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 .
Priorities and Examiner Remarks
In accordance with the Remarks filed 01/02/2026, claims 1-5 and 10-15 are elected for examination on the merits and pending. Claims 6-9 and 16-20 are not elected for examination and withdrawn.
This application is a Continuation of PCT/IB2021/061008 (filed 11/26/2021), which claims priority to application PCTIB2020001006 (filed 11/26/2020) and PCTIB2021000078 (filed 01/18/2021).
Double Patenting
Claim 1 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over respective claims of the following applications. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because of the following:
claim 1 of US 10716130 B2 is directed to the same invention as claim 1 of the instant application, for example, first data for transmission of uplink.
claim 1 of US 11350414 B2 is directed to the same invention as claim 1 of the instant application, for example, first data for transmission of uplink.
claim 1 of US 10728898 B2 is directed to the same invention as claim 1 of the instant application, for example, first information or second information for uplink transmission to a network device.
claim 1 of US 11082999 B2 is directed to the same invention as claim 1 of the instant application, for example, sending first information to uplink of a network device.
claim 1 of US 10932244 B2 is directed to the same invention as claim 1 of the instant application, for example, transmitting a first uplink channel according to the first information received.
claim 1 of US 11190323 B2 is directed to the same invention as claim 1 of the instant application, for example, feeding back information on a uplink according to information received.
claim 1 of US 11102674 B2 is directed to the same invention as claim 1 of the instant application, for example, receiving first information for feeding back information on an uplink channel.
claim 1 of US 11310814 B2 is directed to the same invention as claim 1 of the instant application, for example, sending, by the network device,
first information to the terminal device, wherein the first information
indicates that the terminal device uses or can use the first uplink carrier to perform uplink transmission.
Claim 1 is provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over respective claims of the following copending applications. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because of the following:
claim 1 of US 20200374064 A1 is directed to the same invention as claim 1 of the instant application, for example, receiving, by a terminal device, first information from a network device; determining, by the terminal device, based on the first information, a first resource for transmitting uplink control information (UCI) in an uplink transmission resource. NOTE: this is a provisional obviousness-type double patenting rejection because the conflicting claims have not in fact been patented.
claim 1 of US 20210282155 A1 is directed to the same invention as claim 1 of the instant application, for example, generating, by a first terminal, first information based on second information and a first threshold, wherein the first information is used for indicating a resource situation at a target interface, the target interface comprises at least one of a first interface or a second interface, the first interface is used for transmitting a signal between the first terminal and a second terminal, and the second interface is used for transmitting a signal between the first terminal and a base station. NOTE: this is a provisional obviousness-type double patenting rejection because the conflicting claims have not in fact been patented.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(B) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-5 and 10-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 1 line 3, the phrase “and/or” does not comply with the MPEP standard and is unclear and ambiguous. To be more specific, it is unclear and ambiguous as to whether it is referred to (a) first information and second information, or (b) first information or second information. Clarification or correction is requested. NOTE: for examining purposes, claim features that use "and/or” are being examined as "or" only. Similar problem appears in many of the claims including claims 2-5 and 10-15, hence, each of the phrase "and/or” is also being examined as "or" only.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
Claim 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more
Claim 1 is directed to the abstract idea of using an information obtained for a transmission. The processes of obtaining a first information and/or a second information and using the first information and/or the second information for a downlink reception and/or an uplink transmission are all that describing the abstract idea. The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional limitations of obtaining by the UE from a base station and using by the UE are well-understood and conventional activities previously known to the industry. None of the limitations, considered as an ordered combination, provide eligibility, because taken as a whole, the claim simply instruct the practitioner to implement the abstract idea with routine, conventional activity.
Claims 2-5, these claims are rejected based on their dependency from the rejected base claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-5, 10-11, and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) (2) as being anticipated by Leng et al. (US 20220046566 A1, hereinafter Leng).
Regarding claim 1, Leng teaches a method of wireless communication for user equipment (UE), the method comprising (in general, see fig. 19 in view of fig. 17 and their corresponding paragraphs; see also fig. 7-8 and their corresponding paragraphs at least 87-104 for additional embodiment, which could also be applied alone or combined with fig. 19):
obtaining, by the UE from a base station, a first information and/or a second information (Leng, see at least para. 150, “...As illustrated in FIG. 19, at operation 1902, the UE receives the satellite ephemeris information, and/or the indication of one or more frequency offset values compensated at the BS...”);
and
using, by the UE, the first information and/or the second information for a downlink reception and/or an uplink transmission (Leng, see at least para. 150, “...At
operation 1910, the UE adjusts TA and pre-compensates the frequency offset for uplink transmission based on the indication...”).
Regarding claim 2, Leng teaches wherein the first information and/or the second information is relevant to a frequency domain synchronization, and the frequency domain synchronization comprises at least one of the followings: one or more frequency offsets; or one or more Doppler offsets (Leng, see at least para. 150, “...at operation 1902, the UE receives the satellite ephemeris information, and/or the indication of one or more frequency offset values compensated at the BS...”),
[(i)] wherein the frequency offset and/or the Doppler offset is at least on one of the followings: a service link; or a feeder link,
[(ii)] wherein the frequency offset and/or the Doppler offset is amount of offset experienced on the service link and/or on the feeder link, or
[(iii)] the frequency offset and/or Doppler offset is amount of offset compensated by the base station on the service link and/or on the feeder link (Leng, see at least para. 150 along with para. 89, e.g. operation 1910 in view of operation 1902 above).
Regarding claim 3, Leng teaches wherein the second information is relevant to [(i)] a satellite ephemeris data (Leng, for [(i)], see at least para. 150, “...at operation 1902, the UE receives the satellite ephemeris information, and/or the indication of one or more frequency offset values compensated at the BS...”),
and/or
[(ii)] a reference point status,
[(i)] the satellite ephemeris data comprises at least one of the followings: one or more satellite positions; one or more satellite velocity; one or more reference times corresponding to the one or more satellites positions and/or the one or more satellite velocity (Leng, for [(i)], see at least para. 150, “...The GNSS-capable UE has the knowledge of the position of the UE and is able to be determine TA variation rate of the UE and Doppler shift based on the satellite coordinate and velocity included in the ephemeris information...”),
and
[(ii)] the reference point status comprises at least one of the followings: one or more reference point positions; one or more reference point velocity; one or more reference times corresponding to the one or more reference point positions and/or the one or more reference point velocity.
Regarding claim 4, Leng teaches wherein the first information and/or the second information are transmitted in at least one of the followings:
[(i)] a system information block (SIB) (Leng, for [(i)], see at least para. 150 in view of para. 146 and/or para. 102, “...“...at operation 1902, the UE receives the satellite ephemeris information, and/or the indication of one or more frequency offset values compensated at the BS...”; note that “...at operation 1702, the UE receives the satellite ephemeris information and/or the indication of one or more frequency offset values compensated at the BS, which can be received in system information, e.g., MIB, SIB 1, other SIBs...”);
[(ii)] a radio resource control (RRC) message;
[(iii)] a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE);
or
[(vi)] a downlink control information (DCI),
wherein the SIB comprises SIB x, wherein x is an integer larger than or equal to 1 (Leng, for [(i)], see at least para. 146 and/or para. 102, e.g. SIB 1),
the RRC message comprises at least one of the followings: a cell-specific RRC message; or a UE-specific RRC message, and the RRC message comprises an RRC information element (IE) for an intra-frequency measurement and/or an inter-frequency measurement,
wherein the intra-frequency measurement and/or the inter-frequency measurement is based on a synchronization signal block (SSB) and/or a channel state information-reference signal (CSI-RS), and the RRC IE comprises MeasObjectNR.
Regarding claim 5, Leng teaches wherein using, by the UE, the first information and/or the second information for the downlink reception and/or the uplink transmission comprises:
[(i)] compensating, by the UE, a first frequency offset or a first Doppler offset for the downlink reception,
and/or
[(ii)] compensating, by the UE, the first frequency offset or the first Doppler offset for the uplink transmission (Leng, see at least para. 150, “...At operation 1910, the UE adjusts TA and pre-compensates the frequency offset for uplink transmission based on the indication...”),
wherein the first frequency offset is derived from at least one of the followings: a second frequency offset; or a third frequency offset (Leng, see at least para. 150, e.g. operation 1910 in view of operation 1902 above, note that “...at operation 1902, the UE receives...indication of one or more frequency offset values compensated at the BS...”).
Regarding claim 10, this claim is rejected for the same reasoning as claim 1 except this claim is in apparatus claim format.
To be more specific, Leng also teaches a same or similar apparatus comprising processor, transceiver, and memory (Leng, see at least fig. 3), which are well known in the art and commonly used for providing and enabling robust and reliable data communication hardware and software.
Regarding claim 11, Leng teaches
wherein the first information and/or the second information is relevant to a frequency domain synchronization, and the frequency domain synchronization comprises at least one of the followings: one or more frequency offsets; or one or more Doppler offsets (Leng, see at least para. 150, “...at operation 1902, the UE receives the satellite ephemeris information, and/or the indication of one or more frequency offset values compensated at the BS...”),
wherein the frequency offset and/or the Doppler offset is at least on one of the followings: a service link; or a feeder link (Leng, see at least para. 150 along with para. 89, e.g. operation 1910 in view of operation 1902 above);
and
[(i)] the frequency offset and/or the Doppler offset is amount of offset experienced on the service link and/or on the feeder link,
or
[(ii)] the frequency offset and/or Doppler offset is amount of offset compensated by the base station on the service link and/or one the feeder link (Leng, see at least para. 150 along with para. 89, e.g. operation 1910 in view of operation 1902 above).
Regarding claim 13, in view of claim 10 above, this claim is rejected for the same reasoning as claim 3.
Regarding claim 14, in view of claim 10 above, this claim is rejected for the same reasoning as claim 4.
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 12 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Leng, in view of CHENG et al. (US 20220046498 A1, hereinafter CHENG).
Regarding claim 12, Leng teaches claim 11.
Leng further teaches the frequency offset and/or the Doppler offset on the service link comprises a frequency shift on a link between a satellite and the UE, and the frequency offset and/or the Doppler offset on the feeder link comprises a frequency shift on a link between a satellite and the base station (Leng, see at least para. 150 along with para. 89 and 102, e.g. operation 1910 in view of operation 1902 above, note that operation 1910 for uplink transmission from UE to BS via satellite)
Leng does not specifically teach the link between the satellite and the UE comprises a link from the satellite to the UE and/or a link from the UE to the satellite, and the link between the satellite and the base station comprises a link from the satellite to the base station and/or a link from the base station to the satellite.
CHENG teaches the link between the satellite and the UE comprises a link from the satellite to the UE and/or a link from the UE to the satellite, and the link between the satellite and the base station comprises a link from the satellite to the base station and/or a link from the base station to the satellite (CHENG, see at least fig. 1 and para. 5, “...In the figure, feeder link 130 may include a radio link between satellite 110 and the base station (e.g., gNB 140). Service link 150, on the other hand, may refer to a radio link between satellite 110 and UE 160...”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to a person having ordinary skill in the art to incorporate CHENG into the method of Leng to substantially improve the capability and efficiency in Non-Terrestrial Networks.
Regarding claim 15, Leng teaches claim 14.
Leng does not specifically teach wherein the first information and/or the second information are associated with
[(i)] one or more cell indexes
and/or
[(ii)] one or more beam indexes
and/or
[(iii)] one or more frequencies,
wherein the one or more frequencies comprise at least one of the followings: SSB frequency; or reference frequency for the CSI-RS, and the one or more frequencies comprises a first point which is used for mapping of the CSI-RS to physical resources, wherein the SSB frequency is associated with the MeasObjectNR,
wherein the one or more beam indexes comprises at least one of the followings: an SSB index; a CSI-RS resource index; or a CSI-RS resource set index,
the one or more beam indexes are configured in the MeasObjectNR,
and
[belong to (i)] the one or more cell indexes are configured in the MeasObjectNR.
CHENG teaches wherein the first information and/or the second information are associated with
[(i)] one or more cell indexes (CHENG, see at least para. 61-62, “...As shown in FIG. 2, base station 204 may send, at 210, a measurement object (e.g., an information element, such as the measObjectNR) to UE 202, for example, to configure a measurement procedure. The measObjectNR information element (IE) may include, in some implementations, at least two SMTCs... The second SMTC (SMTC2) may include a secondary measurement timing configuration for the SS/PBCH blocks corresponding to the Physical Cell ID (PCI) (e.g., listed in a pci-List parameter)...”)
and/or
[(ii)] one or more beam indexes
and/or
[(iii)] one or more frequencies,
wherein the one or more frequencies comprise at least one of the followings: SSB frequency; or reference frequency for the CSI-RS, and the one or more frequencies comprises a first point which is used for mapping of the CSI-RS to physical resources, wherein the SSB frequency is associated with the MeasObjectNR,
wherein the one or more beam indexes comprises at least one of the followings: an SSB index; a CSI-RS resource index; or a CSI-RS resource set index,
the one or more beam indexes are configured in the MeasObjectNR,
and
[belong to (i)] the one or more cell indexes are configured in the MeasObjectNR (CHENG, see at least para. 61-62, e.g. measObjectNR may include PCIs).
Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to a person having ordinary skill in the art to incorporate CHENG into the method of Leng to substantially improve the capability and efficiency in Non-Terrestrial Networks.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YEE F LAM whose telephone number is (571)270-7577. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-5pm.
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, Ayman A. Abaza can be reached on (571) 270-0422. 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.
/YEE F LAM/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2465