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 . This Action is in response to Applicant’s remarks and amended claims filed on February 17, 2026. Claims 1-3, 6-10, 13, 16-18, and 21 are now pending in the present application. This Action is made FINAL.
Response to Amendment
2. The outstanding rejections of Claims 1-3, 6-10, 13, and 16-18 under 35 U.S.C. 103 are withdrawn in light of Applicant's amendment to Claims 1, 9, and 16 filed on February 17, 2026.
Specification
3. The amendments to the specification regarding the title received on February 17, 2026. These amendments to the title are NOT accepted.
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
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 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. 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 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 of this title, 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
The factual inquiries 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 1, 8-9, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ofir et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication # 2012/0142340 A1) in view of Khoo et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication # 2015/0063326 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Ofir et al. teach a method (Fig(s).2 and 7) comprising:
obtaining, from a network device (Fig.2 @ 202), slot allocation information (read as control signal) that indicates a first slot (Fig.2 @ 224) and a second slot (Fig.2 @ 226) (Fig.7 @ 710),
However, Ofir et al. fail to explicitly teach wherein the first slot is configured as a voice-specific slot and the second slot is configured as a common slot that is not specific to voice; and
outputting the voice traffic in the first slot and the traffic other than voice in the second slot.
Khoo et al. teach a method wherein the first slot is configured as a voice-specific slot and the second slot is configured as a common slot that is not specific to voice (read as “wherein the plurality of radios utilize a first timeslot of the two adjacent timeslots for voice communication therebetween; wherein the plurality of radios utilize a second timeslot of the two adjacent timeslots for data communications;”(Paragraph [0015])); and
outputting the voice traffic in the first slot and the traffic other than voice in the second slot. (read as “an apparatus includes a radio configured to transmit and receive on at least two adjacent timeslots;”(Fig(s).2 and 6-7; Paragraph [0014]) For example, systems for “simultaneously receiving and transmitting voice and data through using adjacent time slots.”(Fig(s).2 and 6-7; Paragraph [0016]))
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ the function for allocating slots for voice and data as taught by Khoo et al. with the devices as taught by Ofir et al. for the purpose of enhancing time domain resource allocation for voice/traffic communications in a network.
Regarding claim 9, Ofir et al. teach a method (Fig(s).2 and 7) comprising:
generating slot allocation information for transmission to a user equipment (UE) (read as control signal (Fig.2 and 7)),
wherein the slot allocation information (read as control signal) that indicates a first slot (Fig(s).2 @ 224 and 7 @ 710) and a second slot (Fig(s).2 @ 226 and 7 @ 710), and
However, Ofir et al. fail to explicitly teach wherein the first slot is configured as a voice-specific slot and the second slot is configured as a common slot that is not specific to voice; and
receiving voice traffic in the first slot and traffic other than voice in the second slot.
Khoo et al. teach a method wherein the first slot is configured as a voice-specific slot and the second slot is configured as a common slot that is not specific to voice (read as “wherein the plurality of radios utilize a first timeslot of the two adjacent timeslots for voice communication therebetween; wherein the plurality of radios utilize a second timeslot of the two adjacent timeslots for data communications;”(Paragraph [0015])); and
receiving voice traffic in the first slot and traffic other than voice in the second slot. (read as “an apparatus includes a radio configured to transmit and receive on at least two adjacent timeslots;”(Fig(s).2 and 6-7; Paragraph [0014]) For example, systems for “simultaneously receiving and transmitting voice and data through using adjacent time slots.”(Fig(s).2 and 6-7; Paragraph [0016]))
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ the function for allocating slots for voice and data as taught by Khoo et al. with the devices as taught by Ofir et al. for the purpose of enhancing time domain resource allocation for voice/traffic communications in a network.
Regarding claim 16, Ofir et al. teach an apparatus (Fig.2 @ 204-218) comprising:
obtain, from a network device (Fig.2 @ 202), slot allocation information (read as control signal (Fig.2 and 7)),
wherein slot allocation information (read as control signal) that indicates a first slot (Fig(s).2 @ 224 and 7 @ 710) and a second slot (Fig(s).2 @ 226 and 7 @ 710), and
However, Ofir et al. fail to explicitly teach processing circuitry to:
wherein the first slot is configured as a voice-specific slot and the second slot is configured as a common slot that is not specific to voice; and
output voice traffic in the first slot and the traffic other than voice in the second slot; and
memory coupled with the processing circuitry to store the slot allocation information.
Khoo et al. teach an apparatus (Fig.6 @ 70) comprising processing circuitry (Fig.6 @ 72) to:
wherein the first slot is configured as a voice-specific slot and the second slot is configured as a common slot that is not specific to voice (read as “wherein the plurality of radios utilize a first timeslot of the two adjacent timeslots for voice communication therebetween; wherein the plurality of radios utilize a second timeslot of the two adjacent timeslots for data communications;”(Paragraph [0015])); and
output voice traffic in the first slot and the traffic other than voice in the second slot (read as “an apparatus includes a radio configured to transmit and receive on at least two adjacent timeslots;”(Fig(s).2 and 6-7; Paragraph [0014]) For example, systems for “simultaneously receiving and transmitting voice and data through using adjacent time slots.”(Fig(s).2 and 6-7; Paragraph [0016])); and
memory (Fig.6 @ 80) coupled with the processing circuitry (Fig.6 @ 80) to store the slot allocation information (Fig.6 @ 84, 86).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ the function for allocating slots for voice and data as taught by Khoo et al. with the devices as taught by Ofir et al. for the purpose of enhancing time domain resource allocation for voice/traffic communications in a network.
Regarding claim 8, and as applied to claim 1 above, Ofir et al., as modified by Khoo et al., teach a method wherein the voice traffic is transmitted on one or more component carriers (CCs) of a plurality of CCs in carrier aggregation (CA) (Fig.2 @ 220), and
wherein the one or more CCs for communicating the voice traffic are dynamically switched based on a trigger event.(read as access/usage marker field (Fig(s).3-7))
Claims 2, 6, 10, 17, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ofir et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication # 2012/0142340 A1) in view of Khoo et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication # 2015/0063326 A1), Mondet et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication # 2023/0292237 A1), and Akkarakaran et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication # 2018/0317225 A1).
Regarding claims 2 and 17, and as applied to claims 1 and 16 above, Ofir et al. teach “apparatuses and methods for increasing calling capacity in a carrier by dividing timeslots on the carrier into sub-slots and conveying usage and access rights information for each sub-slot on a carrier.”(Fig(s).2 and 7; Paragraph [0016])
Khoo et al. teach “A wireless method, apparatus, and system provide simultaneous transacting of voice and data on adjacent timeslots through a combination of channel access rules and sacrificing small audio portions when required.”(Abstract)
However, Ofir et al. and Khoo et al. fail to explicitly teach wherein the first and second slots are within one on-duration time of a connected mode discontinuous reception (CDRX) period and the method further comprises:
obtaining, from the network device, rank allocation information that indicates a first rank for voice-specific slots and a second rank for common slots,
wherein the first rank is smaller than the second rank; and
outputting the voice traffic in the first slot based on the first rank.
Mondet et al. teach a method wherein the first and second slots are within one on-duration time of a connected mode discontinuous reception (CDRX) period (read as CDRX Component (Fig.3 @ 356); For example, “CDRX component 356 can use the one or more alignment parameters for aligning or determining a subframe, slot, etc. for a CDRX ON duration of a CDRX cycle to receive the transmission burst.”(Fig.3 @ 356; Paragraph [0084]))
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ the CDRX component as taught by Mondet et al. and the function for allocating slots for voice and data as taught by Khoo et al. with the devices as taught by Ofir et al. for the purpose of improving time domain allocation for voice/traffic communications in a network using connected DRX.
However, Ofir et al., Khoo et al., and Mondet et al. fail to explicitly teach obtaining, from the network device, rank allocation information that indicates a first rank for voice-specific slots and a second rank for common slots,
wherein the first rank is smaller than the second rank; and
outputting the voice traffic in the first slot based on the first rank.
Akkarakaran et al. teach a method for obtaining, from the network device (Fig(s).1 @ 105 and 2 @ 105-a), rank allocation information that indicates a first rank for voice-specific slots and a second rank for common slots (Fig.2),
wherein the first rank is smaller than the second rank (read as “The modulation order and rank of the MCS may be different for one or more mini-slots 215 (e.g., mini-slot 215-a and mini-slot 215-b) and the resource block (RB) allocation, …”(Fig.2; Paragraph [0081])); and
outputting the voice traffic in the first slot based on the first rank. (Fig.2)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ the function for ranking one or more mini-slots as taught by Akkarakaran et al., the CDRX component as taught by Mondet et al., and the function for allocating slots for voice and data as taught by Khoo et al. with the devices as taught by Ofir et al. for the purpose of enhancing time domain allocation for voice/traffic communications in a network.
Regarding claims 6, 10, and 21, and as applied to claims 1, 9, and 16 above, Ofir et al. teach “apparatuses and methods for increasing calling capacity in a carrier by dividing timeslots on the carrier into sub-slots and conveying usage and access rights information for each sub-slot on a carrier.”(Fig(s).2 and 7; Paragraph [0016])
Khoo et al. teach “A wireless method, apparatus, and system provide simultaneous transacting of voice and data on adjacent timeslots through a combination of channel access rules and sacrificing small audio portions when required.”(Abstract)
However, Ofir et al. and Khoo et al. fail to explicitly teach wherein the first and second slots are within one on-duration time of a connected mode discontinuous reception (CDRX) period and the method further comprises:
obtaining, from the network device, modulation and coding scheme (MCS) allocation information,
wherein the MCS allocation information indicates a first MCS for voice-specific slots and a second MCS for common slots, and
wherein the first MCS is less than the second MCS; and
outputting the voice traffic in the first slot based on the first MCS.
Mondet et al. teach a method wherein the first and second slots are within one on-duration time of a connected mode discontinuous reception (CDRX) period (read as CDRX Component (Fig.3 @ 356); For example, “CDRX component 356 can use the one or more alignment parameters for aligning or determining a subframe, slot, etc. for a CDRX ON duration of a CDRX cycle to receive the transmission burst.”(Fig.3 @ 356; Paragraph [0084]))
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ the CDRX component as taught by Mondet et al. and the function for allocating slots for voice and data as taught by Khoo et al. with the devices as taught by Ofir et al. for the purpose of improving time domain allocation for voice/traffic communications in a network using connected DRX.
However, Ofir et al., Khoo et al., and Mondet et al. fail to explicitly teach obtaining, from the network device, modulation and coding scheme (MCS) allocation information,
wherein the MCS allocation information indicates a first MCS for voice-specific slots and a second MCS for common slots, and
wherein the first MCS is less than the second MCS; and
outputting the voice traffic in the first slot based on the first MCS.
Akkarakaran et al. teach a method for obtaining, from the network device (Fig(s).1 @ 105 and 2 @ 105-a), modulation and coding scheme (MCS) allocation information (Fig.2),
wherein the rank allocation information indicates a first rank for the voice-specific slots and a second rank for common slots (read as “The RS pattern or density may be based in part on the modulation order or rank for each individual mini-slot 215 (e.g., mini-slot 215-a, mini-slot 215-b, mini-slot 215-c, and mini-slot 215-d).”(Fig.2; Paragraph [0081])), and
wherein the first rank is smaller than the second rank (read as “The modulation order and rank of the MCS may be different for one or more mini-slots 215 (e.g., mini-slot 215-a and mini-slot 215-b) and the resource block (RB) allocation, …”(Fig.2; Paragraph [0081])); and
outputting the voice traffic in the first slot based on the first MCS. (Fig.2)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ the function for ranking one or more mini-slots and the function for assigning MCS to one or more mini-slots as taught by Akkarakaran et al., the CDRX component as taught by Mondet et al., and the function for allocating slots for voice and data as taught by Khoo et al. with the devices as taught by Ofir et al. for the purpose of enhancing time domain allocation for voice/traffic communications in a network.
Claims 3, 13, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication # 2020/0092068 A1), in view of Ofir et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication # 2012/0142340 A1), Mondet et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication # 2023/0292237 A1), Akkarakaran et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication # 2018/0317225 A1), and Lim et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication # 2024/0313931 A1).
Regarding claims 3, 13, and 18, and as applied to claims 2, 10, and 17 above,
Ofir et al. teach “apparatuses and methods for increasing calling capacity in a carrier by dividing timeslots on the carrier into sub-slots and conveying usage and access rights information for each sub-slot on a carrier.”(Fig(s).2 and 7; Paragraph [0016])
Khoo et al. teach “A wireless method, apparatus, and system provide simultaneous transacting of voice and data on adjacent timeslots through a combination of channel access rules and sacrificing small audio portions when required.”(Abstract)
Mondet et al. teach “CDRX component 356 can use the one or more alignment parameters for aligning or determining a subframe, slot, etc. for a CDRX ON duration of a CDRX cycle to receive the transmission burst.”(Fig.3 @ 356; Paragraph [0084])
Akkarakaran et al. teach “The RS pattern or density may be based in part on the modulation order or rank for each individual mini-slot 215 (e.g., mini-slot 215-a, mini-slot 215-b, mini-slot 215-c, and mini-slot 215-d).”(Fig.2; Paragraph [0081])
However, Ofir et al., Khoo et al., Mondet, and Akkarakaran et al. fail to explicitly teach generating a sounding reference signal (SRS) channel estimation for transmission to the network device; and
obtaining, from the network device, a first precoder corresponding to the first rank.
Lim et al. teach a method for generating a sounding reference signal (SRS) channel estimation for transmission to the network device (read as “The UE may transmit one or a plurality of SRS resources included in the SRS resource set having the value of usage configured as ‘codebook’ to the BS according to higher-layer signaling, …”(Paragraph [0207])); and
obtaining, from the network device, a first precoder corresponding to the first rank (read as “When the UE receives a configuration of a plurality of SRS resources, the UE may determine a precoder and a transmission rank to be applied to PUSCH transmission on the basis of an SRI indicated by the BS.”(Paragraph [0212])),
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ the function for generating and exchanging SRS resources as taught by Lim et al., the function for ranking one or more mini-slots and the function for assigning MCS to one or more mini-slots as taught by Akkarakaran et al., the CDRX component as taught by Mondet et al., and the function for allocating slots for voice and data as taught by Khoo et al. with the devices as taught by Ofir et al. for the purpose of enhancing time domain allocation for voice/traffic communications in a network.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ofir et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication # 2012/0142340 A1) in view of Khoo et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication # 2015/0063326 A1), and Mondet et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication # 2023/0292237 A1).
Regarding claim 7, and as applied to claim 1 above, Ofir et al. teach “apparatuses and methods for increasing calling capacity in a carrier by dividing timeslots on the carrier into sub-slots and conveying usage and access rights information for each sub-slot on a carrier.”(Fig(s).2 and 7; Paragraph [0016])
Khoo et al. teach “A wireless method, apparatus, and system provide simultaneous transacting of voice and data on adjacent timeslots through a combination of channel access rules and sacrificing small audio portions when required.”(Abstract)
However, Ofir et al. and Khoo et al. fail to explicitly teach wherein the first slot is a virtual slot and
a cycle of the first slot is aligned with a connected mode discontinuous reception (CDRX) period.
Mondet et al. teach a method wherein the first slot is a virtual slot (read as slot (Paragraph [0084])) and
a cycle of the first slot is aligned with a connected mode discontinuous reception (CDRX) period. (read as CDRX Component (Fig.3 @ 356); For example, “CDRX component 356 can use the one or more alignment parameters for aligning or determining a subframe, slot, etc. for a CDRX ON duration of a CDRX cycle to receive the transmission burst.”(Fig.3 @ 356; Paragraph [0084]))
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ the CDRX component as taught by Mondet et al. and the function for allocating slots for voice and data as taught by Khoo et al. with the devices as taught by Ofir et al. for the purpose of improving time domain allocation for voice/traffic communications in a network using connected DRX.
Response to Arguments
5. Applicant's arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-3, 6-10, 13, 16-18, and 21 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Conclusion
6. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure:
Xu et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication # 2023/0336628 A1) teach “the first time domain duration 320-a may start at the beginning of a connected mode discontinuous reception (CDRX) active time.”(Paragraph [0135])
Shahid et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication # 2022/0191787 A1) teach “the base station may adjust CDRX parameters based on a traffic type (e.g., voice traffic, video traffic, data traffic, etc.) associated with the downlink data, UE state parameters associated with the UE, and/or Received Signal Strength Indicator (RSSI) data associated with the UE.”(Abstract)
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 response to this Office Action should be faxed to (571) 273-8300 or mailed to:
Commissioner for Patents
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
Any inquiry concerning this communication or early communications from the Examiner should be directed to Salvador E. Rivas whose telephone number is (571) 270-1784. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 7:30AM to 5:00PM.
If attempts to reach the Examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner’s supervisor, Un C. Cho can be reached on (571) 272- 7919. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the USPTO patent electronic filing system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or proceeding should be directed to the receptionist/customer service whose telephone number is (571) 272-2600.
/SALVADOR E RIVAS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2413
March 11, 2026