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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 9/29/26 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but are believed to be moot in view of the new grounds of rejection set forth below. Please see rejections below.
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.
Claim(s) 9,1,17,24,2-4,6-7,10-12,14-15,18-20,22-23,25-27,29-30, 31-34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication No. 2020/0178278 A1 to Zhao et al., in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2015/0043438 A1 to Fwu et al.
AS to claim 9, Zhao discloses A user equipment (UE) for wireless communication, comprising: a memory; and one or more processors operatively coupled to the memory, the memory and the one or more processors configured to (Fig. 4, paragraphs 102-104, disclosing “terminal device” that performs the disclosed methods, teaching “UE” and recited components, to a PHOSITA):
determine that data is buffered for transmission via a first logical channel that does not have a valid scheduling request configuration (Figs. 4, 7 [e.g., S730] and 8 [e.g., S840], paragraphs 5-17, 102-117, 132-148, disclosing the process being initiated/performed “when the terminal device has the uplink data transmission requirement on the first logical channel”, where the “first logical channel does not have the scheduling request configuration”, teaching this limitation); and
transmit, via a scheduling request resource of a second logical channel that has a valid scheduling request configuration, a scheduling request for resources on the first logical channel to transmit the data buffered for transmission via the first logical channel (Figs. 4, 7 [e.g., S730] and 8 [e.g., S840], paragraphs 5-17, 102-117, 132-148, see, in particular, paragraphs 105-107, 136-138 [transmitting a scheduling request using the second channel’s SR configuration/resources] and 112 [the step of transmitting the buffered data using the scheduling request response]; further see, in particular, paragraphs 112-116: “the terminal device receives the uplink resource (for example a first uplink resource) allocated by the network device to the terminal device”, where “the first uplink resource includes uplink resources with two formats, [and] the first logical channel may be used to transmit data by using a resource with a first format in the two formats, or may be used to transmit data by using a resource with a second format in the two formats”, teaching that the “first uplink resource” allocated as a result of the SR transmitted on the second logical channel, may be used by and is associated with the “first logical channel” in transmitting the data on that “first logical channel”, thus teaching the recited “resources on the first logical channel”; further see paragraph 112-113, explicitly disclosing and teaching that the “first uplink resource” allocated “based on the first scheduling request configuration of the second logical channel” can be used to transmit data on the first logical channel, where “the logical channel corresponding to the first uplink resource means all logical channels that can use the first uplink resource to transmit data and that correspond to the terminal device”, such “logical channels” thus clearly including the first logical channel, thus teaching the recited “resources on the first logical channel”, teaching this limitation); and
receive a resource grant that allocates resources for transmission of the data buffered for transmission via the first logical channel (Figs. 4, 7 [e.g., S730] and 8 [e.g., S840], paragraphs 5-17, 102-117, 132-148, see discussion above, in particular, see paragraphs 112: “the terminal device receives the uplink resource … allocated by the network device to the terminal device” and paragraph 112-113, explicitly disclosing and teaching that the “first uplink resource” [teaching the recited “receive a resource grant”] allocated “based on the first scheduling request configuration of the second logical channel” can be used to transmit data on the first logical channel, where “the logical channel corresponding to the first uplink resource means all logical channels that can use the first uplink resource to transmit data and that correspond to the terminal device”, such “logical channels” thus clearly including the first logical channel, thus teaching that the “first uplink resource [the recited “resource grant”]” can be used “for transmission of the data buffered for transmission via the first logical channel”, teaching this limitation;
see, generally, paragraphs 75-88, disclosing that a scheduling request state such as a “first scheduling request (SR) state” means that “a scheduling request is triggered by the first logical channel and is not canceled”, and that “when the data of the first logical channel … is sent to the network device, the terminal device cancels the first SR state …”, teaching to a PHOSITA that this SR state merely indicates that a “state” exists where an SR is expected to be sent to request resources for transmitting data on the first logical channel, and this “state” is canceled when that data on the first logical channel is transmitted, meaning that the cancelation of the SR state does not teach merely just the cancelation of such SR state, it also indicates, as in the paragraphs cited above, that transmission of the first logical channel’s data is complete);
transmission of data via the first logical channel (see discussion and citations above, teaching “the data buffered for transmission via the first logical channel”).
Zhao does not appear to explicitly disclose “transmitting, via the first logical channel and in accordance with the resource grant, the data.”
Fwu discloses transmitting, in accordance with the resource grant, the data (paragraphs 30-33, disclosing the “PUCCH may be used by a UE to send an SR to request resource allocation [i.e., the recited “resource grant”] in the uplink (UL) so the UE can send data”, teaching this limitation).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art that Zhao’s teaching of “transmission via the first logical channel” and Fwu’s teaching above may be combined to reject “transmitting, via the first logical channel and in accordance with the resource grant, the data”, since a PHOSITA would have found it obvious to apply/combine Fwu’s teaching of transmitting data in accordance with the resource grant to/with Zhao’s teaching of transmitting data via the first logical channel, to reject this claim. The cited references are directed to wireless communication infrastructures and methods. The suggestion/motivation would have been to improve resource allocation and signaling therefor in wireless communication systems. (Fwu, paragraphs 1-33; Zhao, paragraphs 1-26; Huawei, Abstract, paragraphs 1-8). Furthermore, note that with regard to the claimed invention, especially the limitation above, all of the claimed elements have been shown to be known in the cited art, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art as of and before the effective filing date.
AS to claims 1,17,24 , see rejection for claim 9.
AS to claim 2, Zhao and Fwu teach the method as in the parent claim 1.
Zhao further discloses further comprising: determining, after determining that the data is buffered for transmission via the first logical channel that does not have a valid scheduling request configuration, to not initiate a random access channel procedure based at least in part on a determination that the second logical channel has a valid scheduling request configuration. (Figs. 4, 7 and 8, paragraphs 5-17, 102-117, 132-148, see, in particular, paragraphs 147 [S840,S850] and 117,139,7, where the disclosed methods “reduce an unnecessary random access request” if the Sr configuration of the another/second logical channel is satisfactory).
AS to claim 3, Zhao and Fwu teach the method as in the parent claim 1.
Zhao further discloses further comprising:selecting the second logical channel from one or more logical channels that have valid scheduling request configurations based at least in part on a priority-based selection operation. (Figs. 4, 7 and 8, paragraphs 5-17, 102-117, 132-148, see, in particular, paragraphs 107: second/another logical channel selected based on “priority”).
AS to claim 4, Zhao and Fwu teach the method as in the parent claim 1.
Zhao further discloses further comprising:selecting the second logical channel from one or more logical channels that have valid scheduling request configurations based at least in part on a random selection operation. (Figs. 4, 7 and 8, paragraphs 5-17, 102-117, 132-148, see, in particular, paragraphs 107: “the second logical channel is ANY logical channel with a same priority as the first logical channel”, thus teaching to a PHOSITA that any same-priority logical channel may be randomly selected).
AS to claim 6, Zhao and Fwu teach the method as in the parent claim 1.
Zhao further discloses further comprising:transmitting, using the resources allocated by the resource grant, the data via the first logical channel. (Figs. 4, 7 and 8, paragraphs 5-17, 102-117, 132-148, see, in particular, paragraphs 112-116: “the terminal device receives the uplink resource (for example a first uplink resource) allocated by the network device to the terminal device”, where “the first uplink resource includes uplink resources with two formats, [and] the first logical channel may be used to transmit data by using a resource with a first format in the two formats, or may be used to transmit data by using a resource with a second format in the two formats”, teaching that the “first uplink resource” allocated as a result of the SR transmitted on the second logical channel, may be used by and is associated with the “first logical channel” in transmitting the data on that “first logical channel”, thus teaching this limitation; further see paragraph 112-113, explicitly disclosing and teaching that the “first uplink resource” allocated “based on the first scheduling request configuration of the second logical channel” can be used to transmit data on the first logical channel, where “the logical channel corresponding to the first uplink resource means all logical channels that can use the first uplink resource to transmit data and that correspond to the terminal device”, such “logical channels” thus clearly including the first logical channel, thus teaching this limitation).
AS to claim 7, Zhao and Fwu teach the method as in the parent claim 1.
Zhao further discloses further comprising:determining that additional data is buffered for transmission via the second logical channel; and transmitting at least a portion of one or more of the data or the additional data using the resources allocated by the resource grant. (Figs. 4, 7 and 8, paragraphs 5-17, 102-117, 132-148, see, in particular, paragraphs 112-116: “the terminal device receives the uplink resource (for example a first uplink resource) allocated by the network device to the terminal device”, where “the first uplink resource includes uplink resources with two formats, [and] the first logical channel may be used to transmit data by using a resource with a first format in the two formats, or may be used to transmit data by using a resource with a second format in the two formats”, and where “the second logical channel may be used to transmit data only by using resource with the second format in the two formats”, that teaching buffering and transmitting data through the second logical channel, and generally teaching “transmitting at least a portion of one or more of the data or the additional data using the resources allocated by the resource grant”, to a phosita).
AS to claims 10-12,14-15 , see rejection for claim 2-4,6-7.
AS to claims 18-20,22-23 , see rejection for claim 2-4,6-7.
AS to claims 25-27,29-30, see rejection for claim 2-4,6-7.
As to claim 31, Zhao and Fwu teach the method as in parent claim 1
Zhao does not appear to explicitly disclose wherein the scheduling request for the resources comprises a request for PUSCH resources.
Fwu discloses wherein the scheduling request for the resources comprises a request for PUSCH resources. (paragraphs 32-33: “the SR uses simple On-Off signaling … to request a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) resource …”)
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art that Zhao’s teachings may be combinable with Fwu’s teachings to reject this claim, since it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA that the SR transmitted in Zhao may be further characterized by Fwu’s SR teachings discussed above. The cited references are directed to wireless communication infrastructures and methods. The suggestion/motivation would have been to improve resource allocation and signaling therefor in wireless communication systems. (Fwu, paragraphs 1-33; Zhao, paragraphs 1-26; Huawei, Abstract, paragraphs 1-8). Furthermore, note that with regard to the claimed invention, especially the limitation above, all of the claimed elements have been shown to be known in the cited art, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art as of and before the effective filing date.
As to claim 32, Zhao and Fwu teach the method as in parent claim 1
Zhao discloses wherein determining that the data is buffered for transmission via the first logical channel that does not have the valid scheduling request configuration comprises: determining that the logical channel does not have valid resources for the scheduling request (Figs. 4, 7 [e.g., S730] and 8 [e.g., S840], paragraphs 5-17, 102-117, 132-148, disclosing the process being initiated/performed “when the terminal device has the uplink data transmission requirement on the first logical channel”, where the “first logical channel does not have the scheduling request configuration”, teaching this limitation)
Zhao does not appear to explicitly disclose having valid physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) resources for the scheduling request.
Fwu discloses having valid physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) resources for the scheduling request (paragraph 30: “the PUCCH may be used by a UE to send an SR to request resource allocation …”)
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art that Zhao’s teaching of “wherein determining that the data is buffered for transmission via the first logical channel that does not have the valid scheduling request configuration comprises: determining that the logical channel does not have valid resources for the scheduling request” may be combinable with Fwu’s teaching of “having valid physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) resources for the scheduling request” to reject “wherein determining that the data is buffered for transmission via the first logical channel that does not have the valid scheduling request configuration comprises: determining that the logical channel does not have valid physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) resources for the scheduling request” since both teachings pertain to conditions for determining insufficiencies in resource allocation, and it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA that the insufficiency condition disclosed in Zhao may be further characterized by lacking Fwu’s condition of “having valid physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) resources for the scheduling request” discussed above. The cited references are directed to wireless communication infrastructures and methods. The suggestion/motivation would have been to improve resource allocation and signaling therefor in wireless communication systems. (Fwu, paragraphs 1-33; Zhao, paragraphs 1-26; Huawei, Abstract, paragraphs 1-8). Furthermore, note that with regard to the claimed invention, especially the limitation above, all of the claimed elements have been shown to be known in the cited art, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art as of and before the effective filing date.
As to claims 33,34, see rejections for claims 31,32, in the same order.
Claim(s) 8 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication No. 2020/0178278 A1 to Zhao et al., in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2015/0043438 A1 to Fwu et al., in view of EP 3,668,238 A1 to Huawei (provided by Applicant’s IDS, hereinafter “Huawei”)
As to claim 8, Zhao and Fwu teach the method as in parent claim 1
Zhao discloses wherein transmitting the scheduling request comprises: transmitting the scheduling request via a channel associated with the valid scheduling request configuration of the second logical channel. (Figs. 4, 7 [e.g., S730] and 8 [e.g., S840], paragraphs 5-17, 102-117, 132-148, see, in particular, paragraphs 105-107, 136-138 [transmitting a scheduling request using the second channel’s SR configuration/resources] and 112 [the step of transmitting the buffered data using the scheduling request response])
Zhao does not appear to explicitly disclose transmitting the scheduling request via a physical uplink control channel.
Huawei discloses transmitting the scheduling request via a physical uplink control channel. (Abstract: “sending the first SR to an access network device by the first uplink control channel resource”)
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art that Zhao’s teachings may be combinable with Huawei’s teachings to reject this claim, i.e., “wherein transmitting the scheduling request comprises:transmitting the scheduling request via a physical uplink control channel associated with the valid scheduling request configuration of the second logical channel”, since the SR transmitted in Zhao may further be transmitted through the PUCCH, as the SR taught in Huawei is likewise transmitted through a pucch. The cited references are directed to wireless communication infrastructures and methods. The suggestion/motivation would have been to improve resource allocation and signaling therefor in wireless communication systems. (Zhao, paragraphs 1-26; Huawei, Abstract, paragraphs 1-8). Furthermore, note that with regard to the claimed invention, especially the limitation above, all of the claimed elements have been shown to be known in the cited art, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art as of and before the effective filing date.
AS to claim 16 , see rejection for claim 8.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHI TANG P CHENG whose telephone number is (571)272-9021. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9:30AM - 6PM.
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, Asad M Nawaz can be reached at (571)272-3988. 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.
/CHI TANG P CHENG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2463
Prosecution Insights