DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Amendment filed 6/11/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 1, 7, and 14 have been amended.
Claims 6, 10, 13, and 19 have been previously cancelled.
Claims 1-5, 7-9, 11, 12, 14-18, and 20-23 remain pending.
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.
Claims 1-5, 7-9, 11, 12, 14-18, and 20-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun et al. (US20210306991A1), hereafter Sun, in view of Rastegardoost et al. (US20230209530A1, supported by Provisional 63/168323), hereafter Rastegardoost.
Regarding claims 1 and 14,
Sun discloses a User Equipment (UE) (Fig. 10, device 1005) comprising a memory (Fig. 10, memory 1030) and a processor (Fig. 10, processor 1040) operatively coupled to the memory, wherein the processor is configured to execute program code (Fig. 10, code 1035) to perform a method (Fig. 6) comprising receiving indication of duplexing enhancement of one or more first frequency resources associated with Uplink (UL) for a first beam/set of beams from a base station and one or more second frequency resources associated with downklink (DL) (Fig. 6, steps 625-630; monitoring/receiving COT indication; paragraph 4, 9-12, 20, 34-39, 45-47, 61, 72; set of configured periodic resources for enhancing uplink and downlink in both frequency division and time division duplexing; COT indicates beam direction of a plurality of beams).
Sun further shows determining whether to perform or cancel a first UL transmission based on the one or more first frequency resources associated with UL when the first UL transmission is associated with the first beam/set of beams (Fig. 6, step 635-640; paragraph 83, 86, 87, 96, 101-103; cancel or validate communication based on configured UL/DL resources relative to COT resources) and not determining whether to perform or cancel a second UL transmission based on the one or more first frequency resources (Fig. 6, steps 635-640; paragraphs 5-10, 18, 86, 96, 99-105, 127-130; determination between validation or cancellation of the communication would not be performed for undetected COT indication).
Sun discloses collision detection and avoidance (paragraph 60), use of LBT to determine channel availability of shared resources (Abstract; Fig. 3-5, Fig. 6, step 620; paragraph 35, 66; LBT to verify channel availability/associated COT) as well as the use of multiple beams (paragraph 47, 61; use of multiple spatial layers/beams supporting MIMO/beamforming operations) such that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the disclosed method be performed for each of multiple beams, but does not expressly disclose the cited indications are for collision handling.
Furthermore, Rastegardoost discloses analogous art for enhancing duplexing (Title: priorities in multiple downlink and uplink scheduling) including indications for collision handling (paragraphs 179, 252-256, 283; multi-beam indications between UE and BS for PHY-layer collision handling for DL/UL scheduling).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing to implement the method of Sun for a second UL transmission associated with a second beam/set of beams, as suggested by Sun, and provide such indications for collision handling, as suggested by Sun and shown by Rastegardoost, to iteratively determining whether to perform or cancel another/second UL transmission based on the one or more other/second frequency resources when the second UL transmission is associated with a second beam/set of beams, thereby enabling collision handling for multiple beams for both UL and DL in shared spectrum based on channel occupancy time of channels associated with each of multiple beams to increase data rate and data integrity of UL and DL communications with the UE.
Regarding claim 7,
Sun discloses a method (Fig. 6) for a User Equipment (UE) comprising receiving a first indication of duplexing enhancement one or more first frequency resources associated with Uplink (UL) and one or more third frequency resources associated with downlink (DL) (Fig. 6, steps 625-630; monitoring/receiving COT indication; paragraph 4, 9-12, 20, 34-39, 45-47, 61, 72; set of configured periodic resources for enhancing uplink and downlink in both frequency division and time division duplexing; COT indicates beam direction of a plurality of beams) for a first beam and/or a first set of beams from a base station (Fig. 6, steps 625-630; monitoring/receiving COT indication; paragraph 12, 20, 47, 61; COT indicates beam direction of a plurality of beams) and determining whether to perform or cancel a first UL transmission based on the one or more first frequency resources when the first UL transmission is associated with the first beam and/or the first set of beams (Fig. 6, step 635-640; paragraph 83, 86, 87, 96, 101-103; cancel or validate communication based on UL/DL configured resources relative to COT resources).
Sun discloses collision detection and avoidance (paragraph 60), use of LBT to determine channel availability of shared resources (Abstract; Fig. 3-5, Fig. 6, step 620; paragraph 35, 66; LBT to verify channel availability/associated COT) as well as the use of multiple beams (paragraph 47, 61; use of multiple spatial layers/beams supporting MIMO/beamforming operations) such that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the disclosed method be performed for each of multiple beams, but does not expressly disclose the cited indications are for collision handling.
Furthermore, Rastegardoost discloses analogous art for enhancing duplexing (Title: priorities in multiple downlink and uplink scheduling) including indications for collision handling (paragraphs 179, 252-256, 283; multi-beam indications between UE and BS for PHY-layer collision handling for DL/UL scheduling).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing to implement the method of Sun for a second UL transmission associated with a second beam/set of beams, as suggested by Sun, and provide such indications for collision handling, as suggested by Sun and shown by Rastegardoost, to iteratively determining whether to perform or cancel another/second UL transmission based on the one or more other/second frequency resources when the second UL transmission is associated with a second beam/set of beams, thereby enabling collision handling for multiple UL/DL beams in shared spectrum based on channel occupancy time of channels associated with each of multiple beams to increase data rate and data integrity of communications with the UE.
Regarding claims 2, 8, and 15,
The combination of Sun and Rastegardoost discloses the UE performs the first UL transmission when the first UL transmission is within the one or more first frequency resources (Fig. 3; Fig. 6, step 640; configured resources validated as within COT).
Regarding claims 3, 9, and 16,
The combination of Sun and Rastegardoost discloses the UE cancels the first UL transmission when the first UL transmission is outside the one or more first frequency resources (Fig. 4; Fig. 6, step 635; configured resources 410-415 cancelled as outside COT resources).
Regarding claims 4 and 17,
The combination of Sun and Rastegardoost discloses the one or more first frequency resources are not associated with the second beam and/or the second set of beams (paragraph 47, 61; use of multiple spatial layers/beams supporting MIMO/beamforming operations).
Regarding claims 5 and 18,
The combination of Sun and Rastegardoost discloses the UE determines whether to perform or cancel the second UL transmission based on a slot format corresponding to resources within the one or more first frequency resources and outside the one or more first frequency resources (paragraph 11, 19, 69-71, 89, 103, 131; slot format indicator/SFI indicates slot format associated with COT indication).
Regarding claim 11,
The combination of Sun and Rastegardoost discloses the UE performs the second UL transmission when the first UL transmission is within the one or more second frequency resources (Fig. 3; Fig. 6, step 640; configured resources validated as within COT resources).
Regarding claim 12,
The combination of Sun and Rastegardoost discloses the UE cancels the second UL transmission when the first UL transmission is outside the one or more second frequency resources (Fig. 4; Fig. 6, step 635; configured resources 410-415 cancelled as outside COT resources).
Regarding claims 20 and 22,
The combination of Sun and Rastegardoost discloses UE determines whether to perform or cancel a first DL reception based on the one or more second/third frequency resources associated with DL when the first DL transmission is associated with the first beam and/or first set of beams (Sun: Fig. 6, step 635-640; paragraph 83, 86, 87, 96, 101-103; cancel or validate communication based on configured UL/DL resources relative to COT resources; Rastegardoost: paragraphs 179, 252-256, 283; multi-beam indications between UE and BS for PHY-layer collision handling for downlink and uplink scheduling). See motivation above.
Regarding claims 21 and 23,
The combination of Sun and Rastegardoost discloses UE does not determine whether to perform or cancel a second DL reception based on the one or more second/fourth frequency resources associated with DL when the first DL transmission is associated with the first beam and/or first set of beams (Sun: Fig. 6, steps 635-640; paragraphs 5-10, 18, 86, 96, 99-105, 127-130; determination between validation or cancellation of the communication would not be performed for undetected COT indication; Rastegardoost: paragraphs 179, 252-256, 283; multi-beam indications between UE and BS for PHY-layer collision handling for downlink and uplink scheduling). See motivation above.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/11/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In the Remarks on pg. 10-11 of the Amendment, Applicant contends the combination of Sun and Rastegardoost fails to disclose duplex enhancement, as now expressly claimed. In particular, Applicant alleges Rastegardoost is directed to unlicensed band operation for resources that are only for UL whereas the present claimed invention is uniquely related to duplex enhancement impacting resources for DL and resources for UL.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. As now shown in the rejection and contrary to Applicant’s assertions, both primary reference to Sun (paragraphs 35-39, 68-72) as well as secondary reference Rastegardoost (paragraphs 248, 283, 284; scheduling enhancements for PDSCH/PUSCH) are shown to effect enhancement of both UL and DL resources. Sun (paragraph 4, 9-12, 20, 47, 61; set of configured periodic resources for uplink or downlink) and Rastegardoost (Title; paragraphs 179, 252-256, 283: downlink and uplink scheduling; multi-beam indications between UE and BS for PHY-layer collision handling for downlink and uplink scheduling) both disclose determining/not determining whether to perform or cancel UL transmissions based on collision handling for enhancing the configured resources for both UL and DL (i.e. duplex) communications. Therefore, the rejections based on the combination of Sun and Rastegardoost are properly maintained.
Conclusion
4. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GREGORY B SEFCHECK whose telephone number is (571)272-3098. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 6AM-4PM.
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, Chirag Shah can be reached at 571-272-3144. 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.
/GREGORY B SEFCHECK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2477
Prosecution Insights