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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This communication is responsive to Application # 18549140 filed 1 09/05/2023. Claims 1-20 canceled; claim 21-35 added; and claims 31-35 withdrawn. Claims 21-30 are subject to examination.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 21-30 in the reply filed on 01/20/2026 is acknowledged.
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 the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 21-30 are rejected under 35. U.S.C 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Regarding claim 21 and 26, claim 21 and 26 are directed to a statutory category of subject matter. The claims fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the claims are directed to either a process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter.
Next, the claims are analyzed to determine whether they are directed to a judicial exception. The subject matter of independent claims 21 and 26 are directed to data processing, e.g. “storing”, “encode”. This idea is similar to the concepts that have been identified as abstract by the courts, such as organizing and manipulating information through mathematical correlations in Digitech Image Techs., LLC v Electronics for Imaging, Inc., 758 F.3d 1344, (Fed. Cir. 2014). Therefore, the claims are directed to an abstract idea.
The claims do not include additional elements beyond the abstract idea of encoding data. For example, the claimed step of encoding indication of modulation order and encoding DMRS is not considered to be significantly more. Therefore, the claim does not amount to more than the abstract idea itself. Claim 21 and 26 are not patent eligible.
Regarding Claim(s) 22-25 and 27-30 are also rejected since they are dependent upon rejected claims 21 and 26 as set forth above.
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.
Claim 26-30 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 26 recites “encode … a first demodulation reference signal (DMRS) for the initial transmission of the TB and a second DMRS for the retransmission of the TB on the PUSCH”. Claim 26 is a base station claim and it is clear whether base station is transmitting the PUSCH. As best understood by the examiner and for the purpose of applying prior art, the examiner considers PUSCH is transmitted by the user equipment.
Claim(s) 27-30 are also rejected because they are dependent upon rejected claim 26 as set forth above and include limitations of the claim 26.
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 21-22, 25-27, and 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SHRESTHA et al. (SHRESTHA hereinafter) (US 20220224449 A1) in view of SRIDHARAN et al. (SRIDHARAN hereinafter) (US 20210352527 A1).
Regarding claim 21, SHRESTHA teaches, A user equipment (UE) comprising:
memory to store a received indication of a first modulation for an initial transmission of a transport block (TB) (SHRESTHA; reference number 520 ... DCI that includes an uplink grant to schedule a first PUSCH transmission ... the uplink grant may indicate a PHY configuration that includes one or more PHY parameters associated with a first BLER target performance for the first PUSCH, which may be an original transport block transmission, Par. 0071), and a received indication of a second modulation for a retransmission of a transport block (TB) on a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH), wherein the first and second modulation orders are different (SHRESTHA; As further shown in FIG. 5, and by reference number 540 ... another DCI message that includes an uplink grant associated with the same HARQ process as the first PUSCH ... may configure one or more PHY parameters associated with a second BLER target performance, which may be ... different from the first BLER target performance for the first PUSCH … the uplink grant carried in the subsequent DCI is for ... a retransmission of the earlier PUSCH, Par. 0073; change to one or more PHY parameters (e.g., a different MCS table, Par. 0070; a PHY configuration to achieve a lower BLER target for the second retransmission, Par. 0064); and
processor circuitry to encode, for transmission based on the indications of the first and second modulation orders, a first demodulation reference signal (DMRS) for the initial transmission of the TB and a second DMRS for the retransmission of the TB on the PUSCH, wherein the first and second DMRS are different (SHRESTHA; the DCI may indicate a different PHY configuration to meet the new BLER target performance, such as different power control parameters, a different MCS table, a different DMRS configuration, Par. 0069).
Although SHRESTHA teaches MCS, but failed to explicitly teach,
modulation order.
However, in the same field of endeavor, SRIDHARAN teaches,
modulation order (SRIDHARAN; the base station 402 may instruct the UE 404 to use an MCS in the reserved range defined in the MCS index table … the UE 404 may be instructed to transmit the TB at a first modulation order and retransmit the TB at a second modulation order of the MCS in the reserved range, lower than the first modulation order, Par. 0106).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of SHRESTHA to include the use of MCS table as taught by SRIDHARAN in order to determine modulation order (SRIDHARAN; Par. 0104).
Regarding claim 26, SHRESTHA teaches, One or more non-transitory computer-readable media comprising instructions that, upon execution of the instructions by one or more processors of a fifth generation (5G) or higher base station in a cellular network, is to cause the base station to:
encode, for transmission to a user equipment (UE), an indication of a first modulation for an initial transmission of a transport block (TB) (SHRESTHA; reference number 520 ... DCI that includes an uplink grant to schedule a first PUSCH transmission ... the uplink grant may indicate a PHY configuration that includes one or more PHY parameters associated with a first BLER target performance for the first PUSCH, which may be an original transport block transmission, Par. 0071), and an indication of a second modulation for a retransmission of a transport block (TB) on a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH), wherein the first and second modulation orders are different (SHRESTHA; As further shown in FIG. 5, and by reference number 540 ... another DCI message that includes an uplink grant associated with the same HARQ process as the first PUSCH ... may configure one or more PHY parameters associated with a second BLER target performance, which may be ... different from the first BLER target performance for the first PUSCH … the uplink grant carried in the subsequent DCI is for ... a retransmission of the earlier PUSCH, Par. 0073; change to one or more PHY parameters (e.g., a different MCS table, Par. 0070; a PHY configuration to achieve a lower BLER target for the second retransmission, Par. 0064); and
encode, for transmission based on the first and the second modulation orders, a first demodulation reference signal (DMRS) for the initial transmission of the TB and a second DMRS for the retransmission of the TB on the PUSCH, wherein the first and second DMRS are different (SHRESTHA; the DCI may indicate a different PHY configuration to meet the new BLER target performance, such as different power control parameters, a different MCS table, a different DMRS configuration, Par. 0069).
Although SHRESTHA teaches MCS, but failed to explicitly teach,
modulation order.
However, in the same field of endeavor, SRIDHARAN teaches,
modulation order (SRIDHARAN; the base station 402 may instruct the UE 404 to use an MCS in the reserved range defined in the MCS index table … the UE 404 may be instructed to transmit the TB at a first modulation order and retransmit the TB at a second modulation order of the MCS in the reserved range, lower than the first modulation order, Par. 0106).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of SHRESTHA to include the use of MCS table as taught by SRIDHARAN in order to determine modulation order (SRIDHARAN; Par. 0104).
Regarding claim 22 and claim 27, SHRESTHA- SRIDHARAN teaches, The UE of claim 21 and The one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 26 respectively, wherein different transmit powers are used for the initial transmission and the retransmission (SHRESTHA; DCI indicate a change to one or more PHY parameters (e.g., a different … uplink power control, Par. 0070), and wherein the processor circuitry is further to insert a time gap between the initial transmission and the retransmission (SHRESTHA; Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 25 and claim 30, SHRESTHA- SRIDHARAN teaches, The UE of claim 21 and The one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 26 respectively, wherein the indication of the first modulation order or the indication of the second modulation order is included in a DCI that schedules the initial transmission or the retransmission (SHRESTHA; DCI indicate a change to one or more PHY parameters (e.g., a different MCS table, Par. 0070).
Claim 23-24 and 28-29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SHRESTHA- SRIDHARAN and in further view of KHOSHNEVISAN et al. (KHOSHNEVISAN hereinafter) (US 20230292312 A1).
Regarding claim 23, SHRESTHA- SRIDHARAN teaches, The UE of claim 22.
SHRESTHA- SRIDHARAN failed to explicitly teach,
wherein the processor circuitry is further configured to identify an indication of a configuration of the time gap received from a fifth generation (5G) or higher base station.
However, in the same field of endeavor, KHOSHNEVISAN teaches,
wherein the processor circuitry is further configured to identify an indication of a configuration of the time gap received from a fifth generation (5G) or higher base station (KHOSHNEVISAN; a radio resource control (RRC) configuration may provide an indication of a quantity of symbols for use as a time gap, Par. 0061; a 5G Node B, Par. 0003).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of SHRESTHA- SRIDHARAN to include the use of timing gap as taught by KHOSHNEVISAN in order to transmit and retransmit (KHOSHNEVISAN; Par. 0061).
Regarding claim 28, SHRESTHA- SRIDHARAN teaches, The one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 27.
SHRESTHA- SRIDHARAN failed to explicitly teach,
wherein the instructions are further to cause the base station to encode, for transmission to the UE, an indication of a configuration of the time gap.
However, in the same field of endeavor, KHOSHNEVISAN teaches,
wherein the instructions are further to cause the base station to encode, for transmission to the UE, an indication of a configuration of the time gap (KHOSHNEVISAN; a radio resource control (RRC) configuration may provide an indication of a quantity of symbols for use as a time gap, Par. 0061).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of SHRESTHA- SRIDHARAN to include the use of timing gap as taught by KHOSHNEVISAN in order to transmit and retransmit (KHOSHNEVISAN; Par. 0061).
Regarding claim 24 and claim 29, SHRESTHA- SRIDHARAN- KHOSHNEVISAN teaches, The UE of claim 23 and The one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 28 respectively, wherein the indication of the configuration is received via minimum system information (MSI), remaining minimum system information (RMSI), other system information (OSI), dedicated radio resource control (RRC) signalling, or dynamically indicated in the DCI (KHOSHNEVISAN; the DCI or a radio resource control (RRC) configuration may provide an indication of a quantity of symbols for use as a time gap, Par. 0061).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Prior art He et al. (US 20190045489 A1) teaches in Fig. 15 that different DMRS is used for transmission and retransmission.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHARMIN CHOWDHURY whose telephone number is (571)272-6419. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Noel Beharry can be reached at 5712705630. 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.
/SHARMIN CHOWDHURY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2416