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 in response to Applicant's response filed under 37 C.F.R. § 1.111 in response to a Non-Final Office Action. Claims 21, 23, 26, and 28 have been amended; No claims have been added; Claims 22 and 27 are canceled; Claims 1-20 were canceled previously; Claims 31-35 were previously withdrawn. Claims 21, 23-26, and 28-30 are subject to examination.
Acknowledgement is made to this application's amendment to claim 21 and 26 to obviate the previous 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection to claim 21-30. The previous 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection to claim 21, 23-26, and 28-30 is hereby withdrawn.
Acknowledgement is made to this application's amendment to claim 26 to obviate the previous 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection to claim 26-30. The previous 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection to claim 26-30 is hereby withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims have been considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection.
Election/Restrictions
Newly submitted claim 26, 28-30 directed to an invention that is independent or distinct from the invention originally claimed for the following reasons:
Restriction to one of the following inventions is required under 35 U.S.C. 121:
Originally presented claims 21-30 drawn to an apparatus to be employed by a user equipment (UE) and at least one non-transitory, computer-readable medium including instructions to cause a user equipment to communicate with an evolved Node B (eNB) on the uplink PUSCH, classified in CPC H04W 72/1268.
Newly submitted claims 26, 28-30 presented in the response filed on 05/26/2026, drawn to at least one non-transitory, computer-readable medium including instructions to cause an evolved Node B (eNB) to communicate with a user equipment on the downlink, classified in CPC H04W 72/1273.
Inventions I and II are related as subcombinations disclosed as usable together in a single combination. The subcombinations are distinct if they do not overlap in scope and are not obvious variants, and if it is shown that at least one subcombination is separately usable. In the instant case, subcombination II has separate utility such as encoding PDSCH on downlink. See MPEP § 806.05(d). Restriction for examination purposes is proper because the combination does not require the particulars of the subcombination as claimed for patentability. Claims 26, 28-30 presented in the response filed on 05/26/2026 indicate that the combination does not rely upon the specific details of the subcombination for its patentability.
The examiner has required restriction between subcombinations usable together.
Restriction for examination purposes as indicated is proper because all the inventions listed in this action are independent or distinct for the reasons given above and there would be a serious search and/or examination burden if restriction were not required because one or more of the following reasons apply:
the inventions require a different field of search (e.g., searching different classes /subclasses or electronic resources, or employing different search strategies or search queries).
Since applicant has received an action on the merits for the originally presented invention, this invention has been constructively elected by original presentation for prosecution on the merits. Accordingly, claim 26, 28-30 withdrawn from consideration as being directed to a non-elected invention. See 37 CFR 1.142(b) and MPEP § 821.03.
To preserve a right to petition, the reply to this action must distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement. Otherwise, the election shall be treated as a final election without traverse. Traversal must be timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are subsequently added, applicant must indicate which of the subsequently added claims are readable upon the elected invention.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention.
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 and 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LIM et al. (LIM hereinafter) (US 20220239410 A1) in view of SHRESTHA et al. (SHRESTHA hereinafter) (US 20220224449 A1) and in further view of SRIDHARAN et al. (SRIDHARAN hereinafter) (US 20210352527 A1).
Regarding claim 21, LIM teaches, A user equipment (UE) comprising:
memory to store a received indication of an initial transmission of a transport block (TB), and a received indication of a retransmission of a transport block (TB) on a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) (LIM; When the PUSCH transmission has been scheduled to the UE by the DCI ... a PUSCH repetitive transmission will be described ... the UE needs to repeat a same TB on the number of consecutive slots, Par. 0267), wherein the first and second modulation orders are different (LIM; NC-JT supporting non-coherent precoding between cells, TRPs and/or beams may require individual ... MCS ... according to channel characteristics for each link between the UE and cell, TRP, and or beam, Par. 0361); and
processor circuitry to insert a 1-symbol time gap between the initial transmission and the retransmission on the PUSCH, wherein the 1-symbol time gap is reserved for a power transition based on different transmit powers used for the initial transmission and the retransmission (LIM; Fig. 19; UE may insert one ... symbol gaps between ... repetitive transmissions ... in addition to changing transmit power according to application of different transmission beams … the UE may map a first transmission beam to a first PUSCH repetitive transmission in a first slot, map a second transmission beam to a second PUSCH repetitive transmission, and does not perform frequency hopping, Par. 0473); and to encode, for transmission based on the first and second modulation, 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 (LIM; DMRS- UplinkConfig, TABLE 16-4).
LIM failed to explicitly teach,
a received indication of a first modulation order for an initial transmission of a transport block (TB), and a received indication of a second modulation order for a retransmission of a transport block (TB); and
encode, for transmission based on the indications of the first and second modulation orders.
However, in the same field of endeavor, SHRESTHA teaches,
a received indication of a first modulation for an initial transmission of a transport block (TB), and a received indication of a second modulation for a retransmission of a transport block (TB) (SHRESTHA; reference number 520 ... DCI that includes an uplink grant to schedule a first PUSCH transmission … 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. 0071-0073; 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 indications of the first and second modulation (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).
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 LIM to include the use of DCI as taught by SHRESTHA in order to determine PHY configuration like MCS, DMRS (SHRESTHA; Par. 0069).
Although LIM-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 LIM-SHRESTHA to include the use of MCS table as taught by SRIDHARAN in order to determine modulation order (SRIDHARAN; Par. 0104).
Regarding claim 25, LIM-SHRESTHA-SRIDHARAN teaches, The UE of claim 21, 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).
The rational and motivation for adding this teaching of SHRESTHA is the same as for Claim 21.
Claim 23-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LIM-SHRESTHA- SRIDHARAN and in further view of KHOSHNEVISAN et al. (KHOSHNEVISAN hereinafter) (US 20230292312 A1).
Regarding claim 23, LIM-SHRESTHA- SRIDHARAN teaches, The UE of claim 21.
LIM-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 LIM-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, LIM-SHRESTHA- SRIDHARAN- KHOSHNEVISAN teaches, The UE of claim 23, 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).
The rational and motivation for adding this teaching of KHOSHNEVISAN is the same as for Claim 21.
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 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
Prosecution Insights