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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the 1st symbol" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Similar problem in claims 18, 20.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the first slot" in 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Similar problem in claims 2, 4, 13, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20.
Claim 2 lines 1, 2 cites “an available or valid or nominal first slot”. It is unclear if it is a new “an available or valid or nominal first slot” or referred to “an available or valid or nominal first slot” in claim 1 line 2. Similar problem in claim 2 line 6, claim 19.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "the first symbol" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Similar problem in claims 3, 19.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the symbols" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 13 lines 1, 2 cites “an actual transmission behavior”. It is unclear if it is a new “an actual transmission behavior” or referred to “an actual transmission behavior” in claim 1 line 4. Similar problem in claim 14,
Claim 14 line 5 cites “the actual transmission behavior”. It is unclear if it is referred to “an actual transmission behavior” in claim 1 lines 1, 2 or claim 14 lines 1, 2. Similar problem in claim 16, 17.
Claim 17 recites the limitation "the first symbols" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 17 line 7 cites “a target actual transmission behavior”. It is unclear if it is a new “a target actual transmission behavior” or referred to “a target actual transmission behavior” in claim 17 line 4. Similar problem in claim 17 lines 8, 9, “a target actual transmission behavior”.
Claim 17 line 12 cites “the target actual transmission behavior”. It is unclear if it is referred to “a target actual transmission behavior” in claim 17 lines 4, 7, 8, 9.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1, 13, 18, 20 provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1, 4, 5 of copending Application No. 18645916 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because
Regarding claims 1, 18, 20, the copending Application No. 18645916 teaches an uplink transmission method executed by a terminal, comprising:
determining an available or valid or nominal first slot for uplink transmission before the 1st symbol of uplink transmission is sent (claim 1, 4, 5); and
determining an actual transmission behavior in the first slot (claim 1, 4, 5).
Regarding claim 13, the copending Application No. 18645916 teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the determining an actual transmission behavior in the first slot comprises: performing transmission in the first slot or abandoning transmission in the first slot (claim 1, 4, 5).
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
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 –
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.
Claim(s) 1-6, 9, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by CHAI et al. (US 20220167350 continuation of app. PCT/CN2020/109578 filed on 08/17/2020).
Regarding claims 1, 18, 20, CHAI et al. (US 20220167350) teaches an uplink transmission method executed by a terminal (fig. 22, par. 289, terminal device), comprising:
determining an available or valid or nominal first slot for uplink transmission before the 1st symbol of uplink transmission is sent (par. 87, 88, 271, 273, 274, 275, 276, receiving first information sent by a network device, where the first information is used to configure a physical uplink shared channel (Physical Uplink Shared Channel, PUSCH) occasion, and the first information may include guard period configuration information and time domain resource configuration information of the PUSCH occasion…A PUSCH occasion (PUSCH occasion, PO for short) in this application refers to a time-frequency resource that can be used by a terminal device to send uplink data…if Z consecutive available time domain symbols exist in the first PUSCH occasion that includes the unavailable time domain symbol, the Z consecutive available time domain symbols are determined as a time domain resource of a valid first PUSCH occasion, where Z is greater than or equal to the first time domain length threshold; or first Z-N.sub.GP consecutive available time domain symbols in the Z consecutive available time domain symbols are determined as a time domain resource of a valid first PUSCH occasion, where Z-N.sub.GP is greater than or equal to the first time domain length threshold); and
determining an actual transmission behavior in the first slot (par. 87, 88, 177, 271, 273, 274, 275, 276, if Z consecutive available time domain symbols exist in the first PUSCH occasion that includes the unavailable time domain symbol, the Z consecutive available time domain symbols are determined as a time domain resource of a valid first PUSCH occasion, where Z is greater than or equal to the first time domain length threshold; or first Z-N.sub.GP consecutive available time domain symbols in the Z consecutive available time domain symbols are determined as a time domain resource of a valid first PUSCH occasion, where Z-N.sub.GP is greater than or equal to the first time domain length threshold).
Regarding claims 2, 19, CHAI et al. (US 20220167350) teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the determining an available or valid or nominal first slot for uplink transmission comprises:
obtaining a first quantity of symbols that meet a first condition among all first symbols contained in the first slot (par. 87, 88, 271, 273, 274, 275, 276; par. 187, two (Z=2) consecutive available time domain symbols of the PUSCH occasion #2);
wherein the first symbol is a symbol used for uplink transmission in the first slot (par. 87, 88, 271, 273, 274, 275, 276; par. 187, the PUSCH occasion); and
determining the first slot as an available or valid or nominal first slot in a case that the first quantity is less than a first threshold (par. 87, 88, 271, 273, 274, 275, 276-282; par. 187, 220, 247, if the time domain length of the time domain resource of the last fourth PUSCH occasion in each of the P slots is less than the first time domain length threshold, the time domain resource of the last fourth PUSCH occasion is not used as a time domain resource of a first PUSCH occasion…A time domain resource length of the PUSCH occasion #2 shown in FIG. 20B is equal to the first time domain length threshold (X=2). In this case, the PUSCH occasion #2 is determined as a time domain resource of a valid first PUSCH occasion…a valid first PUSCH occasion is determined based on positions of a time domain resource of a first PUSCH occasion and an unavailable symbol, so that the terminal device can be prevented from sending uplink data on the unavailable symbol).
Regarding claim 3, CHAI et al. (US 20220167350) teaches the method according to claim 2, wherein the first symbol comprises at least one of the following:
symbol for physical uplink shared channel transmission as indicated by time domain resource allocation (par. 6, 87, 88, 271, 273, 274, 275, 276; par. 187, 220, 247, PUSCH occasion);
symbol for uplink transmission as indicated by higher-layer configuration (par. 87, 88, 271, 273, 274, 275, 276; par. 187, 220, 247, 257, RRC IE of the PUSCH configuration or higher-layer configuration); or
symbol for physical uplink control channel transmission as indicated by a physical uplink control channel resource indicator information (optional, par. 87, 88, 271, 273, 274, 275, 276; par. 187, 220, 247, 257; par. 6, 114, 268, the time domain resource configuration information of the PUSCH occasion…The configuration information of the time domain resource start position may include start slot configuration information and/or start symbol configuration information).
Regarding claim 4, CHAI et al. (US 20220167350) teaches the method according to claim 2, wherein the first threshold is determined based on at least one of the following:
higher-layer configuration (par. 87, 88, 271, 273, 274, 275, 276; par. 187, 220, 247, 257, 268, RRC IE of the PUSCH configuration or higher-layer configuration);
dynamic indication (optional, par. 87, 88, 271, 273, 274, 275, 276; par. 187, 220, 247, 257, 268);
transmission length in time domain resource allocation table (optional, par. 87, 88, 271, 273, 274, 275, 276; par. 187, 220, 247, 257, 268);
transmission length of physical uplink control channel (optional, par. 87, 88, 271, 273, 274, 275, 276; par. 187, 220, 247, 257, 268);
transmission length of uplink transmission (par. 87, 88, 271, 273, 274, 275, 276; par. 187, 220, 247, 257; par. 6, 114, 268; par. 14, 111, a quantity of the first part of time domain symbols of the second PUSCH occasion is greater than or equal to a sum of the first time domain length threshold and the guard period,);
configuration by time domain resource allocation (par. 87, 88, 271, 273, 274, 275, 276; par. 187, 220, 247, 257; par. 6, 114, 268);
configuration by radio resource control information (par. 87, 88, 271, 273, 274, 275, 276; par. 187, 220, 247, 257, RRC IE of the PUSCH configuration or higher-layer configuration);
the first slot being a slot without uplink/downlink switching (optional, par. 87, 88, 271, 273, 274, 275, 276; par. 187, 220, 247, 257, 268);
the first slot being a slot with uplink/downlink switching (optional, par. 87, 88, 271, 273, 274, 275, 276; par. 187, 220, 247, 257, 268); or
a coding rate specified by higher-layer configuration and/or protocol (optional, par. 87, 88, 271, 273, 274, 275, 276; par. 187, 220, 247, 257, 268).
Regarding claim 5, CHAI et al. (US 20220167350) teaches the method according to claim 2, wherein the first threshold is greater than or equal to 0 and less than or equal to 13 (par. 87, 88, 271, 273, 274, 275, 276; par. 187, 220, 247, if the time domain length of the time domain resource of the last fourth PUSCH occasion in each of the P slots is less than the first time domain length threshold, the time domain resource of the last fourth PUSCH occasion is not used as a time domain resource of a first PUSCH occasion…A time domain resource length of the PUSCH occasion #2 shown in FIG. 20B is equal to the first time domain length threshold (X=2). In this case, the PUSCH occasion #2 is determined as a time domain resource of a valid first PUSCH occasion…a valid first PUSCH occasion is determined based on positions of a time domain resource of a first PUSCH occasion and an unavailable symbol, so that the terminal device can be prevented from sending uplink data on the unavailable symbol).
Regarding claim 6, CHAI et al. (US 20220167350) teaches the method according to claim 2, wherein the first condition comprises at least one of the following:
configured as a semi-static downlink symbol (optional, par. 194, 266, 267, 268, 270);
configured as a synchronization signal block (par. 266, a symbol on which a synchronization signal block is located; and/or a symbol in a time period T2 after the last symbol of the synchronization signal block);
used for a control resource set for type 0 physical downlink control channel common search space (optional, par. 194, 266, 267, 268, 270);
configured as a semi-static flexible symbol (optional, par. 194, 266, 267, 268, 270);
being a symbol that is unavailable or invalid for uplink transmission according to higher-layer configuration (par. 267, 268, 270, a valid first PUSCH occasion is determined based on positions of a time domain resource of a first PUSCH occasion and an unavailable symbol, so that the terminal device can be prevented from sending uplink data on the unavailable symbol);
being a symbol unusable for current uplink transmission as indicated by dynamic signaling or higher-layer configuration (par. 267, 268, 270, a valid first PUSCH occasion is determined based on positions of a time domain resource of a first PUSCH occasion and an unavailable symbol, so that the terminal device can be prevented from sending uplink data on the unavailable symbol);
current physical uplink shared transmission being interrupted due to a first factor (par. 194, a third PUSCH occasion with a cross-slot time domain resource that is not the last third PUSCH occasion in a group and that does not satisfy the preset condition may be processed in the foregoing shortening manner, so that the plurality of first PUSCH occasions determined based on the first information each are in a same slot); or
current uplink transmission being canceled according to a half-duplex rule (optional, par. 194, 266, 267, 268, 270).
Regarding claim 9, CHAI et al. (US 20220167350) teaches the method according to claim 6, wherein the symbols unusable for current uplink transmission comprises at least one of the following:
used for scheduling downlink symbol(s) (par. 267, 268, 270, downlink symbol);
used for scheduling dynamic flexible symbol (par. 267, 268, 270, flexible symbol);
used for scheduling downlink transmission (par. 267, 268, 270, downlink symbol);
used for scheduling repetition of other uplink transmission (par. 238, the repetition indication information is used to indicate whether there are a plurality of consecutive fifth PUSCH occasions in a PUSCH occasion group);
used for scheduling multi-slot transmission of other uplink transmission (par. 237, a PUSCH occasion #0, a PUSCH occasion #1, and a PUSCH occasion #2,); or
being an unavailable or invalid symbol (par. 267, 268, 270, unavailable symbols).
Regarding claim 13, CHAI et al. (US 20220167350) teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the determining an actual transmission behavior in the first slot comprises:
performing transmission in the first slot or abandoning transmission in the first slot (par. 153, 154, 175, 177, invalid first PUSCH occasion, that is, the invalid first PUSCH occasion is not used to transmit uplink data…Time domain resources of a plurality of third PUSCH occasions satisfying the preset condition in one PUSCH occasion group in this embodiment may be used to transmit a same transport block, to improve uplink data transmission quality).
Regarding claim 14, CHAI et al. (US 20220167350) teaches the method according to claim 2, wherein the determining an actual transmission behavior in the first slot comprises:
determining a second quantity of symbols that meet a second condition among all first symbols (par. 198, 274, 276-280, if a time-frequency resource of a PUSCH occasion on time domain resources of any one or more first PUSCH occasions in the time domain resources of the plurality of first PUSCH occasions satisfies at least one of the following conditions, the time-frequency resource of the PUSCH occasion is invalid); and
determining the actual transmission behavior in the first slot based on the second quantity (par. 154, 177, 198, 273, 274, 276-280, Time domain resources of a plurality of third PUSCH occasions satisfying the preset condition in one PUSCH occasion group in this embodiment may be used to transmit a same transport block, to improve uplink data transmission quality).
Regarding claim 15, CHAI teaches the method according to claim 14, wherein the second condition is the first condition excluding configured as a semi-static downlink symbol (par. 198, 274, 276-282, The conditions excluding semi-static).
Regarding claim 16, CHAI et al. (US 20220167350) teaches the method according to claim 15, wherein the determining the actual transmission behavior in the first slot based on the second quantity comprises:
abandoning transmission in the first slot in a case that the second quantity is greater than or equal to the first quantity (par. 198, 271, 265, 266, 267, 273, 274, a time domain resource length of the shortened PUSCH occasion #1 in the PUSCH occasion group #1 in this embodiment is less than the first time domain length threshold (X=2), the shortened PUSCH occasion #1 in the PUSCH occasion group #1 is used as an invalid first PUSCH occasion, and is not used to send uplink data); and
determining the actual transmission behavior in the first slot in a case that the second quantity is less than the first quantity (par. 154, 177, 198, 273, 274, 276-280, Time domain resources of a plurality of third PUSCH occasions satisfying the preset condition in one PUSCH occasion group in this embodiment may be used to transmit a same transport block, to improve uplink data transmission quality).
Regarding claim 17, CHAI et al. (US 20220167350) teaches the method according to claim 16, wherein the determining the actual transmission behavior in the first slot in a case that the second quantity is less than the first quantity comprises at least one of the following:
performing a target actual transmission behavior in the first slot (par. 154, 177, 198, 273, 274, 276-280, Time domain resources of a plurality of third PUSCH occasions satisfying the preset condition in one PUSCH occasion group in this embodiment may be used to transmit a same transport block, to improve uplink data transmission quality);
abandoning transmission in the first slot in a case that the first symbols, excluding invalid symbol resources, of the first slot contains no demodulation reference signal (optional, par. 154, 177, 198, 273, 274, 276-280);
performing a target actual transmission behavior based on the second quantity (par. 154, 177, 198, 273, 274, 276-280, Time domain resources of a plurality of third PUSCH occasions satisfying the preset condition in one PUSCH occasion group in this embodiment may be used to transmit a same transport block, to improve uplink data transmission quality);
determining based on high-layer configuration that a target actual transmission behavior is to be performed in the first slot (optional, par. 154, 177, 198, 273, 274, 276-280); or
determining an actual transmission behavior on each symbol in the first slot based on processing time (optional, par. 154, 177, 198, 273, 274, 276-280);
wherein the target actual transmission behavior comprises at least one of the following:
current uplink transmission is performed with rate-matching around invalid symbol resources (optional, par. 198, 271, 265, 266, 267, 273, 274,);
current uplink transmission is performed by removing or puncturing invalid symbol resources (optional, par. 198, 271, 265, 266, 267, 273, 274,);
current uplink transmission is performed by segmenting around invalid symbol resources (par. 122, 135, 136, a second PUSCH occasion that does not satisfy the preset condition is adjusted, in another manner such as a shortening manner or a splitting manner, to a PUSCH occasion satisfying the preset condition); or
abandoning transmission in the first slot (par. 198, 271, 265, 266, 267, 273, 274, a time domain resource length of the shortened PUSCH occasion #1 in the PUSCH occasion group #1 in this embodiment is less than the first time domain length threshold (X=2), the shortened PUSCH occasion #1 in the PUSCH occasion group #1 is used as an invalid first PUSCH occasion, and is not used to send uplink data).
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.
The factual inquiries 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.
Claim(s) 7, 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CHAI et al. (US 20220167350 continuation of app. PCT/CN2020/109578 filed on 08/17/2020) in view of YANG et al. (US 20230276440 with foreign app. GR 20200100567 filed on 09/18/2020).
Regarding claim 7, CHAI does not teach the method according to claim 6, wherein the semi-static downlink symbols are configured by tdd-UL-DL-ConfigurationCommon information and/or tdd-UL-DL- ConfigurationDedicated information.
But, YANG et al. (US 20230276440) in a similar or same field of endeavor teaches wherein the semi-static downlink symbols are configured by tdd-UL-DL-ConfigurationCommon information and/or tdd-UL-DL- ConfigurationDedicated information (par. 125, 126, Semi-static DL symbols as determined from at least one of the following: 1) symbols indicated as downlink by TDD-ConfigurationCommon or TDD-UL-DL-ConfigDedicated;).
Thus, it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effectively filing date of the claimed invention to implement the system or method as taught by YANG in the system of CHAI to determine invalid symbol.
The motivation would have been to optimize the resource selection for transmission by prevent invalid resource being selected.
Regarding claim 8, CHAI does not teach the method according to claim 6, wherein the synchronization signal block is indicated and configured based on ssb-PositionsInBurst in a system information block or ssb- PositionsInBurst in ServingCellConfigCommon.
But, YANG et al. (US 20230276440) in a similar or same field of endeavor teaches wherein the synchronization signal block is indicated and configured based on ssb-PositionsInBurst in a system information block or ssb- PositionsInBurst in ServingCellConfigCommon (par. 125, 126, symbols that are indicated to the UE by ssb-PositionInBurst in SIB1 or ssb-PositionInBurst in ServingCellConfigCommon for reception of SSB/PBCH blocks).
Thus, it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effectively filing date of the claimed invention to implement the system or method as taught by YANG in the system of CHAI to determine invalid symbol.
The motivation would have been to optimize the resource selection for transmission by prevent invalid resource being selected.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CHAI et al. (US 20220167350 continuation of app. PCT/CN2020/109578 filed on 08/17/2020) in view of KIM et al. (US 20220095360 as supported by provisional app. 63080407 filed on 09/18/2020).
Regarding claim 10, CHAI does not teach the method according to claim 6, wherein the first factor comprises at least one of the following:
a time resource with a scheduling restriction caused by a first measurement;
switching or transition period between uplink and downlink transmission;
radio frequency retuning time between a same or different uplink transmissions;
bandwidth part switching in a current or other cell, activation of a secondary cell, deactivation of a secondary cell, addition of a secondary cell, or release of a secondary cell;
transition between non-discontinuous reception and discontinuous reception in another serving cell; or
measurement gap.
But, KIM et al. (US 20220095360) in a similar or same field of endeavor teaches
wherein the first factor comprises at least one of the following:
a time resource with a scheduling restriction caused by a first measurement (optional, par. 66, 117);
switching or transition period between uplink and downlink transmission (optional, par. 66, 117);
radio frequency retuning time between a same or different uplink transmissions (optional, par. 66, 117);
bandwidth part switching in a current or other cell, activation of a secondary cell, deactivation of a secondary cell, addition of a secondary cell, or release of a secondary cell (optional, par. 66, 117);
transition between non-discontinuous reception and discontinuous reception in another serving cell (par. 66, 117, each active duration and/or inactive duration may include one or more symbols in the time domain, and may be used to differentiate uplink transmission occasions of the uplink configuration which are valid from uplink transmission occasions which are invalid); or
measurement gap (optional, par. 66, 117).
Thus, it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effectively filing date of the claimed invention to implement the system or method as taught by KIM in the system of CHAI to determine invalid symbol.
The motivation would have been to significantly reduce a power consumption and improve battery performance at the communication devices.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CHAI et al. (US 20220167350 continuation of app. PCT/CN2020/109578 filed on 08/17/2020) in view of FAKOORIAN et al. (US 20200267756).
Regarding claim 11, CHAI does not teach the method according to claim 6, wherein the half-duplex rule comprises at least one of the following:
terminal behavior under time division duplex half-duplex carrier aggregation; or
terminal behavior under half-duplex frequency division duplex for reduced capability devices.
However, FAKOORIAN et al. (US 20200267756) in a similar or same field of endeavor teaches terminal behavior under time division duplex half-duplex carrier aggregation (par. 79, 87, half-duplex… a carrier aggregation… time division duplexing (TDD)); or
terminal behavior under half-duplex frequency division duplex for reduced capability devices (par. 79, 87, half-duplex…frequency division duplexing (FDD)).
Thus, it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effectively filing date of the claimed invention to implement the system or method as taught by FAKOORIAN in the system of CHAI to determine invalid symbol.
The motivation would have been to optimize the resource selection for transmission by prevent invalid resource being selected.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CHAI et al. (US 20220167350 continuation of app. PCT/CN2020/109578 filed on 08/17/2020) in view of LY et al. (US 20230421327 supported by provisional app. 63137668 filed on 01/14/2021).
Regarding claim 12, CHAI does not teach the method according to claim 6, wherein the first condition is determined based on at least one of the following:
classification of physical uplink shared channel;
format of physical uplink control channel; or
uplink control information carried by physical uplink control channel.
But, LY et al. (US 20230421327) in a similar or same field of endeavor teaches classification of physical uplink shared channel (par. 65, 67, 73, 77, PUSCH repetition Type A… PUSCH repetition Type B);
format of physical uplink control channel (par. 53, whether short or long PUCCHs are transmitted and depending on the particular PUCCH format used); or
uplink control information carried by physical uplink control channel (par. 54, The PUCCH carries uplink control information (UCI)).
Thus, it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effectively filing date of the claimed invention to implement the system or method as taught by LY in the system of CHAI to determine invalid symbol.
The motivation would have been to optimize the resource selection for transmission by prevent invalid resource being selected.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
KUMAGAI et al. (US 20240023081) teaches wherein the semi-static downlink symbols are configured by tdd-UL-DL-ConfigurationCommon information and/or tdd-UL-DL- ConfigurationDedicated information (par. 50, The slot format configuration information is, for example, tdd-UL-DL-ConfigurationCommon or tdd-UL-DL-ConfigurationDedicated…the above configuration information is referred to as semi-static TDD configuration information).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THINH D TRAN whose telephone number is (571)270-3934. The examiner can normally be reached mon-fri 9-6.
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, FARUK HAMZA can be reached at 5712727969. 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.
/THINH D TRAN/for /Thinh Tran/, Patent Examiner of Art Unit 2466 03/20/2026