DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 1-20 are pending for examination in this application.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 04/30/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to theconditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claim does not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter. Claim 20 is directed to a computer program, which does not have a physical or tangible form and is claimed as a product without any structural recitation.
It is recommended that this claim be amended such that it falls under a statutory category of invention.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC §103
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, 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 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 non-obviousness.
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.
Claims 1-8 and 10-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Huang et al. (US 20220085915 A1), hereinafter Huang.
Regarding claim 1:
Huang discloses an apparatus (user equipment {UE}, element 104 in Fig.2) comprising:
at least one processor (processor, element 212 in Fig.2); and
at least one memory storing instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor (memory, element 216 in Fig.2 and [0031]), cause the apparatus at least to perform:
determining signal characteristics of a physical uplink control channel to indicate capability or incapability of the apparatus to transmit the physical uplink control channel with repetitions (defining a DMRS pattern, e.g., signal characteristics, for channel transmission repetitions or for physical uplink control channel {PUCCH} repetitions that are mapped to a set of uplink symbols [0057 and 0066], and wherein PUCCH repetitions can be performed, e.g., capability of transmissions repetitions, refrained or dropped, e.g., e.g., incapability of transmissions repetitions, [0057, 0077]); and
transmitting, to a network node, the physical uplink control channel with the signal characteristics indicating capability or incapability of the apparatus to transmit the physical uplink control channel with repetitions (transmitting, to base station [0102], channel transmission repetitions according to DMRS pattern, which is defined though symbol length of 3 in slot { [0071 or Fig. 8} and wherein capability of repetitions is indicated [element 806 in Fig.8] and incapability of repetition is indicated [element 808 in Fig.8]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art at the time before the claimed invention was filed to transmit the PUCCH repetitions along with signal characteristics, e.g., DMRS pattern; thus increasing throughput and reliability of communications by performing transmission repetitions and proper demodulation/decoding.
Regarding claim 2:
Huang discloses all limitations of claim 1, and –
Huang further discloses the signal characteristics comprise a dedicated demodulation reference signal pattern for indicating capability or incapability of the apparatus to transmit the physical uplink control channel with repetitions (comprising a DMRS pattern, e.g., signal characteristics, for channel transmission repetitions/ PUCCH repetitions [0057 and 0066], which can be performed, refrained, or dropped [0057, 0077]).
Regarding claim 3:
Huang discloses all limitations of claim 2, and –
Huang further discloses the at least one memory storing instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to perform:
transmitting the physical uplink control channel with the dedicated demodulation reference signal pattern (transmitting a channel transmission repetition with DMRS pattern [0072, lines 1-5]).
Regarding claim 4:
Huang discloses all limitations of claim 1, and –
Huang further discloses the signal characteristics comprise a slot shift or a specific slot for transmission of the physical uplink control channel for indicating capability or incapability of the apparatus to transmit the physical uplink control channel with repetitions (shifting repetition from slot n+1 to slot n+2 [0083 and Fig.8).
Regarding claim 5:
Huang discloses all limitations of claim 4, and –
Huang further discloses the at least one memory storing instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to perform:
transmitting the physical uplink control channel in a slot different than the one indicated by the network node for transmission of the physical uplink control channel (transmitting PUCCH repetition in slot n+2 {#818} that is different than slot n+1 {#816} [0083 and Fig.8), wherein the slot is determined based on a slot shift or a specific slot according to configuration or pre-configuration (slot is shifted [0083] or next slot in super uplink slot including uplink symbols {[0089] or Fig.8}).
Regarding claim 6:
Huang discloses all limitations of claim 1, and –
Huang further discloses the signal characteristics comprise a second physical uplink control channel resource for transmission of the physical uplink control channel (symbols in 806, Fig.8), wherein the second physical uplink control channel resource is different from a first physical uplink control channel resource for transmission of the physical uplink control channel (symbols in 806 are different from symbols in 816) in at least one of the following:
a time domain (symbols, [0071 or Fig.8), a frequency domain, or a code domain, wherein the second physical uplink control channel resource indicates capability of the apparatus to transmit the physical uplink control channel with repetitions (symbols for repetition in 806, Fig.8), and the first control channel resource indicates incapability of the apparatus to transmit the physical uplink control channel with repetitions (and symbols 816 are not used for repetitions {[0083] or Fig.8}.
Regarding claim 7:
Huang discloses all limitations of claim 1, and –
Huang further discloses the at least one memory storing instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to perform:
transmitting the physical uplink control channel on the second physical uplink control channel resource (transmitting PUCCH on symbols in 818 or 828).
Regarding claim 8:
Huang discloses all limitations of claim 1, and –
Huang further discloses the at least one memory storing instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to perform:
receiving a cell-specific configuration for transmitting the physical uplink control channel with repetitions (receiving configurations via radio resource control (RRC) signaling, system information or other broadcast signaling, e.g., cell specific signaling [0069, lines 16-20]).
Regarding claim 10:
Claim 10 is rejected for substantially same reason as applied to claim 1 above, respectively, except that claim 10 is recited from the perspective of a base station, and wherein Huang [in claim 18] also discloses an apparatus (base station, element 102 in Fig.3) comprising: at least one processor (processor, element 312 in Fig.3); and at least one memory storing instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor (memory, element 316 in Fig.3), cause the apparatus at least to perform claimed functionalities.
Regarding claims 11-12:
Huang discloses all limitations of claim 10, and –
Claims 11-12 are rejected for substantially same reason as applied to claims 2-3 above, respectively, except that claims 11-12 are recited from the perspective of a base station.
Regarding claim 13:
Claim 13 is rejected for substantially same reason as applied to claim 1 above, except that claim 13 is in a method claim format.
Regarding claims 14-19:
Claims 14-19 discloses all limitations of claim 13, and –
Claims 14-19 are rejected for substantially same reason as applied to claims 2-7 above, respectively, except that claims 14-19 are in a method claim format.
Regarding claim 20:
Claim 20 is rejected for substantially same reason as applied to claim 1 above, except that claim 20 is recited as a computer program [0031].
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Huang, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Wang et al. (US 20190261353 A1), hereinafter Wang.
Regarding claim 9:
Huang discloses all limitations of claim 1, and –
Huang does not explicitly disclose the transmitted physical uplink control channel comprises an acknowledgement, ACK, or a negative acknowledgement, NACK, of a radio resource control setup message; which is known in the art and commonly applied in communications field for data communications, as suggested in Wang’s disclosure as below.
Wang, from the same field of endeavor, discloses the transmitted physical uplink control channel comprises an acknowledgement, ACK, or a negative acknowledgement, NACK, of a radio resource control setup message (ACK for MSG 4 , e.g., uplink transmission, has a repetition level and is configured before RRC connection setup [0095] or NACK is transmitted [0065]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art at the time before the claimed invention was filed to transmit ACK or NACK for receiving resources assignment; thus identifying a subset of a resource set corresponding to PUCCH transmission to base station, so as for the base station to efficiently control the status of resources – Wang [0005, 0087].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
He (2022/0271886 A1 [0189, 0198]),
Huang (2022/0086823 A1 [0031, 0075]), and
Taherzadeh (2022/0248477 A1 [0052, 0059]),
are all cited to show that transmitting the PUCCH repetitions along with signal characteristics, e.g., DMRS pattern – would increase throughput and reliability of communications by performing transmission repetitions and proper demodulation/decoding – similar to the claimed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CAMQUYEN THAI whose telephone number is (571)270-7245. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday, 9:00am-5:30pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and videoconferencing 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, Ayman A. Abaza, can be reached at 571-270-0422. 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.
/C.Q.T./
/AYMAN A ABAZA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2465