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
Applicant’s amendment, filed 31 October 2025, has been entered and carefully considered.
Claims 1, 4, 6, 9, 11, 14, 16 and 19 are amended.
Claims 2, 7, 12 and 17 are canceled.
Claims 21-24 are newly added.
Claims 1, 3-6, 8-11, 13-16 and 18-24 are currently pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 31 October 2025, with respect to the outstanding rejection of Claims 1, 3-6, 8-11, 13-16 and 18-20 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of Claims 1, 3-6, 8-11, 13-16 and 18-20 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) has been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed 31 October 2025 regarding the rejection of Claims 1, 6, 11 and 16 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant states “The currently amended independent claims recite that the value of N1 (maximum quantity of repetitions) is inversely related to N2 (quantity of slots occupied by one transport block), so that the more slots there are, the fewer repetitions there are, effectively limiting repetitions.” The Office notes that the sole relation between N1 and N2 in the claim is part of the phrase “N1*N2≤N”. However, the Office further notes that N is only present in the claim language as a) a “preset value” and b) “a positive integer”. N is thereby solely defined in the claim by its properties and not by what it represents in relation to a maximum quantity of repetitions (N1) or a quantity of slots (N2). As such, a broadest reasonable interpretation of N represents any integer value that would be greater than or equal to the value of N1 multiplied by N2. Table 1 of Deng, which illustrates a number of repetitions that can be accompanied by a number of slots, can reasonably be mapped to meet the claim language. Contrary to Applicant’s statement, nowhere in Deng is it presumed that the number of repetitions multiplied by the number of slots is less than or equal to the disclosed codepoint. In light of the absence of what N represents in the claim language, Table 1 of Deng was utilized to show that a number of slots is less than a number of repetitions and a number of slots can be multiplied together to be less than or equal to a preset positive integer (i.e., 4*2 = 8, 8*4 = 32, 16*4 = 64), which is the only property of N that is presently claimed. Applicant further states “Finally, while the independent claims recite an equation to limit repetitions, Deng recites no equation here, only a pair of values that correspond to a codepoint.” The Office respectfully disagrees. The independent claims do not recite any language to the effect of “limiting repetitions”, and the inequality “N1*N2≤N” is recited as a preset condition of three variables relating to one another, rather than an “equation to limit repetitions” as alleged by Applicant.
For these reasons, the rejection of Claims 1, 6, 11 and 16 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) is maintained.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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, 3-6, 8-11, 13-16 and 18-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Deng et al (United States Pre-Grant Publication 2023/0345432), hereinafter Deng.
Regarding Claim 11, Deng discloses a communication apparatus, comprising:
at least one processor (Figure 21 and paragraph 0252, the radio station (UE) comprises processor 210) configured to:
determine a value of N1 when data is transmitted by using a transport block over multiple slots (TBoMS) (Figure 4A and paragraphs 0088-0089 – transmission of a transport block over multiple slots; Figure 14 at steps 1410-1430, the user device determines availability of transport block processing over multiple slots),
wherein N1, N2, and N meet a preset condition, the preset condition is: N1*N2≤N (paragraph 0085 at Table 1 - multiple values can be configured such that the number of slots is not larger than the number of repetitions; paragraph 0089 – parameters for the transmission, including repetitions, number of slots, and numbers of consecutive slots are configured),
N1 is a maximum quantity of repetitions allowed when the data is repeatedly transmitted by using the TBoMS, N1≥1, N1 is an integer (paragraphs 0088-0089 – the number of repetitions is 4, which is an integer and greater than or equal to 1),
N2 indicates a quantity of slots occupied by one transport block (TB) when the data is transmitted by using the TBoMS, N2≥2, N2 is an integer (paragraphs 0088-0089 – number of slots for the transmission is set to 2, which is an integer and greater than or equal to 2),
N is a preset value, and N is a positive integer (paragraph 0085 at Table 1 – utilizing a codepoint, the number of repetitions and number of slots is configured); and
perform a repeated transmission of the data based on the value of N1 (Figure 4A, configuration of repeated transmission of the transport block over multiple slots; Figure 14 at step 1440 – perform transmission based on the determined parameters).
Claim 1 is a method claim comprising the same steps as claimed as being performed by the communication apparatus in Claim 11. Therefore, Claim 1 is rejected using the same reasons as presented above for Claim 11.
Regarding Claims 3 and 13, Deng discloses N=32 (paragraph 0085 at Table 1 – the number of repetitions is 8 and the number of slots is 4, therefore N would equal 32).
Regarding Claims 4 and 14, Deng discloses:
receiving a first message from a network device, wherein the first message indicates to transmit the data by using the TBoMS (paragraph 0084 – RRC signaling is used to indicate a set of values for number of slots); and
receiving a second message from the network device, wherein the second message indicates a value of N2 (paragraph 0084 – RRC signaling is used to indicate a set of values for number of slots (N2)).
Regarding Claims 5 and 15, Deng discloses:
receiving a message from a network device, wherein the message comprises a value of N2 (paragraph 0084 – RRC signaling is used to indicate a set of values for number of slots (N2)); and
determining, based on the value of N2, to use the TBoMS to transmit the data (Figure 14 at step 1440 – perform transmission based on the determined parameters).
Regarding Claim 16, Deng discloses a communication apparatus, comprising:
at least one processor (Figure 21 and paragraph 0252, the radio station (base station) comprises processor 210) configured to:
determine a value of N1 when data is transmitted by using a transport block over multiple slots (TBoMS) (Figure 4A and paragraphs 0088-0089 – transmission of a transport block over multiple slots; Figure 11 at step 1110, the network node determines configuration for transport block processing over multiple slots),
wherein N1, N2, and N meet a preset condition, the preset condition is: N1*N2≤N (paragraph 0085 at Table 1 - multiple values can be configured such that the number of slots is not larger than the number of repetitions; paragraph 0089 – parameters for the transmission, including repetitions, number of slots, and numbers of consecutive slots are configured),
N1 is a maximum quantity of repetitions allowed when the data is repeatedly transmitted by using the TBoMS, N1≥1, N1 is an integer (paragraphs 0088-0089 – the number of repetitions is 4, which is an integer and greater than or equal to 1),
N2 indicates a quantity of slots occupied by one transport block (TB) when the data is transmitted by using the TBoMS, N2≥2, N2 is an integer (paragraphs 0088-0089 – number of slots for the transmission is set to 2, which is an integer and greater than or equal to 2),
N is a preset value, and N is a positive integer (paragraph 0085 at Table 1 – utilizing a codepoint, the number of repetitions and number of slots is configured); and
receive a repeated transmission of the data based on the value of N1 (Figure 4A, configuration of repeated transmission of the transport block over multiple slots; Figure 14 at step 1440 – the user device performs transmission based on the determined parameters).
Claim 6 is a method claim comprising the same steps as claimed as being performed by the communication apparatus in Claim 16. Therefore, Claim 6 is rejected using the same reasons as presented above for Claim 16.
Regarding Claims 8 and 18, Deng discloses N=32 (paragraph 0085 at Table 1 – the number of repetitions is 8 and the number of slots is 4, therefore N would equal 32).
Regarding Claim 9, Deng discloses:
sending a first message to a terminal device, wherein the first message directs the terminal device to transmit the data by using the TBoMS (paragraph 0084 – RRC signaling is used to indicate a set of values for number of slots); and
sending a second message to the terminal device, wherein the second message indicates a value of N2 (paragraph 0084 – RRC signaling is used to indicate a set of values for number of slots (N2)).
Regarding Claims 10 and 20, Deng discloses:
sending a message to a terminal device, wherein the message comprises the value of N2 and the value of N2 indicates to the terminal device to transmit the data by using the TBoMS (paragraph 0084 – RRC signaling is used to indicate a set of values for number of slots (N2); Figure 14 at step 1440 – the user device performs transmission based on the determined parameters).
Regarding Claim 19, Deng discloses:
send a first message to a terminal device, wherein the first message indicates to transmit the data by using the TBoMS (paragraph 0084 – RRC signaling is used to indicate a set of values for number of slots); and
send a second message to the terminal device, wherein the second message indicates device of a value of N2 (paragraph 0084 – RRC signaling is used to indicate a set of values for number of slots (N2)).
Regarding Claim 21, Deng discloses the method is performed by a terminal device, or a chip in a terminal device (Figure 21 and paragraph 0252, the radio station (UE) comprises processor 210).
Regarding Claim 22, Deng discloses the method is performed by a network device, or a chip in a network device (Figure 21 and paragraph 0252, the radio station (base station) comprises processor 210).
Regarding Claim 23, Deng discloses the communication apparatus is a terminal device, or a chip in a terminal device (Figure 21 and paragraph 0252, the radio station (UE) comprises processor 210).
Regarding Claim 24, Deng discloses the apparatus is a network device, or a chip in a network device (Figure 21 and paragraph 0252, the radio station (base station) comprises processor 210).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Su et al (United States Pre-Grant Publication 20250286673) discloses valid combinations of S and L for Type A and Type B repetitions (paragraph 0369 and Table 3.5-2).
Wang (United States Pre-Grant Publication 2025/0202648) discloses an uplink channel repetition factor less than a threshold value, and determining an uplink channel repetition factor as a DMRS bundling window size (paragraph 0300).
Sun et al (United States Patent 12244533) is directed to a base station dynamically or semi-statically indicating a maximum number of repetitions.
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 ANDREW W. CHRISS whose telephone number is (571)272-1774. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8am-4pm ET.
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, Kevin Bates can be reached at (571) 272-3980. 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.
/ANDREW W CHRISS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2472