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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 01-20-2026 has been entered and considered.
Claims 1-2, and 4-31 are pending in the current application.
Claims 1-2, 4-19 and 29-31 remain rejected as discussed below.
Claims 20-28 are objected to.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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 1-2, 4-5 and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vankayala et al (US 2021/0168841) in view of Wang et al (US 2020/0120662). Hereinafter referred to as Vankayala and Wang.
Regarding claims 1 and 29, Vankayala discloses a first network node for wireless communication, comprising: at least one processor; and a memory coupled to the at least one processor, wherein the at least one processor is configured to: receive a control channel transmission including logical channel information for transmission of buffered data information from a second network node (see at least figure 3A); and transmit the buffered data information to the second network node based on the logical channel information in one or more uplink resources (see at least figure 3A).
Vankayala discloses all the limitations of the claimed invention with the exception of wherein the logical channel information includes a set of logical channel identifiers or one or more logical channel group identifiers or includes a bitmap that indicates the set of logical channel identifiers or the one or more logical channel group identifiers. However, Wang, from the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the logical channel information includes a set of logical channel identifiers or one or more logical channel group identifiers or includes a bitmap that indicates the set of logical channel identifiers or the one or more logical channel group identifiers (see at least paragraph [0091]-[0092]). Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the invention to employ the teaching of Wang, as indicated, into the communication method of Vankayala for the purpose of effectively improve uplink transmission mechanisms for different services.
Regarding claim 2. Vankayala in view of Wang discloses a discloses a first network node wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: receive a resource allocation indicating one or more transmission resources for data based on transmission of the buffered data information; and transmit the data in the one or more transmission resources based on receipt of the resource allocation (see at least figure 3A).
Regarding claim 4. Vankayala in view of Wang discloses a first network node wherein the at least one processor configured to transmit the buffered data information to the second network node based on the logical channel information includes to: determine one or more logical channel identifiers based on the logical channel information; and transmit the buffered data information to the second network node in one or more logical channels corresponding to the one or more logical channel identifiers (see a least paragraph [0034]: allocation is associated with logical Channel group (LGC)).
Regarding claim 5. Vankayala in view of Wang discloses a first network node wherein the buffered data information includes or corresponds to at least one of: a scheduling request (SR) request for at least one logical channel of the logical channels indicated in the logical channel information; a buffer status report (BSR); a delay status report (DSR); a statistical delay report (SDR); remaining packet delay budget (PDB) information or time wait (Twait) information of one or more scheduled uplink packets; or remaining PDB information or Twait information for at least one logical channel of the logical channels indicated in the logical channel information (see at least figure 3A).
Claims 6-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vankayala in view of Wang and further in view of Lyu et al (US 2025/0168697). Hereinafter referred to as Lyu.
Regarding claim 6, Vankayala in view of Wang discloses all the limitations of the claimed invention with the exception that the BSR, the DSR, the SDR, or a combination thereof are low resolution and provide an indication with respect to a single threshold per logical channel of the logical channels indicated by the logical channel information. However, Lyu, from the same field of endeavor, discloses the BSR, the DSR, the SDR, or a combination thereof are low resolution and provide an indication with respect to a single threshold per logical channel of the logical channels indicated by the logical channel information (see at least paragraph [0113]). Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the invention to employ the teaching of Lyu, as indicated, into the communication method of Vankayala in view of Wang for the purpose of improving communication and allocating resources.
Regarding claim 7, Vankayala in view of Wang discloses all the limitations of the claimed invention with the exception the BSR, the DSR, the SDR, or a combination thereof are high resolution and provide an indication with respect to multiple thresholds per logical channel of the logical channels indicated by the logical channel information. However, Lyu, from the same field of endeavor, discloses the BSR, the DSR, the SDR, or a combination thereof are high resolution and provide an indication with respect to multiple thresholds per logical channel of the logical channels indicated by the logical channel information (see at least paragraph [0113]). Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the invention to employ the teaching of Lyu, as indicated, into the communication method of Vankayala in view of Wang for the purpose of improving communication and allocating resources.
Regarding claim 8, Vankayala in view of Wang discloses all the limitations of the claimed invention with the exception that the buffered data information is included in a buffer status report (BSR), and wherein the BSR comprises a medium access control control element (MAC CE). However, Lyu, from the same field of endeavor, discloses the buffered data information is included in a buffer status report (BSR), and wherein the BSR comprises a medium access control control element (MAC CE) (see at least paragraph [0045]). Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the invention to employ the teaching of Lyu, as indicated, into the communication method of Vankayala in view of Wang for the purpose of improving communication and allocating resources.
Regarding claim 9, Vankayala in view of Wang discloses all the limitations of the claimed invention with the exception that the control channel transmission includes or corresponds to downlink control information (DCI), and wherein the DCI comprises an uplink scheduling DCI, a downlink scheduling DCI, or a control DCI. However, Lyu, from the same field of endeavor, discloses the control channel transmission includes or corresponds to downlink control information (DCI), and wherein the DCI comprises an uplink scheduling DCI, a downlink scheduling DCI, or a control DCI (see at least paragraph [0068]). Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the invention to employ the teaching of Lyu, as indicated, into the communication method of Vankayala in view of Wang for the purpose of improving communication and allocating resources.
Regarding claim 10, Vankayala in view of Wang discloses all the limitations of the claimed invention with the exception that the one or more uplink resources correspond to multiple transmit opportunities, and wherein the buffered data information is transmitted included in multiple transmissions. However, Lyu, from the same field of endeavor, discloses the one or more uplink resources correspond to multiple transmit opportunities, and wherein the buffered data information is transmitted included in multiple transmissions (see at least abstract). Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the invention to employ the teaching of Lyu, as indicated, into the communication method of Vankayala in view of Wang for the purpose of improving communication and allocating resources.
Claims 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vankayala in view of Wang and further in view of Hoang et al (US 2022/0303952). Hereinafter referred to as Hoang.
Regarding claim 11, Vankayala in view of Wang discloses all the limitations of the claimed invention with the exception that the one or more uplink resources include or correspond to physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) resources, physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) resources, or a combination thereof. However, Hoang, from the same field of endeavor, teaches the one or more uplink resources include or correspond to physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) resources, physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) resources, or a combination thereof (see at least paragraph [0291]). Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the invention to employ the teaching of Hoang, as indicated, into the communication method of Vankayala in view of Wang for the purpose of managing resources and increase QOS.
Regarding claim 12. Vankayala in view of Wang in view of Hoang discloses a first network node wherein the PUCCH resources include dedicated resources, scheduling request (SR) resources, hybrid automatic repeat request acknowledgement (HARQ-ACK) resources, channel state information reference signal (CSI-RS) resources, or a combination thereof, and wherein the PUSCH resources include dedicated resources, CSI-RS resources, or a combination thereof (see at least paragraph [0291]).
Regarding claim 13, Vankayala in view of Wang discloses all the limitations of the claimed invention with the exception that the at least one processor is further configured to: receive resource configuration information indicating a plurality of scheduling request (SR) resources, hybrid automatic repeat request acknowledgement (HARQ-ACK) resources, or channel state information reference signal (CSI-RS) resources for the first network node. However, Hoang, from the same field of endeavor, teaches the at least one processor is further configured to: receive resource configuration information indicating a plurality of scheduling request (SR) resources, hybrid automatic repeat request acknowledgement (HARQ-ACK) resources, or channel state information reference signal (CSI-RS) resources for the first network node (see at least paragraph [0291]). Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the invention to employ the teaching of Hoang, as indicated, into the communication method of Vankayala in view of Wang for the purpose of managing resources and increase QOS.
Regarding claim 14, Vankayala in view of Wang discloses all the limitations of the claimed invention with the exception control channel transmission comprises an uplink scheduling downlink control information (DCI), and wherein the one or more uplink resources include or correspond to physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) resources indicated in the uplink scheduling DCI, physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) resources indicated in the uplink scheduling DCI, a PUSCH allocation indicated in the uplink scheduling DCI, or a combination thereof. However, Hoang, from the same field of endeavor, teaches the control channel transmission comprises an uplink scheduling downlink control information (DCI), and wherein the one or more uplink resources include or correspond to physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) resources indicated in the uplink scheduling DCI, physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) resources indicated in the uplink scheduling DCI, a PUSCH allocation indicated in the uplink scheduling DCI, or a combination thereof (see at least paragraph [0267]). Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the invention to employ the teaching of Hoang, as indicated, into the communication method of Vankayala in view of Wang for the purpose of managing resources and increase QOS.
Claims 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vankayala in view of Wang and further in view of Chin et al (US 12,185,364). Hereinafter referred to as Chin.
Regarding claim 15, Vankayala in view of Wang discloses all the limitations of the claimed invention with the exception that the control channel transmission comprises an uplink scheduling downlink control information (DCI), wherein the uplink scheduling DCI indicates a transmission resource for second data, and wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: transmit a first physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) for the second data in the transmission resource. However, Chin, from the same field of endeavor, teaches the control channel transmission comprises an uplink scheduling downlink control information (DCI), wherein the uplink scheduling DCI indicates a transmission resource for second data, and wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: transmit a first physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) for the second data in the transmission resource (see at least Col.17, lines 16-37). Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the invention to employ the teaching of Hoang, as indicated, into the communication method of Vankayala in view of Wang for the purpose of managing resources and increase QOS.
Regarding claim 16, Vankayala in view of Wang discloses all the limitations of the claimed invention with the exception that the control channel transmission comprises an uplink scheduling downlink control information (DCI), wherein the uplink scheduling DCI indicates a transmission resource for second data, and wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: transmit a first physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) for the second data and at least a portion of the buffered data information in the transmission resource. However, Chin, from the same field of endeavor, teaches the control channel transmission comprises an uplink scheduling downlink control information (DCI), wherein the uplink scheduling DCI indicates a transmission resource for second data, and wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: transmit a first physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) for the second data and at least a portion of the buffered data information in the transmission resource (see at least Col.17, lines 16-37). Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the invention to employ the teaching of Hoang, as indicated, into the communication method of Vankayala in view of Wang for the purpose of managing resources and increase QOS.
Regarding claim 17, Vankayala in view of Wang discloses all the limitations of the claimed invention with the exception that the control channel transmission comprises a downlink scheduling downlink control information (DCI), and wherein the one or more uplink resources include or correspond to: a hybrid automatic repeat request acknowledgement (HARQ-ACK) resource associated with a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) scheduled by the downlink scheduling DCI; a physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) resource indicated in the downlink scheduling DCI; a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) allocation indicated in the downlink scheduling DCI; or a combination thereof. However, Chin, from the same field of endeavor, teaches the control channel transmission comprises a downlink scheduling downlink control information (DCI), and wherein the one or more uplink resources include or correspond to: a hybrid automatic repeat request acknowledgement (HARQ-ACK) resource associated with a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) scheduled by the downlink scheduling DCI; a physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) resource indicated in the downlink scheduling DCI; a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) allocation indicated in the downlink scheduling DCI; or a combination thereof (see at least Col.17, lines 16-37). Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the invention to employ the teaching of Hoang, as indicated, into the communication method of Vankayala in view of Wang for the purpose of managing resources and increase QOS.
Claims 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vankayala in view of Wang and further in view of Marinier et al (US 2024/0322979). Hereinafter referred to as Marinier.
Regarding claim 18, Vankayala in view of Wang discloses all the limitations of the claimed invention with the exception that the control channel transmission comprises a downlink scheduling downlink control information (DCI), wherein the downlink scheduling DCI indicates a transmission resource for second data, and wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: receive a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) for the second data; and transmit feedback information in feedback information resources for the PDSCH. However, Marinier, from the same field of endeavor, teaches the control channel transmission comprises a downlink scheduling downlink control information (DCI), wherein the downlink scheduling DCI indicates a transmission resource for second data, and wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: receive a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) for the second data; and transmit feedback information in feedback information resources for the PDSCH (see at least claim 15). Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the invention to employ the teaching of Hoang, as indicated, into the communication method of Vankayala in view of Wang for the purpose of improving communication.
Regarding claim 19, Vankayala in view of Wang discloses all the limitations of the claimed invention with the exception that the control channel transmission comprises a downlink scheduling downlink control information (DCI), wherein the downlink scheduling DCI indicates a transmission resource for second data, and wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: receive a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) for the second data; and transmit feedback information and at least a portion of the buffered data information in feedback information resources for the PDSCH. However, Marinier, from the same field of endeavor, teaches the control channel transmission comprises a downlink scheduling downlink control information (DCI), wherein the downlink scheduling DCI indicates a transmission resource for second data, and wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: receive a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) for the second data; and transmit feedback information and at least a portion of the buffered data information in feedback information resources for the PDSCH (see at least claim 15 and figure 2). Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the invention to employ the teaching of Hoang, as indicated, into the communication method of Vankayala in view of Wang for the purpose of improving communication.
Claim 30 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vankayala in view of Wang and further in view of Palenius et al (US 2023/0300788). Hereinafter referred to as Palenius.
Regarding claim 30, Vankayala in view of Wang discloses all the limitations of the claimed invention with the exception that the control channel transmission is transmitted without receipt of a scheduling request (SR) or a buffer status request (BSR) requesting resources for the buffered data information. However, Palenius, from the same field of endeavor, teaches the control channel transmission is transmitted without receipt of a scheduling request (SR) or a buffer status request (BSR) requesting resources for the buffered data information (see at least paragraphs [0166]). Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the invention to employ the teaching of Palenius, as indicated, into the communication method of Vankayala in view of Wang for the purpose of reducing power consumption and increase flexibility.
Claim 31 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vankayala in view of Wang and further in view of Wu et al (US 2025/0008508). Hereinafter referred to as Wu.
Regarding claim 31, Vankayala in view of Wang discloses all the limitations of the claimed invention with the exception of wherein the buffered data information includes or corresponds to at least one of remaining packet delay budget (PDB) information or time wait (Twait) information of one or more scheduled uplink packets; or remaining PDB information or Twait information for at least one logical channel of the logical channels indicated in the logical channel information. However, Wu, from the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the buffered data information includes or corresponds to at least one of remaining packet delay budget (PDB) information or time wait (Twait) information of one or more scheduled uplink packets; or remaining PDB information or Twait information for at least one logical channel of the logical channels indicated in the logical channel information (see at least figure 6 and paragraphs [0013], [0087]). Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the invention to employ the teaching of Wu, as indicated, into the communication method of Vankayala in view of Wang for the purpose of improving transmission efficiency.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 20-27 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-2, 4-19 and 29-31 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO_892.
In the case of amending the claimed invention, Applicant is respectfully requested to indicate the portion(s) of the specification which dictate(s) the structure relied on for proper interpretation and also to verify and ascertain the metes and bounds of the claimed invention.
When responding to this office action, applicants are advised to clearly point out the patentable novelty which they think the claims present in view of the state of the art disclosed by the references cited or the objections made. Applicants must also show how the amendments avoid such references or objections. See 37C.F.R 1.111(c). In addition, applicants are advised to provide the examiner with the line numbers and pages numbers in the application and/or references cited to assist examiner in locating the appropriate paragraphs.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOUNIR MOUTAOUAKIL whose telephone number is (571)270-1416. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10AM-4PM 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, Ayaz Sheikh can be reached at 571-272-3795. 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.
/MOUNIR MOUTAOUAKIL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2476
Prosecution Insights