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
The examiner has taken notice that claims 6, 11 and 21 are amended and new claims 28 and 29 have been added. Claims 6-16 and 21-29 are currently pending in the present application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see response, filed 02/24/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 6, 11 and 21 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Rastegardoost.
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) 6-8, 11-13, 21-23 and 28-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yuan et al. (US 2023/0299906) in view of Baldemair (US 2023/0370130) in further view of Rastegardoost et al. (US 2024/0031056).
Regarding claim 6, Yuan teaches an information transmission method, comprising: receiving, by a terminal device, first downlink control information from a network device (Paragraphs [0043]; [0092] describes receiving control information from a network device that provides instructions for PUCCH transmission),
Yuan doesn’t teach wherein the first downlink control information is downlink control information scrambled by a radio network temporary identifier (RNTI),
However, in analogous art Baldemair teaches wherein the first downlink control information is downlink control information scrambled by a radio network temporary identifier (RNTI) (Paragraph [0089] describes how DCI is scrambled with RNTI for device identification),
Yuan teaches the first downlink control information comprises first information which comprises repetition indication information (Paragraphs [0088]; [0091]-[0092] describes how repetition indication information is provided in DCI messages),
Yuan and Baldemair don’t teach and a first field indicating the first information is selected based on a type of the terminal device, the downlink control information comprising the first field;
in analogous art Rastegardoost teaches and a first field indicating the first information is selected based on a type of the terminal device, the downlink control information comprising the first field (Paragraphs [0299]; [0301]; [0316]-[0317]; [0335]-[0336]; [0339] describes that one or more information fields of the same DCI format may be different for a first-type UE and a legacy UE, and that the DCI format may comprise first information fields for first-type UEs and second information fields for legacy UEs. This corresponds to a field indicating the repetition information being selected based on a type of the terminal device);
Yuan teaches and performing data transmission based on the first downlink control information (Paragraphs [0094]-[0096]; [0100] describes how the UE performs the actual data transmission (transmitting PUCCH) based on the received DCI information, including the repetition parameters).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to modify Yuan in view of Baldemair to incorporate the teachings of Rastegardoost a device-type-aware DCI field structure where the same DCI can carry different fields including dedicated repetition indication and TBS scaling that are selected and interpreted based on the type of terminal device, allowing the network to independently optimize the random access response for each UE type without mutual interference or performance degradation (Rastegardoost , Paragraph [0245]).
Regarding claim 7, Yuan in view of Baldemair and Rastegardoost, Yuan teaches wherein the repetition indication information is repetition indication information of a physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) (Paragraphs [0088]; [0091] describes transmission of repetition indication information and the repetition indication is for PUCCH).
Regarding claim 8, Yuan in view of Baldemair and Rastegardoost, Yuan teaches wherein 2 bits of the first downlink control information are used to indicate the repetition indication information (Table 1, Paragraph [0092] describes UE receives DCI with codepoint. UE decodes 2-bit codepoint (per table 1-3) to determine PUCCH repetition count).
Regarding claim 11, Yuan teaches a communications apparatus, comprising a processor configured to perform (Paragraphs [0096]):
receiving first downlink control information from a network device (Paragraphs [0043]; [0092] describes receiving control information from a network device that provides instructions for PUCCH transmission),
Yuan doesn’t teach wherein the first downlink control information is downlink control information scrambled by a radio network temporary identifier (RNTI),
However, in analogous art Baldemair teaches wherein the first downlink control information is downlink control information scrambled by a radio network temporary identifier (RNTI) (Paragraph [0089] describes how DCI is scrambled with RNTI for device identification),
Yuan teaches the first downlink control information comprises first information which comprises repetition indication information (Paragraphs [0088]; [0091]-[0092] describes how repetition indication information is provided in DCI messages),
Yuan and Baldemair don’t teach and a first field indicating the first information is selected based on a type of the apparatus, the downlink control information comprising the first field;
in analogous art Rastegardoost and a first field indicating the first information is selected based on a type of the apparatus, the downlink control information comprising the first field (Paragraphs [0299]; [0301]; [0316]-[0317]; [0335]-[0336]; [0339] describes that one or more information fields of the same DCI format may be different for a first-type UE and a legacy UE, and that the DCI format may comprise first information fields for first-type UEs and second information fields for legacy UEs. This corresponds to a field indicating the repetition information being selected based on a type of the terminal device);
Yuan teaches and performing data transmission based on the first downlink control information (Paragraphs [0094]-[0096]; [0100] describes how the UE performs the actual data transmission (transmitting PUCCH) based on the received DCI information, including the repetition parameters).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Yuan in view of Baldemair into the combination of Rastegardoost for the same reason as claim 6 above.
Regarding claim 28, Yuan in view of Baldemair and Rastegardoost, Rastegardoost teaches wherein the type of the terminal device comprises a reduced capability terminal device (RedCap) or a non-RedCap terminal device (Paragraphs [0251]; [0304] describes distinguishes RedCap UEs from legacy UEs, these are distinct device types with different hardware capabilities).
Claim 21 is rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 11 respectively.
Claims 12 and 22 are rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 7 respectively.
Claims 13 and 23 are rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 8 respectively.
Claim 29 is rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 28 respectively.
Claim(s) 9-10, 14-16 and 24-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yuan in view of Baldemair in further view of Rastegardoost and Fakoorian et al. (US 2022/0322447).
Regarding claim 9, Yuan in view of Baldemair and Rastegardoost, Yuan teaches wherein the first downlink control information is used to schedule the PUCCH (Paragraphs [0073]; [0091]-[0093] describes PUCCH scheduling, DCI assigns specific PUCCH resource for transmission),
the first downlink control information does not comprise second information (Table 1, 2 and 3, Paragraph [0075] describes four repetition values n2, n4, n8 and n16 all four values are active or not reserved. DCI 2-bit field selects among these four (not reserved state)),
Yuan, Rastegardoost and Baldemair don’t teach and the second information comprises a first reserved bit
However, in analogous art Fakoorian teaches and the second information comprises a first reserved bit (Paragraphs [0025]-[0030] describes the second information that uses reserved bits to indicate repetitions but this for PDSCH/Msg2, not for PUCCH scheduling).
Yuan, Baldemair, Rastegardoost and Fakoorian are all considered analogous to the claimed invention, as they pertain to the same field of wireless communication systems, specifically 5G/NR RACH (Random Access Channel) procedures and coverage enhancement through repetition mechanisms for uplink control channels.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yuan in view of Baldemair in further view of Rastegardoost and Fakoorian’s method of RNTI scrambling and DCI-based repetition indication to improve coverage enhancement and random access procedure efficiency (Fakoorian, Paragraph [0019]).
Regarding claim 10, Yuan in view of Baldemair, Rastegardoost and Fakoorian, Fakoorian teaches wherein the first reserved bit is a bit occupied by a downlink assignment index (DAI) (Paragraphs [0027]-[0028] describes DCI 1_0 has reserved bits, these reserved bits are “in the form of the downlink assignment index (DAI)”)
Regarding claim 27, Yuan in view of Baldemair, Rastegardoost and Fakoorian, Fakoorian teaches wherein the first downlink control information is used to schedule an acknowledgment feedback message of a contention resolution message of the terminal device (Paragraphs [0022]; [0027] describes DCI 1_0 is used to schedule Msg4 (the contention resolution message), after receiving Msg4, the UE would send an ACK/NACK feedback. The DCI schedules the PDSCH carrying Msg4).
Claims 14 and 24 are rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 9 respectively.
Claims 15 and 25 are rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 10 respectively.
Claims 16 and 26 are rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 27 respectively.
Conclusion
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 MEHERET WOLDEGEBREAL KIDANE whose telephone number is (571)270-3642. The examiner can normally be reached M-F8:30-5.
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, Ricky Ngo can be reached at 571-272-3139. 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.
/Chandrahas B Patel/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2464
/M.W.K./Examiner, Art Unit 2464