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 .
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed 12/22/2025 has been entered. Claims 1, 4-6, 8-9, 12-13, 15-16, and 19-20 are amended. Claims 21-22 are added in this application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments/amendments with respect to the rejection to Double Patenting have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection to Double Patenting has been withdrawn.
Applicant's argument(s) filed on 12/22/2025 with respect to the rejection of claims under rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground rejection.
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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-3, 8-9, 11, 15-18, and 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rudolf (US 20230209483 A1) hereinafter Rudoff in view of Yang (US 20230008206 A1), hereinafter Yang.
Regarding to claim 1 ,
Rudolf teaches a method of wireless communication of a user equipment (UE),frequency-translation repeater, and a base station, comprising ([0138] Full-duplex transmission/reception is not limited to gNBs, TRPs, or UEs, but can also be used for other types of wireless nodes such as relay or repeater nodes)
receiving, in a specific slot, downlink data signals from the base station on a first set of frequency resource ([0146] When using FD communications, UL and DL signals are simultaneously received and transmitted on fully or partially overlapping, or adjacent, frequency resources .... [0147] ....a single carrier may be used such that transmissions and receptions are scheduled on same time-domain resources, such as .... slots. .... Transmissions and receptions on same .... slots may be separated in frequency, for example by being placed in non-overlapping sub-bands);
transmitting, in the same specific slot, uplink data signals directed to the base station on a second set of frequency resources to a repeater the frequency-translation repeater ([0146] When using FD communications, UL and DL signals are simultaneously received and transmitted on fully or partially overlapping, or adjacent, frequency resources .... [0147] ....a single carrier may be used such that transmissions and receptions are scheduled on same time-domain resources, such as .... slots. .... Transmissions and receptions on same .... slots may be separated in frequency, for example by being placed in non-overlapping sub-bands);
wherein the first set of frequency resources and the second set of frequency resources are non-overlapping ([0146] When using FD communications, UL and DL signals are simultaneously received and transmitted on fully or partially overlapping, or adjacent, frequency resources .... [0147] ....a single carrier may be used such that transmissions and receptions are scheduled on same time-domain resources, such as .... slots. .... Transmissions and receptions on same .... slots may be separated in frequency, for example by being placed in non-overlapping sub-bands);
wherein the frequency-translation repeater is configured to, in the same specific slot, ... and wherein the base station transmits the downlink data signals to the UE on the first set of frequency resources and receives the uplink data signals from the frequency-translation repeater on the ([0129] 5G NR radio supports time-division duplex (TDD) operation and frequency division duplex (FDD) operation.....FIG. 10 illustrates an example structure of slots or single-carrier TDD UL-DL frame configuration for a TDD communications system according to the embodiments of the disclosure....[0130] where D denotes a DL slot, U denotes an UL slot, and S denotes a special or switching slot with a DL part, a flexible part that can also be used as guard period G for DL-to-UL switching, and optionally an UL part...[0135] a single carrier may be used such that transmissions and receptions are scheduled on same time-domain resources, such as symbols or slots. Transmissions and receptions on same symbols or slots may be separated in frequency ... [0138] Full-duplex transmission/reception is not limited to gNBs, TRPs, or UEs, ... relay or repeater nodes).
Rudolf does not explicitly teach receiving the uplink data signals on the second set of frequency resources and forward the uplink data signals to the base station on a third set of frequency resources by shifting a radio frequency (RF) carrier of the uplink data signals from the second set of frequency resources to the third set of frequency resources.
Yang teaches receiving the uplink data signals on the second set of frequency resources and forward the uplink data signals to the base station on a third set of frequency resources by shifting a radio frequency (RF) carrier of the uplink data signals from the second set of frequency resources to the third set of frequency resources ([0031] supported radio frequency resources to map at least one set of sub-carriers of the at least one of the first communication link and the second communication link with at least one physical channel in supported radio frequency resources of at least one of the first communication link or the second communication link,.... mapping comprises ... sub-carrier shifting, wherein a sub-carrier is selected for the repeater to frequency shift to another part of the spectrum...[0033] wherein the at least one physical channel comprises at least one of a downlink physical channel or an uplink physical channel ... [0126] Similarly, in the uplink direction, the User Equipment transmits the output signal that has the sub-band bandwidth of b.sub.1 and frequency offset of f.sub.2 (shaded black signal) which is subsequently received by the repeater device. The repeater device maintains the signal bandwidth at b.sub.1 but shifts the frequency offset to f.sub.3, as a result, the signal transmitted by the repeater).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teaching of Yang to the teaching of Rudolf. The motivation for such an addition would be to provide coverage extension ([0081] Yang).
Regarding to claim 2
Rudolf in view of Yang teaches the method of claim 1,
Rudolf further teaches wherein the UE is not capable of simultaneously transmitting and receiving signals on the first set of frequency resources (0134] When using FD communications, UL and DL signals are simultaneously received and transmitted on fully or partially overlapping, or adjacent, frequency resources, thereby improving spectral efficiency and reducing latency in user and/or control planes).
Regarding to claim 3,
Rudolf in view of Yang teaches the method of claim 1,
Rudolf further teaches wherein the first set of frequency resources is within a component carrier (CC) in a first frequency band, and the second set of frequency resources is within a second CC in a second frequency band (fig. 11 and [0144] For a dual-carrier (carrier aggregation) TDD configuration with full-duplex enabled, a UE receives in a slot on CC #1 and transmits in at least one or more symbol(s) of the slot on CC #2).
Regarding to claim 8,
Rudolf in view of Yang teaches the method of claim 1,
Rudolf further teaches wherein the UE and the repeater form a logical device that communicates with the base station in a full duplex mode on the first set of frequency resources (fig. 10-11 and [0134] When using FD communications, UL and DL signals are simultaneously received and transmitted on fully or partially overlapping, or adjacent, frequency resources, thereby improving spectral efficiency and reducing latency in user and/or control planes ... [0138] Full-duplex transmission/reception is not limited to gNBs, TRPs, or UEs, but can also be used for other types of wireless nodes such as relay or repeater nodes).
Regarding to claim 21,
Rudolf and Yang teaches the method of claim 1,
Rudolf does not explicitly teach wherein the first set of frequency resources and the third set of frequency resources are a same set of frequency resources
Yang teaches wherein the first set of frequency resources and the third set of frequency resources are a same set of frequency resources ([0031] supported radio frequency resources to map at least one set of sub-carriers of the at least one of the first communication link and the second communication link with at least one physical channel in supported radio frequency resources of at least one of the first communication link or the second communication link, .... mapping comprises ... sub-carrier shifting, wherein a sub-carrier is selected for the repeater to frequency shift to another part of the spectrum...[0033] wherein the at least one physical channel comprises at least one of a downlink physical channel or an uplink physical channel ... [0126] Similarly, in the uplink direction, the User Equipment transmits the output signal that has the sub-band bandwidth of b1 and frequency offset of f2 (shaded black signal) which is subsequently received by the repeater device. The repeater device maintains the signal bandwidth at b1 but shifts the frequency offset to f3, as a result, the signal transmitted by the repeater).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teaching of Yang to the teaching of Rudolf. The motivation for such an addition would be to provide coverage extension ([0081] Yang).
Regarding to claim 22,
Rudolf and Yang teach the method of claim 1,
Rudolf does not explicitly teach wherein the first set of frequency resources and the third set of frequency resources are different sets of frequency resources.
Yang teaches wherein the first set of frequency resources and the third set of frequency resources are different sets of frequency resources ([0031] supported radio frequency resources to map at least one set of sub-carriers of the at least one of the first communication link and the second communication link with at least one physical channel in supported radio frequency resources of at least one of the first communication link or the second communication link, .... mapping comprises ... sub-carrier shifting, wherein a sub-carrier is selected for the repeater to frequency shift to another part of the spectrum...[0033] wherein the at least one physical channel comprises at least one of a downlink physical channel or an uplink physical channel ... [0126] Similarly, in the uplink direction, the User Equipment transmits the output signal that has the sub-band bandwidth of b.sub.1 and frequency offset of f.sub.2 (shaded black signal) which is subsequently received by the repeater device. The repeater device maintains the signal bandwidth at b.sub.1 but shifts the frequency offset to f.sub.3, as a result, the signal transmitted by the repeater).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teaching of Yang to the teaching of Rudolf. The motivation for such an addition would be to provide coverage extension ([0081] Yang).
Claims [9, 11 and 15] method are rejected under the same reasoning as claims [1, 2 and 8] method, where Rudolf teaches both device and method (abstract).
Claims [16-18] apparatus are rejected under the same reasoning as claims [1-3] method, where Rudolf teaches both device and method (abstract).
Claims 4 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rudolf and Yang and further in view of Li (US 20210037457 A1), hereinafter Li
Regarding to claim 4,
Rudolf and Yang teaches the method of claim 1,
Rudolf and Yang do not explicitly teach wherein the uplink data signals are transmitted on the second set of frequency resources to the frequency-translation repeater at a first transmission power, wherein the first transmission power is lower than a second transmission power that is required to transmit the uplink data signals on the first set of frequency resources directly to the base station.
Li teaches further teaches wherein the uplink data signals are transmitted on the second set of frequency resources to the frequency-translation repeater at a first transmission power, wherein the first transmission power is lower than a second transmission power that is required to transmit the uplink data signals on the first set of frequency resources directly to the base station ([0021] transitioning to the lower power state may include operations, features, means, or instructions for transitioning to the low power state based on the repeater configuration indicating a first type of resources for the monitoring for the first transmission).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teaching of Li to the teaching of Rudolf and Yang. The motivation for such an addition would be to provide power saving ([0047] Li).
Claims [19] apparatus are rejected under the same reasoning as claims [4] method, where Rudolf teaches both device and method (abstract).
Claims 5 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rudolf and Yang and further in view of Bodas (US 20160261332 A1), hereinafter Bodas.
Regarding to claim 5,
Rudolf in view of Yang teaches the method of claim 1,
Rudolf and Yang do not explicitly teach determining an estimation of pathloss between the UE and the frequency-translation repeater; and determining, based on the estimated pathloss, a first transmission power used for the uplink data signals transmitted on the second set of frequency resources to the frequency-translation repeater
Bodas teaches determining an estimation of pathloss between the UE and the frequency-translation repeater; and determining, based on the estimated pathloss, a first transmission power used for the uplink data signals transmitted on the second set of frequency resources to the frequency-translation repeater ([0038] source communication device 115-a may estimate the pathloss from each of the plurality of relay candidates ... to the source communication device 115-a based at least in part on the plurality of beacon signals (e.g., based on measurements (e.g., measured signal strengths) of the beacon signals, which may be compared to the nominal power of the beacon signals).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teaching of Bodas to the teaching of Rudolf and Yang. The motivation for such an addition would be to improve communication with the second communication device ([0008] Bodas).
Claims [20] apparatus are rejected under the same reasoning as claims [5] method, where Rudolf teaches both device and method (abstract).
Claims 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rudolf and Yang and further in view of Gutman (US11558088B1) hereinafter Gutman.
Regarding to claim 12,
Rudolf and Yang teaches the method of claim 9,
Rudolf and Yang do not explicitly teach determining, by the UE, an interference to be received at the frequency-translation repeater in the specific slot on the third set of frequency resources and forwarded on the second set of frequency resources, the interference being caused by transmission of the uplink data signals from the UE to the base station on the first set of frequency resources.
Gutman further teaches further comprising: determining, by the UE, an interference to be received at the frequency-translation repeater in the specific slot on the third set of frequency resources and forwarded on the second set of frequency resources, the interference being caused by transmission of the uplink data signals from the UE to the base station on the first set of frequency resources (col. 40, rows 20-46, receiving, from a second wireless node, an interference measurement report including an indication of interference caused by the first wireless node, the second wireless node ... the first wireless node includes a UE, an IAB node, a repeater node, a second base station, or any combination thereo).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teaching of Gutman to the teaching of Rudolf in view of Yang. The motivation for such an addition would be to support improvements to interference (col. 16, rows 35-40, Gutman).
Claims 6-7 and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rudolf and Yang, in view of Gutman, and further in view of Hormis (US 11848898 B2) hereinafter Hormis.
Regarding of claim 6,
Rudolf and Yang teaches the method of claim 1,
Rudolf and Yang do not explicitly teach wherein the first set of frequency resources is in a first frequency band, the method further comprising: determining, at the UE, an interference in the specific slot on the first set of frequency resources caused by transmission of the uplink data signals from the frequency translation repeater to the base station on a the third set of frequency resources in the first frequency band; and implementing an interference cancellation mechanism to cancel or suppress the interference.
Gutman further teaches wherein the first set of frequency resources is in a first frequency band, the method further comprising determining, at the UE, an interference in the specific slot on the first set of frequency resources caused by transmission of the uplink data signals from the repeater to the base station on the first set of frequency resources or on a third set of frequency resources in the first frequency band (abstract, the base station may receive an interference report from a second wireless node, indicating that the first wireless node caused interference at the second wireless node... the beam tapering configuration may be associated with less interference when transmitting the beamformed message). (column 40 , row20-46 )receiving, from a second wireless node, an interference measurement report including an indication of interference caused by the first wireless node, the second wireless node ... the first wireless node includes a UE, an IAB node, a repeater node, a second base station, or any combination thereof.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teaching of Gutman to the teaching of Rudolf in view of Yang. The motivation for such an addition would be to support improvements to interference (col. 6, rows 35-40, Gutman).
Rudolf and Yang and Gutman do not explicitly teach implementing an interference cancellation mechanism to cancel or suppress the interference.
Hormis teaches implementing an interference cancellation mechanism to cancel or suppress the interference (col. 25, rows 13-18, processing component 920 may cancel interference caused by either the receiving or the transmitting using a digital baseband processing component of the UE).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teaching of Hormis to the teaching of Rudolf and Yang and Gutman. The motivation for such an addition would be to increase communication reliability in a wireless communications system (Hormis, col. 23, rows 55-59).
Regarding of claim 7,
Rudolf and Yang and Gutman and Hormis teaches the method of claim 6,
Rudolf and Yang and Gutman do not explicitly teach wherein the interference cancellation mechanism is based on the uplink data signals transmitted by the UE on the second set of frequency resources.
Hormis further teaches wherein the interference cancellation mechanism is based on the uplink data signals transmitted by the UE on the second set of frequency resources (col. 25, rows 13-18, processing component 920 may cancel interference caused by either the receiving or the transmitting using a digital baseband processing component of the UE).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teaching of Hormis to the teaching of Rudolf and Yang and Gutman. The motivation for such an addition would be to increase communication reliability in a wireless communications system (Hormis, col. 23, rows 55-59).
Regarding to claim 13,
Rudolf and Yang and Gutman teaches the method of claim 12
Rudolf and Yang do not explicitly teach receiving the interference forwarded by the frequency-translation repeater on the second set of frequency resources
Gutman further teaches receiving the interference forwarded by the frequency-translation repeater on the second set of frequency resources (abstract, the base station may receive an interference report from a second wireless node, indicating that the first wireless node caused interference at the second wireless node... the beam tapering configuration may be associated with less interference when transmitting the beamformed message). (column 40 , row20-46 )receiving, from a second wireless node, an interference measurement report including an indication of interference caused by the first wireless node, the second wireless node ... the first wireless node includes a UE, an IAB node, a repeater node, a second base station, or any combination thereof.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teaching of Gutman to the teaching of Rudolf in view of Yang. The motivation for such an addition would be to support improvements to interference (col. 16, rows 35-40, Gutman)
Rudolf and Yang and Gutman do not explicitly teach implementing an interference cancellation mechanism for canceling or suppressing the received interference.
Hormis teaches implementing an interference cancellation mechanism for canceling or suppressing the received interference (col. 25, rows 13-18, processing component 920 may cancel interference caused by either the receiving or the transmitting using a digital baseband processing component of the UE).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teaching of Hormis to the teaching of Rudolf and Yang and Gutman. The motivation for such an addition would be to increase communication reliability in a wireless communications system (Hormis, col. 23, rows 55-59).
Claim 14 “method” is rejected under the same reasoning as claim 7 “method”, where Rudolf teaches both device and method (abstract).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rudolf and Yang and further in view of Pezeshki (US 20220053347 A1) hereinafter Pezeshki.
Regarding to claim 10,
Rudolf and Yang teaches the method of claim 9,
Rudolf and Yang do not explicitly teach transmitting in the specific slot on the first set of frequency resources, an acknowledgement (ACK) or negative-acknowledgement (NACK) of reception of downlink data signals in a slot prior to the specific slot on the second set of frequency resources.
Pezeshki teaches transmitting in the specific slot on the first set of frequency resources, an acknowledgement (ACK) or negative-acknowledgement (NACK) of reception of downlink data signals in a slot prior to the specific slot on the second set of frequency resources ([0054] the UE may operate in a full-duplex mode, in which the UE may transmit the predicted NACK to the second TRP while the UE is still receiving a portion of the downlink data message from the first TRP. Based on receiving the predicted NACK at the second TRP, the network may determine to begin preparing a retransmission of the downlink data message while the first TRP is still transmitting a portion of the downlink data message; and [0109] Base station 105-a may receive a predicted NACK message 215 prior to a scheduled HARQ feedback opportunity (e.g., during the downlink slot in which the downlink data message 220 was transmitted), for example, according to an indication received in the capability message transmitted by UE 115-a or the configuration message transmitted by base station 105-a).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teaching of Pezeshki to the teaching of Rudolf and Yang . The motivation for such an addition would be to improving the efficiency and reducing the latency associated with the communications ([0053] Pezeshki).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 VAN T NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-6178. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 AM - 5:00 PM (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, Ayman A Abaza can be reached at (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.
/V.T.N./Examiner, Art Unit 2465 /AYMAN A ABAZA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2465
Prosecution Insights