified by the band index is pre-defined as a licensed band or an unlicensed band (0091-0095 – predetermined criteria can include ARFCH or a frequency index).
Re: Claim(s) 8
Futaki in view of Zhang discloses those limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim(s) 1 above.
Futaki further discloses wherein in a case where the operating band is a licensed band, the first information for the cell is absent; or, in a case where the operating band is an unlicensed band, the first information for the cell is optionally present (0085 - The eNB 1 may transmit the control information via the serving cell of the UE 3 on the licensed frequency (e.g., Cell #1 in FIGS. 1A and 1B), transmit the control information via the cell on the unlicensed frequency (e.g., Cell #2 in FIGS. 1A and 1B), or transmit the control information via both of these cells).
Re: Claim(s) 11
Futaki in view of Zhang discloses those limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim(s) 1 above.
Futaki discloses receiving a radio resource control (RRC) message (Fig. 6 - 601).
Futaki does/do not appear to explicitly disclose wherein, the receiver is further configured to: receive a fourth information carried by a radio resource control signaling, the fourth information configures types of channel access procedure types which are capable of being indicated by the information contained in the DCI or the RAR.
However, attention is directed to Zhang which discloses said limitation (0082 - the configuration information is transmitted via a system message and/or radio resource control (RRC) signaling. The channel access types may be configured via the system message, or the channel access types may be configured via UE-specific PUCCH configuration signaling. 0113 - the DCI contains a channel access type indicator field, the channel access type indicator field being used to indicate the channel access type of the PUCCH transmitting the HARQ feedback information).
Therefore 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 Futaki invention by employing the teaching as taught by Zhang to provide the ability to include, within system information, configuration information detailing the different channel access types to be indicated by the indicator field included in the DCI. The motivation for the combination is given by Zhang (0002 and 0012).
Re: Claim(s) 17
Futaki in view of Zhang discloses those limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim(s) 1 above.
Futaki further discloses wherein, the uplink transmission is PRACH, PUCCH, PUSCH, or SRS (Fig. 6 – 605).
Re: Claim(s) 21
Futaki in view of Zhang discloses those limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim(s) 1 and 11 above.
Futaki in view of Zhang discloses wherein, the types of channel access procedure that are configurable by the fourth information include a type with channel sensing and a type without channel sensing (see as analyzed in the rejection of claims 1 and 11).
Re: Claim(s) 22
Futaki in view of Zhang discloses those limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim(s) 1 and 11 above.
Futaki in view of Zhang discloses wherein the types of channel access procedure that are configurable by the fourth information include a type 1 channel access procedure or a type 2 channel access procedure or a type 3 channel access procedure (see as analyzed in the rejection of claims 1 and 11).
Re: Claim(s) 23
Futaki in view of Zhang discloses those limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim(s) 1 above.
Futaki further discloses that the unlicensed frequency may be operated in the 5 GHz band (0008).
Futaki does/do not appear to explicitly disclose wherein the first information is for a cell operating in frequency range from 52.6 GHz to 71 GHz.
However, further attention is directed to Futaki which suggests said limitation (0068 - The unlicensed frequency includes a frequency that is used for, for example, radar systems and wireless LAN (WLAN or also referred to as WiFi) and includes frequencies other than licensed frequencies allocated only to any specific operators (i.e., service providers). The unlicensed frequency is, for example, but not limited to, 5 GHz band (emphasis added)).
Therefore 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 Futaki invention by further employing the teaching as taught by Futaki to implement a design choice when selecting a operable frequency range of an unlicensed spectrum.
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Futaki in view of Zhang as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 20220287094 A1 to Tooher; J. Patrick et al.
Re: Claim(s) 18
Futaki in view of Zhang discloses those limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim(s) 1 above.
Futaki in view of Zhang does/do not appear to explicitly disclose wherein, the transmitter is further configured to transmit measurement result; wherein the measurement result comprises received signal strength per beam.
However, attention is directed to Tooher which discloses said limitation (0072 - Channel access in an unlicensed frequency band may typically use a Listen-Before-Talk (LBT) mechanism. 0156-0159 - the WTRU may be configured with a set of PUCCH resources. The WTRU may only use the set of PUCCH resources if they are dynamically triggered by the base station. The trigger may indicate to the WTRU a reference slot from which feedback report measurements should be obtained … If the WTRU is configured to report multiple CSI feedbacks including a Channel Quality Indicator (CQI), a Channel Resource Indicator (CRI), L1-beam measurement results, Precoding Matrix Indicator (PMI), Rank Indicator (RI), Layer Indicator (LI), the WTRU may need to perform LBT to acquire UL resources to transmit the CSI feedback report. Content of the feedback may include L1-RSRP).
Therefore 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 Futaki in view of Zhang invention by employing the teaching as taught by Tooher to provide the ability to report the RSRP of L1-beam measurements results to a network upon utilizing LBT. The motivation for the combination is given by Tooher (0003, 0006).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KASHIF SIDDIQUI whose telephone number is (571)270-3188. The examiner can normally be reached on M-R 6:00 EST to 16:00 EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jeffrey Rutkowski can be reached on 571-270-1215. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/KASHIF SIDDIQUI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2415