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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. JP2021-064169, filed on 04/05/2021.
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The listing of references in the PCT international search report is not considered to be an information disclosure statement (IDS) complying with 37 CFR 1.98. 37 CFR 1.98(a)(2) requires a legible copy of: (1) each foreign patent; (2) each publication or that portion which caused it to be listed; (3) for each cited pending U.S. application, the application specification including claims, and any drawing of the application, or that portion of the application which caused it to be listed including any claims directed to that portion, unless the cited pending U.S. application is stored in the Image File Wrapper (IFW) system; and (4) all other information, or that portion which caused it to be listed. In addition, each IDS must include a list of all patents, publications, applications, or other information submitted for consideration by the Office (see 37 CFR 1.98(a)(1) and (b)), and MPEP § 609.04(a), subsection I. states, “the list ... must be submitted on a separate paper.”
Therefore, the references cited in the international search report a copy of which was filed with the present application on 09/26/2023 have not been considered. Applicant is advised that the date of submission of any item of information in the international search report will be the date of submission of the IDS for purposes of determining compliance with the requirements for the IDS with 37 CFR 1.97, including all timing statement requirements of 37 CFR 1.97(e). See MPEP § 609.05(a).
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description:
Regarding Fig. 15, it should show “6 instances indicated by 15002 to 15007 are followed by the instance 15001” as stated in [¶0357] of the Specification. However, indications 15002-15007 are missing in Fig. 15.
Regarding Fig. 16, it should show “the instance 16001 doesn't overlap with 9001” and “the instance 16002 overlaps with 9003” as stated in [¶0377] of the Specification, as well as “instance 16001, 16003 and 16004 as the first Krep instances” as stated in [¶0387] of the Specification. However, indications 16001-16004 are missing in Fig. 16.
Regarding Fig. 17, it should show that “5 instances indicated by 17002 to 17006 are followed by the instance 17001” as stated in [¶0394] of the Specification, as well as “17007 indicates an instance of another PUSCH” as stated in [¶0397] of the Specification. However, indications 17004-7 are missing in Fig. 17.
Regarding Fig. 18, it should show “2 instances indicated by 18002 and 18003 are followed by the instance 18001” as stated in [¶0402] of the Specification. However, Fig. 18 shows 18002 and 18003 after instance 18001. In addition, the “instance “18004 is a first instance associated with another PUSCH within the period 17011” as stated in [¶0403] of the Specification has no representation in Fig. 18.
The drawings are also objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description:
Regarding Fig. 15, it shows references 15010, 15011, 15020 and 15021 but there is no explanation of these references in the Specification.
Regarding Fig. 16, it shows references 15010, 15011 and 16020 but there is no explanation of these references in the Specification.
Regarding Fig. 17, it shows references 17012, 17020 and 17021 but there is no explanation of these references in the Specification.
Regarding Fig. 18, it shows references 18010-18012 but there is no explanation of these references in the Specification.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 (a)
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
Claim1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding Claim 1, the claim language requires a “RRC parameter” indicating how to determine the availability of multiple slots for PUSCH (re)transmissions. In order to satisfy the written description requirement, set forth in 35 U.S.C. 112(a), the specification must describe the claimed invention in sufficient detail such that one skilled in the art can reasonably conclude that the inventor had possession of the claimed invention at the time of filing. For instance, the specification must provide a sufficient description of an invention, not an indication of a result that one might achieve. Information that is well known in the art need not be described in detail in the specification. However, sufficient information must be provided to show that the inventor had possession of the invention as claimed. See MPEP § 2163, subsection II(A)(2); see also Reiffin v.Microsoft Corp., 214 F.3d 1342, 1345 (Fed. Cir. 2000) (‘‘The purpose of [the written description requirement] is to ensure that the scope of the right to exclude, as set forth in the claims, does not overreach the scope of the inventor’s contribution to the field of art as described in the patent specification”).
Here, the Specification discloses a “slot-counting type configuration” as the alleged RRC parameter but remains vague as to whether a “slot-counting type configuration” is necessary. For example, the Specification discloses a UE capable of and/or configured with “a certain coverage enhancement feature(s) (e.g. available slot based PUSCH repetition counting),” i.e., not requiring an additional “slot-counting type configuration” – See [¶0236] (stating: “If the UE is not capable of a certain coverage enhancement feature(s) (e.g. available slot based PUSCH repetition counting) or if the UE is not provided with a certain coverage enhancement configuration(s) (e.g. available slot based PUSCH repetition counting), the following (i.e. the number of repetitions counted based on contiguous (or continuous, or consecutive) slots) may be applied” or “Alternatively or additionally, if the UE is capable of a certain coverage enhancement feature(s) and if the UE is provided with a slot-counting type configuration (the RRC configuration or RRC parameter for indicating whether the number of repetitions are counted based on contiguous (or continuous) slots or based on available slots) which indicates the PUSCH repetition to be counted based on contiguous slots, the [same] following may be applied” whereby “the following may be applied” means the “[f]or both Type 1 and Type 2 PUSCH transmissions with a configured grant, when K > 1, the UE may repeat the TB across the K consecutive slots applying the same symbol allocation in each slot, except if the UE is provided with higher layer parameters cg-nrofSlots and cgnrofPUSCH-InSlot, in which case the UE may repeat the TB in the repK earliest consecutive transmission occasion candidates within the same configuration” – See [¶0236] (reciting an entire paragraph from § 6.1.2.3.1, 3GPP TS 38.214:124, infra, which states that in case of slot based Type A PUCH repetitions “[f]or both Type 1 and Type 2 PUSCH transmissions with a configured grant, when K > 1, the UE shall repeat the TB across the K consecutive slots applying the same symbol allocation in each slot, except if the UE is provided with higher layer parameters cg-nrofSlots and cg-nrofPUSCH-InSlot, in which case the UE repeats the TB in the repK earliest consecutive transmission occasion candidates within the same configuration. A Type 1 or Type 2 PUSCH transmission with a configured grant in a slot is omitted according to the conditions in Clause 9, Clause 11.1 and Clause 11.2A of [6, TS38.213]” whereby for Type 1 configured grant the RRC IEConfiguredGrantConfig is used to configure uplink transmission without dynamic grant according to two possible schemes, A and B, wherein the field/parameter pusch-RepTypeIndicator with “value pusch-RepTypeA enables the 'PUSCH repetition type A' and the value pusch-RepTypeB enables the 'PUSCH repetition type B' (see TS 38.214 [19], clause 6.1.2.3). The value pusch-RepTypeB is not configured simultaneously with cg-nrofPUSCH-InSlot-r16 and cg-nrofSlots-r16” – See 3GPP TS 38.331:386-92; and for Type 2 grant, i.e., resource allocation for PUSCH is provided by DCI in PDDCH, the pusch-RepTypeIndicatorDCI-0-1/2 in PUSCH-TimeDomainResourceAllocationList IE may be set to value pusch-RepTypeA – See 3GPP 38.331:546-47). Therefore, the Specification discloses in fact a UE with slot based PUSCH repetitions Type A, configured by RRC (without stating that this is the case) thus leaving the one of ordinary skills in the art wondering ‘‘whether the specification shows possession by the inventor of how [the claimed function] is achieved.” – See Vasudevan Software, Inc. v. MicroStrategy, Inc., 782 F.3d 671, 683 (Fed. Cir. 2015). To add to the confusion, the Specification uses in fact PUSCH repetition Type A as application for a “slot-counting type configuration” in various slot counting procedures, infra, and the claimed first and second length of time to PUSCH cancellation based on
T
p
r
o
c
,
2
when both the cancelling procedures and the T_(proc,2) are known in the art (“In other words, [i]f the number of repetitions for PUSCH repetition type A is counted based on contiguous slots, the processing time requirement of T_(proc,2) may be applied. If the number of repetitions for PUSCH repetition type A is counted based on available slots, the longer processing time requirement may be applied” – See [¶0258]; repeated at [¶0273],[¶0277], and [¶0284], i.e., for each of the available slots procedure, infra– See, e.g., § 9, 3GPP TS 38.213:51 stating “the UE expects that the transmission of the first PUCCH or the first PUSCH, respectively, would not start before
T
p
r
o
c
,
2
+
d
1
after a last symbol of the corresponding PDCCH reception” whereby “
T
p
r
o
c
,
2
is the PUSCH preparation time for a corresponding UE processing capability assuming
d
2,1
=
0
[6, TS 38.214], based on
μ
and
N
2
as subsequently defined in this Clause, and
d
1
is determined by a reported UE capability” and whereby
T
p
r
o
c
,
2
formula depending on UE processing capability 1 and 2 is disclosed in § 6.4, 3GPP TS 38.214:150-151, and reproduced verbatim at [¶0264], hence a minimum and a maximum PUSCH preparation time is readily available in 3GPP specifications).
Even when there could be a newly defined RRC parameter “slot-counting type configuration,” the Specification fails to explain how that RRC parameter indicates that the multiple slots are determined according to slots which are available for transmission(s) of the PUSCH. That information is rather indicated by Type A/B PUSCH repetitions and the procedures for knocking off possible repetitions through methods known in the art before the effective filing date of the present application. The Specification discloses that: (1) “If a PUSCH (or a repetition of a PUSCH) in a slot is determined to be transmitted, the slot may be considered as available for the PUSCH transmission. If a PUSCH ( or a repetition of a PUSCH) in a slot is determined to be cancelled or not to be transmitted, the slot may be considered as not available for the PUSCH transmission” – See, e.g., [¶0253];[¶0263]; [¶0279];[¶0287]; and that (2) “[t]he K available slots may be determined according to the conditions at least and/or at most in, PUSCH-priority based procedure, slot configuration based procedure, slot format based procedure and cancellation indication based procedure. For example, a slot may be determined as available if the slot is available according to all the conditions defined in those procedures, and/or the slot may be determined as not available if the slot is not available according to at least one of the conditions defined in those procedures” – See [¶0238]. Because the procedure1 that determines the availability of a slot for transmission is performed post the UE configuration with an RRC parameter, and that is because in each procedure the UE must monitor or detect an extra configuration message – See, e.g. [¶0258];[¶0277];[¶0284], the Specification fails to show how the claimed RRC parameter, acquired by the UE prior to performing one of the disclosed procedures, indicates that the multiple slots are determined according to slots which are available for transmission(s) of the PUSCH, as claimed. In addition, after each procedure recitation, the same conclusion is drawn in the Specification: “the above-described processing time requirement that ‘UE does not expect to cancel the transmission of the PUSCH in the set of symbols if the first symbol in the set occurs within T_(proc,2) relative to a last symbol of a CORESET where the UE [detects a procedure dependent message], otherwise UE cancels the PUSCH transmission’ may be applied” but the cancelling time may be relaxed on “the PUSCH in the set of symbols if the first symbol in the set occurs within T (proc,2)+d x relative to a last symbol of a CORESET where the UE [detects a procedure dependent message]” – See [¶0258]; [¶0277];[¶0284]). Notwithstanding that the
T
p
r
o
c
,
2
formula depending on UE processing capability 1 and 2 disclosed in § 6.4, 3GPP TS 38.214:150-151 already gives a ceiling and a floor for the symbol based PUSCH preparation time and the Specification does not disclose a formula for calculating the positive d_x value, one of ordinary skills in the art would understand the Specification to disclose a relationship between the possible RRC parameter “slot-counting type configuration” and the length of the PUSCH cancellation time, rather than exemplifying how, e.g., by name, type or message, the possible RRC parameter “slot-counting type configuration” indicates that the multiple slots are determined according to slots which are available for transmission(s) of the PUSCH, as claimed – See [¶0258]; [¶0277];[¶0284] (stating that “If the slot-counting type configuration indicates that the number of repetitions to be counted based on contiguous slots, the above-described processing time requirement that ‘UE does not expect to cancel the transmission of the PUSCH in the set of symbols if the first symbol in the set occurs within T (proc,2) relative to a last symbol of a CORESET where the UE [detects a procedure dependent message]’” and that “If the slot-counting type configuration indicates that the number of repetitions to be counted based on available slots, the processing time requirement may be relaxed”).
In sum, Claim 1 and Claims 2-3 for the same reasons as above, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the written description requirement.
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 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Bagheri et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2023/0189255 (hereinafter Bagheri2).
Regarding Claim 1, a user equipment (UE) (“apparatus and method of cancelling a PUSCH transmission” – See [¶0009]) comprising:
high-layer processing circuitry configured to acquire a RRC parameter, and transmission circuitry configured to transmit a PUSCH in multiple slots (the “UE with PUSCH transmission corresponding to a configured grant including multiple repetitions of a transport block” – See [¶0002] and Fig.4 is configured by RRC; whereby the multiple slots are determined as “resource allocation for uplink transmission with configured grant, according to [3GPP TS] 38.214, when PUSCH resource allocation is semi-statically configured by higher layer parameter configuredGrantConfig . . . , and the PUSCH transmission corresponding to a configured grant” – See [¶0035]; furthermore, “[f]or PUSCH transmissions with a Type 1 or Type 2 configured grant, the number of (nominal) repetitions K to be applied to the transmitted transport block is provided by the indexed row in the time domain resource allocation table if numberOfRepetitions is present in the table. Otherwise, K is provided by the higher layer configured parameters repK” – See [¶0038], wherein repK is determined “if the UE is provided with higher layer parameters cg-nrofSlots-r16 and cg-nrofPUSCH-InSlot-r16, in which case the UE repeats the TB in the repK earliest consecutive transmission occasion candidates within the same configuration,”– See [¶0047]; and wherein for Type 1 PUSCH transmissions, “the PUSCH repetition type,” is set as follows: “if the higher layer parameter PUSCHRepTypelndicator- ForTypeIConfiguredgrant is configured and set to 'pusch-RepTypeB', PUSCH repetition type B is applied; otherwise, PUSCH repetition type A is applied” – See [¶0035], while “[f]or Type 2 PUSCH transmissions with a configured grant: the resource allocation follows the higher layer configuration according to [TS 38.321], and UL grant received on the DCI . . . as defined in Clause 6.1.2.1” of 3GPP TS 38.214: 112-116 – See [¶0037], whereby § 6.1.2.1, 3GPP TS 38.214:113 provides that “[f]or PUSCH repetition Type A, the starting symbol S relative to the start of the slot [always start symbol in a slot], and the number of consecutive symbols L counting from the symbol S allocated for the PUSCH are determined from the start and length indicator SLIV of the indexed row” in the allocation table “[f]or PUSCH repetition Type B, the starting symbol S relative to the start of the slot, and the number of consecutive symbols L counting from the symbol S allocated for the PUSCH are provided by startSymbol and length of the indexed row of the resource allocation table” and “[t]he UE shall consider the S and L combinations defined in table 6.1.2.1-1 as valid PUSCH allocations” (emphasis added); therefore, initially, a UE configured to acquire RCC parameters related to PUSCH transmissions may be configured with either configured grant Type 1 or Type 2 to transmit in multiple slots using either repetition Type A, slot level, or Type B, symbol level, and the UE would have as many as numberOfRepetitions or repK valid slots nominally configured, unless a RRC parameter indicates if/how transmission of a PUSCH repetition in some of these slots is to be cancelled, as explained, infra) wherein
the RRC parameter indicates that the multiple slots are determined according to slots which are available for transmission(s) of the PUSCH3 (“[f]or PUSCH repetition type A, the selection of the time domain resource allocation table follows the rules for DCI format 0_0 on UE specific search space, as defined in Clause 6.1.2.1.1” of 3GPP TS 38.314 – See [¶0035], whereby the same § 6.1.2.1, 3GPP TS 38.314:114 provides that “[f]or PUSCH repetition Type A, a PUSCH transmission in a slot of a multi-slot PUSCH transmission is omitted according to the conditions in Clause 9, Clause 11.1 and Clause 11.2A of [6, TS38.213],”; for example, according to § 9, 3GPP TS 213:50-51, “[a] PUSCH or a PUCCH transmission, including repetitions if any, can be of priority index 0 or of priority index 1” and “a UE determines a priority index from phy-PriorityIndex, if provided,” as a RRC parameter/field in ConfiguredGrantConfig IE, “[i]ndicat[ing] the PHY priority of CG PUSCH at least for PHY-layer collision handling. Value p0 indicates low priority and value p1 indicates high priority” – See 3GPP TS 38.331:390; then, “[a]ccording to 38.214, if a UE reports the capability of intra-UE prioritization, and if a PUSCH corresponding to a configured grant and a PUSCH scheduled by a PDCCH on a serving cell are partially or fully overlapping in time, if the PUSCH corresponding to the configured grant has priority in configuredGrantConfig set to 1 (i.e., high priority), and the PUSCH scheduled by the PDCCH is indicated as low priority by having the priority indicator field in the scheduling DCI set to 0 or by not having the priority indicator field present in the scheduling DCI, the UE is expected to transmit the PUSCH corresponding to the configured grant, and cancel the PUSCH transmission scheduled by the PDCCH at latest starting at the first symbol of the PUSCH corresponding to the configured grant. Otherwise, the UE shall cancel the PUSCH transmission corresponding to the configured grant” – See [¶0025]; therefore, for Type A repetitions with configured grant type 1, the RRC parameter is the priority index phy-PriorityIndex; in addition, when “[f]or [direct] cancellation indication, according to 38.213, if a UE is provided Uplink:Cancellation, the UE is provided, in one or more serving cells, a search space set for monitoring the first PDCCH candidate . . . for detection of a DCI format 2_ 4 [TS 38.212] with a CI-RNTI provided by ci-RNTI as described in Subclause 10.1” – See [¶0026] and the “UE that detects a DCI format 2_ 4 for a serving cell cancels a PUSCH transmission or a repetition of a PUSCH transmission [TS 38.214] if the PUSCH transmission is with repetitions” – See [¶0031]; see also § 11.2A, 3GPP TS 38.213:138; therefore the RRC parameter UplinkCancellation applies in case of direct cancellation indication by DCI format 2_4),
if the RRC parameter is not provided, processing time for canceling a transmission of the PUSCH is required to be shorter than or equal to a first length (when none of the RRC parameters considered, supra, are provided, “[f]or downlink feedback indication [DFI], according to TS 38.214, if a UE receives an ACK for a given HARQ process in CG-DFI in a PDCCH ending in symbol i to terminate a transport block repetition in a PUSCH transmission with a configured grant on a given serving cell with the same HARQ process after symbol i, the UE is expected to terminate the repetition of the transport block in a PUSCH transmission starting from a symbol j if the gap between the end of PDCCH of symbol i and the start of the PUSCH transmission in symbol j is equal to or more than N2 symbols” and “[t]he value N2 in symbols is determined according to the UE processing capability defined in Clause 6.4 of 38.214, and N2 and the symbol duration are based on the minimum of the subcarrier spacing corresponding to the PUSCH and the subcarrier spacing of the PDCCH indicating CG-DFI” – See [¶0014], whereby “N2 is based on µ of Table 6.4-1 and Table 6.4-2 for UE processing capability 1 and 2 respectively, where µ corresponds to the one of (µDL, µUL) resulting with the largest Tproc,2, where the µDL corresponds to the subcarrier spacing of the downlink with which the PDCCH carrying the DCI scheduling the PUSCH was transmitted and µUL corresponds to the subcarrier spacing of the uplink channel with which the PUSCH is to be transmitted, and κ is defined in clause 4.1 of [4, TS 38.211],” – See [¶0034] and Tables 6.4-1,2; e.g., Table 6.4-1 shows N2 , i.e., the cancellation time, at a maximum of 36 symbols for 120KHz spacing, must be shorter than or equal to this first length when none of the considered RRC parameter is provided; see also § 6.4, 3GPP TS 38.214:150-151)
if the RRC parameter is provided, the processing time for canceling a transmission of the PUSCH is required to be shorter than or equal to a second length (for example, when PUSCH priority indicator phy-PriorityIndex is provided as explained, supra, “[a]ccording to 38.214, if a UE reports the capability of intra-UE prioritization, and if a PUSCH corresponding to a configured grant and a PUSCH scheduled by a PDCCH on a serving cell are partially or fully overlapping in time, if the PUSCH corresponding to the configured grant has priority in configuredGrantConfig set to 1 (i.e., high priority), and the PUSCH scheduled by the PDCCH is indicated as low priority by having the priority indicator field in the scheduling DCI set to 0 or by not having the priority indicator field present in the scheduling DCI, the UE is expected to transmit the PUSCH corresponding to the configured grant, and cancel the PUSCH transmission scheduled by the PDCCH at latest starting at the first symbol of the PUSCH corresponding to the configured grant. Otherwise, the UE shall cancel the PUSCH transmission corresponding to the configured grant at latest starting M symbols after the end of the last symbol of the PDCCH carrying the DCI scheduling the PUSCH, and transmit the PUSCH scheduled by the PDCCH, where M=Tproc,2+d1, where Tproc,2 is given by clause 6.4 for the corresponding PUSCH timing capability assuming d2,1 =0 and d1 is determined by the reported UE capability” – See [¶0025], wherein § 6.4 of 3GPP TS 38.214:150 defines Tproc,2 as:
PNG
media_image1.png
25
349
media_image1.png
Greyscale
, wherein d2 is different from zero because “If a PUSCH of a larger priority index would overlap with PUCCH of a smaller priority index, d2 for the PUSCH of a larger priority is set as reported by the UE; otherwise d2 = 0,” and, based on UE processing capability either 1 or 2, d1 is determined as the number of overlapping symbols between the two UL transmissions if the PUSCH is less than 7 symbols and 0 otherwise – See § 5.3, 3GPP 38.213:105, therefore, in case of PriorityIndex parameter provided, the number M of symbols denoting the cancellation time for the configured PUSCH retransmission is larger than the N2 value calculated, supra, for PUSCH cancellation time without priority collision because M= Tproc,2+d1 and Tproc,2 is >= N2; in another case, if the RRC UplinkCancellation IE is provided, “[a]n indication by a DCI format 2_ 4 for a serving cell is applicable to a PUSCH transmission . . . on the serving cell” and “the UE determines the first symbol of the TCI symbols to be the first symbol that is after T'proc,2 from the end of a PDCCH reception where the UE detects the DCI format 2_ 4, where Tproc,2 is obtained from Tproc,2 for PUSCH processing capability 2 [6, TS 38.214] assuming d2,1=delta_offset•2-μUL/2-μ, μ being the smallest SCS configuration between the SCS configuration of the PDCCH and the smallest SCS configuration μUL provided in scs-SpecificCarrierList of FrequencyInfoUL or FrequencyinfoUL-SIB. The UE does not expect to cancel the PUSCH transmission or the SRS transmission before a corresponding symbol that is Tproc, 2 after a last symbol of a CO RESET where the UE detects the DCI format 2_ 4” – See [¶0030], wherein Tproc,2 is calculated with the same formula as above, only now the d2,1 factor is positive, hence the cancellation time T'proc,2 is larger than Tproc,2);
the second length is longer than the first length (for example, in case of PriorityIndex RRC parameter provided, the number M of symbols denoting the cancellation time for the configured PUSCH retransmission is larger than N2 calculated for PUSCH cancellation time without priority collision because M= Tproc,2+d1 and Tproc,2 is >= N2, as explained supra; and in case RRC UplinkCancellation IE is provided the cancellation time T'proc,2 is larger than Tproc,2).
Therefore, Claim 1 is anticipated by Bagheri.
Regarding Claim 2, a base station comprising: high-layer processing circuitry configured to send a RRC parameter, and reception circuitry configured to receive a PUSCH in multiple slots (“a network entity, such as a base station, transmission and reception point, mobility management entity, or other network entity, can perform reciprocal operations of a UE. For example, the network entity can transmit signals received by the UE and can receive signals transmitted by the UE. The network entity can also process and operate on sent and received signals” – See [¶0085]), wherein the RRC parameter is recited with the same limitations as in Claim 1 and no other limitations. Because Claim 1 is anticipated by Bagheri, Claim 2 is also anticipated by Bagheri.
Regarding Claim 3, a method for a user equipment (UE), the method comprising: the steps executed by the UE of Claim 1, recited with the same language and no additional limitations. Because Claim 1 is anticipated by Bagheri, Claim 3 is also anticipated by Bagheri.
In sum, Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as anticipated by Bagheri.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Bhamri et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2024/0089026 discloses configurations for Rel-16 PUSCH repetition type A and enhancements on PUSCH repetition type B including actual PUSCH transmission across the slot boundary/invalid symbols, the length of actual repetition larger than 14 symbols, and redundancy version ("RV") enhancement citing section 6.1.2.1 of Third Generation Partnership Project ("3GPP") Technical Specification ("TS") 38.214 Vl6.6.0 for time-domain allocation for PUSCH and Clause 9, Clause 11.1 and Clause 11.2A of 3GPP TS 38.213 V16.6.0 for conditions under which in PUSCH repetition Type A, a PUSCH transmission in a slot of a multi-slot PUSCH transmission is omitted; a repetition span duration "TypeA_repS" beyond which repetitions are not transmitted is disclosed together with "TypeA_repK" semi-statically configured by higher layers, and a new field ( e.g., similar to numberOfRepetitions-rl7(is added to be used to indicate actual number of repetitions) whereby the TDRA table includes two values for numberofRepetitions (for each entry in the TDRA table), where one value is number of repetitions counted as total consecutive slots ( or number of nominal repetitions) and other value is number of repetitions counted as available UL slots ( or number of actual repetitions);
Su et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2024/0107521 discloses methods, apparatus and computer programs for PUSCH repetition type A and type B citing resource allocations following Clause 6.1.2.1 of [6, TS38.214] and two enhancements of PUSCH repetition Type A agreed for Rel-17 NR coverage enhancement WI, including increasing the number of repetitions and the number of repetitions counted on the basis of available UL slots;
Islam et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0168783 discloses Systems, apparatuses, methods, and computer-readable media are provided for causing a user equipment (UE) device to receive a configuration signaling to monitor for uplink (UL) cancellation indications; monitor a search space for an UL cancellation indication; detect an UL cancellation indication in the search space; and in response, cancel at least a portion of a scheduled UL transmission;
3GPP TS 38.331 V16.4.1 (2021-03), “Technical Specification Group Radio Access Network; NR; Radio Resource Control (RRC) protocol specification (Release 16)”;
3GPP TS 38.214 V16.5.0 (2021-03), “Technical Specification Group Radio Access Network; NR; Physical layer procedures for data (Release 16)”;
3GPP TS 38.213 V16.5.0 (2021-03), “Technical Specification Group Radio Access Network; NR; Physical layer procedures for control (Release 16)”;
3GPP TS 38.212 V16.5.0 (2021-03), “Technical Specification Group Radio Access Network; NR; Multiplexing and channel coding (Release 16)”;
3GPP TS 38.321 V16.4.0 (2021-03), “Technical Specification Group Radio Access Network; NR; Medium Access Control (MAC) protocol specification (Release 16)”;
3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #104-e, R1-21xxxxx, Title:” Summary of email discussion [104-e-NR-7.1CRs-05]: clarification of cancellation due to SFI, PSDCH, or CSI-RS,” Source: Qualcomm (moderator), February 2021;
3GPP TSG-RAN WG1 Meeting #104b-e, R1-2103199, Title: “Discussion on PUSCH with UL Skipping and repetition,” Source: Ericsson, April 2021;
3GPP TSG-RAN WG1 Meeting #104b-e, R1-2102582, Title: “Discussion on PUSCH skipping,” Source: CATT, April 2021;
3GPP TSG-RAN WG1 Meeting #104-e, R1-2102246, Title: “Summary of [104-e-NR-7.1CRs-01] Discussion on UL skipping for PUSCH for Rel-16,” Source: Moderator (vivo), February 2021.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LUCIA GHEORGHE GRADINARIU whose telephone number is (571)272-1377. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00am - 5:00pm 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, Joseph AVELLINO can be reached at (571)272-3905. 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.
/L.G.G./ Examiner, Art Unit 2478
/JOSEPH E AVELLINO/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2478
1 The Specification describes each one of a PUSCH-priority based procedure, slot configuration based procedure, slot format based procedure and cancellation indication based procedure using verbatim or summarizing teachings from corresponding 3GPP procedures, including the RRC IEs and fields and timing formulae each procedure depends on (e.g., [¶¶0219-223] reciting from §10.2, 3GPP TS 38.213, infra, for PDCCH validation; [¶¶0227-231] verbatim from § 6.1.2.1, 3GPP TS 38.214, infra, for time domain resource allocation; [¶¶0254-57],[¶¶0259-62] verbatim from § 11.1, 3GPP TS 38.213; [¶¶0263-64] verbatim from § 6.4, 3GPP TS 38.214; [¶¶0266-72], [¶¶0274-76], and [¶0278] reciting (sometimes verbatim) from § 11.1 and Table 11.1.1-1, 3GPP TS 38.213; [¶¶0281-83] verbatim from §11.2A, 3GPP TS 38.213, infra, and § 7.3.1.3.5, 3GPP TS 38.212, infra, for the DCI format 2_4 definition; and none of these sources are listed at least in an IDS).
2 Bagheri includes by reference 3GPP TS 38.214 V16.5.0 (2021-03), “Technical Specification Group Radio Access Network; NR; Physical layer procedures for data (Release 16)” (hereinafter 3GPP TS 38.214) – See, e.g., [¶0014] (referencing § 6.4, 3GPP TS 38.214 for the UE PUSCH preparation procedure time); Bagheri includes by reference 3GPP TS 38.213 V16.5.0 (2021-03), “Technical Specification Group Radio Access Network; NR; Physical layer procedures for control (Release 16)” – See, e.g., [¶0026] (referencing § 11.2A of 3GPP TS 38.213 for the higher level UplinkCancellation parameter provided to the UE); Bagheri further references 3GPP TS 38.212 V16.5.0 (2021-03), “Technical Specification Group Radio Access Network; NR; Multiplexing and channel coding
(Release 16)” – See, id. (referencing DCI format 2_ 4 defined in § 7.3 of 3GPP TS 38.212); Bagheri further references 3GPP TS 38.321 V16.4.0 (2021-03), “Technical Specification Group Radio Access Network;
NR; Medium Access Control (MAC) protocol specification (Release 16)” (hereinafter 3GPP TS 38.321) – See, e.g., [¶0037]
3 The Specification defines “slot availability” as “[i]f a PUSCH (or a repetition of a PUSCH) in a slot is determined to be transmitted, the slot may be considered as available for the PUSCH transmission. If a PUSCH (or a repetition of a PUSCH) in a slot is determined to be cancelled or not to be transmitted, the slot may be considered as not available for the PUSCH transmission” – See, e.g., [¶0263] but fails to provide the RRC parameter indicating how the determination of availability is made, e.g., indicating how “[t]he K available slots may be determined according to the conditions at least and/or at most in, PUSCH-priority based procedure, slot configuration based procedure, slot format based procedure and cancellation indication based procedure. For example, a slot may be determined as available if the slot is available according to all the conditions defined in those procedures, and/or the slot may be determined as not available if the slot is not available according to at least one of the conditions defined in those procedures” – See [¶0238]