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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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) 1-3, 22-23 and 29-30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chatterjee (US 20240014995) in view of Khan (US 20240107525), and further in view of Mahama (US 20240107541).
With respect to independent claims:
Regarding claim(s) 1/22/29/30, Chatterjee teaches A method of wireless communications at a user equipment (UE)([Fig.1A], UE), comprising:
receiving a configuration ([0045], a gNB may configure a UE by using “configuration of SBFD operation ... dynamic slot formats (e.g., via DCI format 2_0), higher layer configuration, or dynamic L1 signalling.”) of a physical uplink channel ([0087 and Fig.2], “each of the SBFD symbols may span the carrier bandwidth and may comprise ... an uplink (UL) subband 212” for uplink transmission. And [0089 and Fig.2], “the gNB may be configured to communicate with the UEs during ... non-SBFD uplink region 206” by using an uplink channel), the configuration being applicable to sub-band full duplex (SBFD) symbols ([0050 and Fig.2], the gNB may configure “one set of time domain resources may be for SBFD symbols.”) and to non-SBFD symbols ([0050], the gNB may configure “another set of time domain resources for non-SBFD symbols.”);
receiving an indication of resources for transmission on at least a slot configured with the SBFD symbols ([0087 and Fig.2], “each of the SBFD symbols may span the carrier bandwidth and may comprise ... an uplink (UL) subband 212” for uplink transmission.).
However, Chatterjee does not teach determining whether to transmit the physical uplink channel on the resources based on whether all resource blocks of the physical uplink channel are within an uplink sub-band.
In an analogous art, Khan teaches receiving an indication of resources ([0139], “other PUCCH resources (e.g., invalid PUCCH resources) which may be located outside the uplink subband in SBFD slot may be considered as not available PUCCH resources.”) for transmission on at least a slot configured with the SBFD symbols ([0139], “When a WTRU is indicated to use an invalid PUCCH resource in a SFBD slot.”); and
determining ([0139], “When a WTRU is indicated to use an invalid PUCCH resource in a SFBD slot, the WTRU may and/or may be allowed to drop the PUCCH transmission.”) whether to transmit the physical uplink channel ([0139], “drop the PUCCH transmission.”) on the resources ([0139], “invalid PUCCH resource”) based on whether all resource blocks of the physical uplink channel are within an uplink sub-band ([0139], “PUCCH resources (e.g., invalid PUCCH resources) which may be located outside the uplink subband in SBFD slot may be considered as not available PUCCH resources.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claim invention to have modified the method of Chatterjee to specify whether to transmit uplink channel as taught by Khan. The motivation/suggestion would have been because there is a need to “drop the PUCCH transmission” when resources are “invalid.”
However, the combination of Chatterjee and Khan does not teach the configuration defining resources associated with a physical uplink control channel or a physical uplink shared channel.
In an analogous art, Mahama teaches receiving a configuration of a physical uplink channel ([0005], “receiving a physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) resource configuration from a base station.”), the configuration defining resources associated with a physical uplink control channel ([0007], “PUCCH”) or a physical uplink shared channel, and the configuration being applicable to sub-band full duplex (SBFD) symbols ([0007], “the PUCCH resource configuration further indicates a first second hop frequency domain starting position for the PUCCH transmission in SBFD slots.” And [0040], “SBFD slots/symbols”) and to non-SBFD symbols ([0007], “and a second hop frequency domain position for the PUCCH transmission in non-SBFD slots.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claim invention to have modified the method of Chatterjee to specify symbol location for SBFD as taught by Mahama. The motivation/suggestion would have been because there is a need for uplink transmission.
With respect to dependent claims:
Regarding claim(s) 2/23, Khan teaches wherein all resource blocks of the physical uplink channel are not within the uplink sub-band, further comprising dropping the physical uplink channel ([0139], “When a WTRU is indicated to use an invalid PUCCH resource in a SFBD slot, the WTRU may and/or may be allowed to drop the PUCCH transmission.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claim invention to have modified the method of Chatterjee to specify whether to transmit uplink channel as taught by Khan. The motivation/suggestion would have been because there is a need to “drop the PUCCH transmission” when resources are “invalid.”
Regarding claim(s) 3, Khan teaches wherein the resources on the slot configured with SBFD symbols ([0111], “the WTRU may be configured for resource allocation when using SBFD.”) are configured with a starting resource block and a number of resource blocks specific to the SBFD symbols ([0111], “A WTRU may receive and/or be configured with one or more resource allocation settings for uplink transmission ... starting PRB, second hop starting PRB, number of PRBs.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claim invention to have modified the method of Chatterjee to specify SBFD symbols location as taught by Khan. The motivation/suggestion would have been because there is a need to transmit uplink information by a UE.
Regarding claim(s) 5/24, Mahama teaches wherein the resources on the slot configured with SBFD symbols are configured with a starting resource block applicable to both non-SBFD symbols and SBFD symbols, a starting resource block specific to the SBFD symbols, or both ([0007], “the PUCCH resource configuration further indicates a first second hop frequency domain starting position for the PUCCH transmission in SBFD slots and a second hop frequency domain position for the PUCCH transmission in non-SBFD slots. ... the first second hop frequency domain starting position and the second hop frequency domain position are provided in a same PUCCH resource.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claim invention to have modified the method of Chatterjee to specify symbol location for SBFD as taught by Mahama. The motivation/suggestion would have been because there is a need for uplink transmission.
Regarding claim(s) 6/25, Mahama teaches wherein the resources on the slot configured with SBFD symbols are configured with a number of resource blocks applicable to both non-SBFD symbols and SBFD symbols, a number of resource blocks specific to the SBFD symbols, or both ([0007], “the PUCCH resource configuration further indicates a first second hop frequency domain starting position for the PUCCH transmission in SBFD slots and a second hop frequency domain position for the PUCCH transmission in non-SBFD slots. ... the first second hop frequency domain starting position and the second hop frequency domain position are provided in a same PUCCH resource.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claim invention to have modified the method of Chatterjee to specify symbol location for SBFD as taught by Mahama. The motivation/suggestion would have been because there is a need for uplink transmission.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chatterjee in view of Khan and Mahama, and further in view of Grant (US 20250254018).
Regarding claim(s) 4, Grant teaches wherein the resources on the slot configured with SBFD symbols are configured with a start symbol and a number of symbols specific to the SBFD symbols ([0102], “the SBFD indication parameter indicates a starting slot offset, a starting symbol offset, and a number of symbols (or an ending slot offset and ending symbol offset) for a set of consecutive SBFD symbols.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claim invention to have modified the method of Chatterjee to specify symbol location for SBFD as taught by Grant. The motivation/suggestion would have been because there is a need for uplink transmission.
Claim(s) 7-8 and 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chatterjee in view of Khan and Mahama, and further in view of Hou (US 20240276502).
Regarding claim(s) 7/26, Hou teaches determining whether to transmit the physical uplink channel with intra-slot frequency hopping ([0119], “the intra-slot frequency hopping transmission mode may need to be disabled, that is, transmission is performed in a disabled intra-slot frequency hopping mode.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claim invention to have modified the method of Chatterjee to specify disabling intra slot hopping as taught by Hou. The motivation/suggestion would have been because “fragmentation of the PUCCH resource is reduced.”
Regarding claim(s) 8, Chatterjee teaches SBFD symbols ([0050 and Fig.2], the gNB may configure “one set of time domain resources may be for SBFD symbols.”).
However, Chatterjee does not teach rest of the claim limitations.
In an analogous art, Hou teaches wherein determining whether to transmit the physical uplink channel with intra-slot frequency hopping comprises one of: disabling intra-slot frequency hopping ([0119], “the intra-slot frequency hopping transmission mode may need to be disabled, that is, transmission is performed in a disabled intra-slot frequency hopping mode.”) ... disabling intra-slot frequency hopping on the SBFD symbols when at least one physical resource block of a set of configured second hop physical resource blocks is outside of the uplink sub-band; adapting the resources for intra-slot frequency hopping by applying a same offset to both a starting physical resource block (PRB) of the resources and to a second hop PRB; or adapting the resources for intra-slot frequency hopping by applying a first offset to a starting PRB of the resources and applying a second offset to a second hop PRB.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claim invention to have modified the method of Chatterjee to specify disabling intra slot hopping as taught by Hou. The motivation/suggestion would have been because “fragmentation of the PUCCH resource is reduced.”
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chatterjee in view of Khan and Mahama, and further in view of Lei (US 20210051727).
Regarding claim(s) 10, Lei teaches the physical uplink channel is scheduled or activated by a downlink control information (DCI) that indicates a selected second hop PRB for the physical uplink channel ([0070], “(indication in DCI of PDCCH ... allows the PUCCH resources to be dynamically configured by RRC protocol, ... dynamic configuration may include ... second hop PRB offset.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claim invention to have modified the method of Chatterjee to specify second hop PRB as taught by Lei. The motivation/suggestion would have been because there is a need for uplink transmission.
Claim(s) 11, 15 and 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chatterjee in view of Khan and Mahama, and further in view of Rudolf (US 20230292294).
Regarding claim(s) 11/27, Rudolf teaches determining whether to transmit the physical uplink channel on the slot configured with the SBFD symbols with a configured or indicated number of repetitions ([0155], “a number of repetitions n.sub.rep,SBFD=4 may be provided or indicated to the UE for a PUCCH repetition using SBFD slots/symbols.”) based on whether the slot configured with the SBFD symbols is considered an available slot for repetition ([0155], “a first list of DL data to UL Acknowledgment (ACK) timing(s) such as [2, 3, 5, 7] slots may be indicated and used by the UE to determine a first slot in a PUCCH repetition to occur in SBFD slots/symbols.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claim invention to have modified the method of Chatterjee to specify uplink repetitions as taught by Rudolf. The motivation/suggestion would have been because there is a need to boost uplink reliability.
Regarding claim(s) 15, Rudolf teaches wherein the slot configured with the SBFD symbols is considered an available slot for repetition when a first slot for transmission of the physical uplink channel is a slot configured with the SBFD symbols ([0155], “a first list of DL data to UL Acknowledgment (ACK) timing(s) such as [2, 3, 5, 7] slots may be indicated and used by the UE to determine a first slot in a PUCCH repetition to occur in SBFD slots/symbols.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claim invention to have modified the method of Chatterjee to specify uplink repetitions as taught by Rudolf. The motivation/suggestion would have been because there is a need to boost uplink reliability.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9, 12-14, 16-21 and 28 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims filed on 04/27/2026 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection in instant Office action does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the Applicant’s arguments.
Regarding claim 1, Applicant argues (Remark page 10, 2nd paragraph)
“Third, the configuration of Chatterjee is not "applicable to sub-band full duplex (SBFD) symbols and to non-SBFD symbols." The configuration of SBFD operation in paragraph [0045] is only applicable to SBFD symbols. The Office Action also cites paragraph [0050], which discloses, "gNB may configure more than one values of NTA,offset for two or more sets of time domain resources ... one set of time domain resources may be for SBFD symbols, and another set of time domain resources for non-SBFD symbols." Accordingly, the configurations described in paragraph [0050] is a different configuration that merely specifies which symbols (i.e., time domain resources) are the SBFD symbols and which are the non-SBFD symbols. Accordingly, paragraph [0050] provides different configuration for the SBFD symbols and the non-SBFD symbols.”
Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Examiner cited teaching from [0050 Chatterjee], which discloses a gNB configures two sets of resources to a UE, a first resource set is for SBFD symbols, and a second resource set for non-SBFD symbols. When the first and second resource sets are considered as a whole, then the whole resource configuration, which includes the first and second resource sets, is for the SBFD symbols and non-SBFD symbols.
Based on the foregoing reasoning, the rejections are sustained.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 ZHIREN QIN whose telephone number is (571)272-5444. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9-6PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Derrick Ferris can be reached on 571-272-3123. 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 the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ZHIREN QIN/Examiner, Art Unit 2411
Prosecution Insights