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 .
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.
Claims 1-3, 5-13, 16-23, 25-28 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al (US 2020/0314891, hereinafter Li, as disclosed in the IDS), in view of Pan et al (US 2024/0032093, hereinafter Pan, claiming priority date of both provisional applications) and in view of Ganesan et al (US 2024/0032098, hereinafter Ganesan, claiming priority date of provisional application 63/122,855).
Regarding claim 1, Li discloses a wireless communication device (UE, Fig. 3) for wireless communication, comprising: one or more antennas, a processing system, coupled with the one or more antennas, that includes one or more processors and one or more memories that store code for the one or more processors (antennas, memory and processor, Fig. 3), configured to cause the wireless device to: no-listen-before-talk (no-LBT) and after a first channel occupancy time (COT), an away period during which no transmissions are to occur in a beam direction used in the first COT (no-LBT option, where UE can transmit uplink transmission without performing LBT, Para [0431-432], transmission in idle period is not permitted, Para [0283], idle period occurs after COT period, Fig. 13); perform, during the away period, channel sensing (device may perform LBT during observation slots, Para [0161], observation slots occurring during the idle period, Para [0281]/Fig. 24); and transmit a communication in a second COT after the away period, based at least in part on a result of the channel sensing (upon successful LBT, the initiating device can use directional transmissions during the COT, Para [0329], in this case a second COT is after a first COT, Fig. 24); but is not explicitly about starting in a no-listen-before-talk (no-LBT) mode. Pan discloses a non-LBT mode can be used, Para [0104], switching between LBT and no-LBT mode, Para [0259] and UE can determine to autonomously use the LBT mode, Para [0109], where the UE starts in no-LBT mode. Also see Para [0055, 206] from provisional application 63/261,886. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to utilize the techniques taught by Pan in the system of Li in order to enable an efficient coexistence mechanism between LBT and no-LBT modes; and does not explicitly disclose transmit, in a no LBT mode, one or more communications during a first COT. Ganesan discloses starting a no-LBT mode, Para [0063], can switch from no-LBT mode to LBT mode, Para [0053/69], on-going transmission in a first COT initiated based on no-LBT, the next COT can be initiated based on LBT, Para [0072]. Also see Para [0273, 249, 299] of the provisional application. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to utilize the techniques taught by Ganesan in the system of Li in view with Pan in order to further improve coexistence between no-LBT and LBT and the switching between the two modes.
Regarding claims 2 and 22, Li discloses the wireless communication device/method of claim 1/21, wherein the wireless communication device is a user equipment (UE, Para [0018]).
Regarding claims 3 and 23, Li discloses the wireless communication device of claim 1/21, wherein the wireless communication device is a base station (gNB, Para [0017]).
Regarding claims 5 and 25, Li discloses the wireless communication device/method of claim 1/21, wherein the away period is started after a threshold duration for delaying the away period (idle period is “delayed” for the duration of the COT, Fig. 13).
Regarding claim 6, Li discloses the wireless communication device of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are configured to perform channel sensing with a beam that is expected to be used for the second COT (performing directional LBT with specific beam, Para [0310]).
Regarding claim 7, Li discloses the wireless communication device of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are configured to perform channel sensing for a threshold duration (one or more observation slots can be assigned for performing LBT, Para [0266], an observation slot is at least 9 microseconds, Para [0161]).
Regarding claims 8 and 26, Li discloses the wireless communication device/method of claim 1/21, wherein the one or more processors are configured to perform channel sensing at multiple occasions throughout the away period (device may perform LBT during observation slots, Para [0161], observation slots occurring during the idle period, Para [0281]/Fig. 24).
Regarding claim 9, Li discloses the wireless communication device of claim 8, wherein the multiple occasions are separated by at least a threshold duration (there can be non-consecutive observation slots with a gap between them, Para [0253], obvious to one of ordinary skill the gap would have a minimum duration).
Regarding claim 10, Li discloses the wireless communication device of claim 9, wherein the result of the channel sensing is clear if a threshold quantity of the multiple occasions are clear (LBT is successful if at least one observation slot passes LBT, Para [0266]).
Regarding claims 11 and 27, Li discloses the wireless communication device/method of claim 1/21, wherein the one or more processors are configured to start the second COT after a restriction period if the result of the channel sensing is not clear, wherein the restriction period starts after an end of the away period (UE device is restricted from transmitting due to failed LBT for a COT duration by monitoring for a preamble, Para [0326], obvious variation to one of ordinary skill in the art, in this case the device can have a second COT after the COT obtained by the other device is over).
Regarding claims 12 and 28, Li discloses the wireless communication device/method of claim 11/27, wherein a duration of the restriction period is based at least in part on one or more of stored configuration information, an energy detection value, or the result of the channel sensing (determining COT duration configuration from monitoring energy of neighbor transmissions, Para [0325]).
Regarding claim 13, Li discloses the wireless communication device of claim 11, but not wherein the one or more processors are configured to, during the restriction period, switch to an LBT mode based at least in part on the result of the channel sensing. Pan discloses the UE can autonomously decide the LBT mode and perform LBT before transmission, Para [0109], UE can switch LBT based on LBT results, Para [0117].
Regarding claim 16, Li discloses the wireless communication device of claim 11, wherein the one or more processors are configured to extend the away period before starting the restriction period (the idle period can be at least 5% of the COT, Para [0184], obvious variation that the idle period can be increased higher than 5%).
Regarding claim 17, Li discloses the wireless communication device of claim 11, wherein the one or more processors are configured to receive an indication of a duration for the restriction period (UE device is restricted from transmitting due to failed LBT for a COT duration by monitoring for a preamble, Para [0326], preamble carries useful system configuration information such as COT duration, Para [0223]).
Regarding claim 18, Li discloses the wireless communication device of claim 1, wherein the away period and the channel sensing are applied per beam or set of beams. (performing directional LBT with specific beam, Para [0310]).
Regarding claim 19, Li discloses a base station (gNB, Fig. 2) for wireless communication, comprising: one or more antennas, one or more memories and one or more processors (antennas, memory and processor, Fig. 2), coupled to the memory, configured to: generate, for a user equipment (UE) operating in a no listen-before-talk (no-LBT) mode, an indication of a duration of a restriction period that follows an away period during which no transmissions are to occur by the UE in a beam direction used in the first COT and during which the UE performs channel sensing, wherein the away period follows a first COT during which UE transmits communications while operating in a no-LBT mode; and transmit the indication to the UE (no-LBT option, where UE can transmit uplink transmission without performing LBT, Para [0431-432], transmission in idle period is not permitted, Para [0283], idle period occurs after COT period, Fig. 13, device may perform LBT during observation slots, Para [0161], observation slots occurring during the idle period, Para [0281]/Fig. 24, UE device is restricted from transmitting due to failed LBT for a COT duration by monitoring for a preamble, Para [0326], UE transmitting while operating in a no-LBT mode is not a limitation on the claimed apparatus).
Regarding claim 20, Li discloses the base station of claim 19, wherein the one or more processors are configured to transmit configuration information for the restriction period or the away period (preamble carries useful system configuration information such as COT duration, Para [0223]).
Regarding claim 21, Li discloses a method of wireless communication performed by a wireless communication device, comprising: no-listen-before-talk (no-LBT) and after a first channel occupancy time (COT), an away period during which no transmissions are to occur in a beam direction used in the first COT (no-LBT option, where UE can transmit uplink transmission without performing LBT, Para [0431-432], transmission in idle period is not permitted, Para [0283], idle period occurs after COT period, Fig. 13); performing, during the away period, channel sensing (device may perform LBT during observation slots, Para [0161], observation slots occurring during the idle period, Para [0281]/Fig. 24); and transmitting a communication in a second COT after the away period, based at least in part on a result of the channel sensing (upon successful LBT, the initiating device can use directional transmissions during the COT, Para [0329], in this case a second COT is after a first COT, Fig. 24); but is not explicitly about starting in a no-listen-before-talk (no-LBT) mode. Pan discloses a non-LBT mode can be used, Para [0104], switching between LBT and no-LBT mode, Para [0259] and UE can determine to autonomously use the LBT mode, Para [0109], where the UE starts in no-LBT mode. Also see Para [0055, 206] from provisional application 63/261,886. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to utilize the techniques taught by Pan in the system of Li in order to enable an efficient coexistence mechanism between LBT and no-LBT modes; and does not explicitly disclose transmit, in a no LBT mode, one or more communications during a first COT. Ganesan discloses starting a no-LBT mode, Para [0063], can switch from no-LBT mode to LBT mode, Para [0053/69], on-going transmission in a first COT initiated based on no-LBT, the next COT can be initiated based on LBT, Para [0072]. Also see Para [0273, 249, 299] of the provisional application. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to utilize the techniques taught by Ganesan in the system of Li in view with Pan in order to further improve coexistence between no-LBT and LBT and the switching between the two modes.
Regarding claim 30, Li discloses a method of wireless communication performed by a base station, comprising: generating, for a user equipment (UE) operating in a no listen-before-talk (no-LBT) mode, an indication of a duration of a restriction period that follows an away period during which no transmissions are to occur by the UE in a beam direction used in the first COT and during which the UE performs channel sensing, wherein the away period follows a first COT during which UE transmits communications while operating in a no-LBT mode; and transmitting the indication to the UE (no-LBT option, where UE can transmit uplink transmission without performing LBT, Para [0431-432], transmission in idle period is not permitted, Para [0283], idle period occurs after COT period, Fig. 13, device may perform LBT during observation slots, Para [0161], observation slots occurring during the idle period, Para [0281]/Fig. 24, UE device is restricted from transmitting due to failed LBT for a COT duration by monitoring for a preamble, Para [0326], UE transmitting while operating in no-LBT mode is not performed by the BS).
Claims 4 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li, in view of Pan, in view of Ganesan and in view of Ye et al (US 2021/0058206, hereinafter Ye).
Regarding claims 4 and 24, Li discloses the wireless communication device/method of claim 1/21, but not fully wherein the away period is longer in duration than a maximum extended clear channel assessment period that could be configured for the wireless communication device. Li discloses the idle period can be at least 5% of the COT, Para [0184] and Ye discloses the maximum eCCA period can be equal to 5% of the MCOT, Para [0156], therefore the idle period can be longer than the max eCCA period. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to utilize the techniques taught by Ye in the system of Li in view of Pan and Ganesan in order to effectively utilize an anchor channel to reduce UE search time and power consumption.
Claims 14, 15 and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li, in view of Pan, in view of Ganesan and in view of Lin et al (US 2023/0058838, hereinafter Lin).
Regarding claim 14, Li discloses the wireless communication device of claim 11, but not wherein the one or more processors are configured to, during the restriction period, reduce a transmit power. Lin discloses there is a first threshold for determining whether the channel is idle or not, Para [0109], where the sensed CCA value is greater than a threshold but the device can transmit with a reduced transmit power, Para [0117], that is the device could transmit with lower power to not interference during the restricted period. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to utilize the techniques taught by Lin in the system of Li in view of Pan and Ganesan in order to better multiplex services with different priority levels.
Regarding claim 15, Li discloses the wireless communication device of claim 11, but not explicitly wherein the one or more processors are further configured to, during the restriction period, reduce a duty cycle (in one case the UE device is restricted from transmitting due to failed LBT for a COT duration by monitoring for a preamble, Para [0326], therefore the duty cycle is reduced).
Regarding claim 29, Li discloses the method of claim 27, but not further comprising, during the restriction period, reducing a transmit power or a duty cycle. Lin discloses there is a first threshold for determining whether the channel is idle or not, Para [0109], where the sensed CCA value is greater than a threshold but the device can transmit with a reduced transmit power, Para [0117], that is the device could transmit with lower power to not interference during the restricted period.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 3/4/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The Applicant amends the limitations in the claim and argues the references do not disclose the amended limitations. Applicant argues Pan and Li do not disclose transmitting communications during a first COT while in a no-LBT mode. Applicant argues Li and Pan do not disclose starting an away period while in no-LBT mode. In response, arguments are moot in view of a new reference being used in the current office action. The terminal is able to switch out no-LBT mode to LBT mode after the COT is over. Applicant also argues over dependent claim 5. Applicant argues Li and Pan do not disclose the away period is started after a threshold duration for delaying the away period. Applicant argues Li does not disclose delaying the idle period following the COT. In response, that isn’t a limitation in the claim. Examiner interprets the idle/away period is started after the COT duration (i.e. “threshold” duration).
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 KEVIN CUNNINGHAM whose telephone number is (571) 272-1765. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Thursday 7:30-18:00 (EST).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Huy Vu can be reached on (571) 272-3155. The fax 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.
/KEVIN M CUNNINGHAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2461
Prosecution Insights