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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Group I in the reply filed on 01/26/2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 04/24/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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.
Claims 6 and 21 are 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Specifically, claim 6, lines 3-4 recite “a set of symbols associated with a first duplex mode.” Since claim 2 defines the first duplex mode of claim 1 as a full-duplex mode, it is unclear if “a first duplex mode” in claim 6 corresponds to the first duplex mode of claim 1 or if it corresponds to a duplex mode different from the first duplex mode of claim 1.
For the purpose of examination, the “a first duplex mode” of claim 6 is interpreted as the first duplex mode of claim 1 as further defined as a full-duplex mode in claim 2 from which claim 6 depends and consistent with para. 0109 of the specification.
Claim 21 which is directed toward an apparatus corresponding to the method of claim 6 and depends from claims 16 and 17 as claim 6 depends from claims 1 and 2 respectively is rejected for similar reasons with regard to lines 3-4 of claim 21.
For the purpose of examination, the “a first duplex mode” of claim 21 is interpreted as the first duplex mode of claim 16 as further defined as a full-duplex mode in claim 17 from which claim 21 depends and consistent with para. 0109 of the specification.
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.
The factual inquiries 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 nonobviousness.
Claims 1-3, 7-8, 16-18, and 22-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abotabl et al. (US 2024/0032042), Abotabl hereinafter, in view of Zhang et al. (US 2022/0183027), Zhang hereinafter.
Re. Claim 1. Abotabl teaches a method of a User Equipment ("UE") (Abotabl, 0190: A method of wireless communication performed by a user equipment (UE)), the method comprising:
receiving a configuration (Abotabl, 0190: receiving, from a base station, a configuration message indicating a scheduling request configuration that includes at least one resource associated with a half-duplex mode of the UE and at least one resource associated with a full-duplex mode of the UE And 0205: The method of any of Aspects 1 through 14, wherein the configuration message further indicates a logical channel configuration that maps a logical channel to a corresponding scheduling request configuration associated with the half-duplex mode of the UE, to a corresponding scheduling request configuration associated with the full-duplex mode of the UE, or to a combination thereof, and wherein the scheduling request is transmitted using the logical channel.) comprising:
a first set of logical channel ("LCH") restriction configurations (Abotabl, 0096: Similarly, the logical channel configuration may implicitly exclude the logical channel from being used in the half-duplex mode by not mapping the logical channel to a scheduling request configuration that is associated with the half-duplex mode and/or that includes one or more PUCCH resources associated with the half-duplex mode.), and
a second set of LCH restriction configurations different than the first set of LCH restriction configurations (Abotabl, 0096: Additionally, or alternatively, the logical channel configuration may implicitly exclude the logical channel from being used in the full-duplex mode by not mapping the logical channel to a scheduling request configuration that is associated with the full-duplex mode and/or that includes one or more PUCCH resources associated with the full-duplex mode.);
receiving, from a network entity, an uplink resource allocation indicating uplink resources a physical uplink shared channel ("PUSCH") transmission (Abotabl, 0105: the base station transmits, and UE transmits data to the base station based on the uplink grant in the full-duplex mode or the half duplex mode);
While Abotabl teaches the association between the LCH restriction and the duplex mode as well as receiving an uplink allocation, Abotabl does not explicitly teach receiving, from a network entity, an uplink resource allocation indicating uplink resources a physical uplink shared channel ("PUSCH") transmission;
generating a transport block ("TB") corresponding to the uplink resource allocation, wherein the TB is generated based on the first set of LCH restriction configurations when the PUSCH transmission is to be transmitted in a set of symbols indicated as being operated in associated with a first duplex mode, and wherein the TB is generated based on the second set of LCH restriction configurations when the PUSCH transmission is to be transmitted in a set of symbols having at least one symbol associated with a second duplex mode; and
transmitting the generated TB on the indicated uplink resources.
However, in the related art, Zhang teaches receiving, from a network entity, an uplink resource allocation indicating uplink resources a physical uplink shared channel ("PUSCH") transmission (Zhang, 0071: At 704, the UE receives, from a base station, scheduling information for an uplink or downlink transmission indicating an uplink or downlink PHY priority level (that may be for uplink and/or downlink) from a set of priority levels including a first half-duplex priority level, a second half-duplex priority level, a first full-duplex priority level, and a second full-duplex priority level. The scheduling information may be for an uplink transmission, such as PUCCH or PUSCH.);
generating a transport block ("TB") corresponding to the uplink resource allocation (Zhang, 0066: As illustrated in FIG. 6, the base station 604 may indicate a PHY layer priority level 606 to the UE 602 via radio resource control (RRC) message, e.g., for configured grant or in response to a received scheduling request 605, or downlink control information (DCI), e.g., for dynamic PUCCH/PUSCH/PDCCH/PDSCH. The UE 602 may communicate with the base station 604, such as receiving PDCCH/PDSCH 610 or transmitting PUCCH/[PUSCH] 610 according to the PHY layer priority levels of various communication. [It is necessary to generate the transport block in order to transmit the PUSCH. Note: Zhang, 0066 contains a typo corrected here for clarity: “transmitting PUCCH/PSCCH” has been corrected to “transmitting PUCCH/[PUSCH]” as is consistent with the context and symbol 610 in FIG. 6.]),
wherein the TB is generated based on the first set of LCH restriction configurations when the PUSCH transmission is to be transmitted in a set of symbols indicated as being operated in associated with a first duplex mode (Zhang, 0074: The half-duplex mode or the full-duplex mode may be indicated by the DCI that activates or schedules single (e.g., half-duplex) or bi-directional (e.g., full-duplex) transmissions (e.g. whether uplink transmissions for PUCCH or PUSCH or reception of a downlink transmission of PDCCH or PDSCH). [The full-duplex mode corresponds to the first duplex mode, and Abotabl, 0096 teaches the association between the LCH restriction and the duplex mode.]), and
wherein the TB is generated based on the second set of LCH restriction configurations when the PUSCH transmission is to be transmitted in a set of symbols having at least one symbol associated with a second duplex mode (Zhang, 0074: The half-duplex mode or the full-duplex mode may be indicated by the DCI that activates or schedules single (e.g., half-duplex) or bi-directional (e.g., full-duplex) transmissions (e.g. whether uplink transmissions for PUCCH or PUSCH or reception of a downlink transmission of PDCCH or PDSCH). [The half-duplex mode corresponds to the second duplex mode, and Abotabl, 0096 teaches the association between the LCH restriction and the duplex mode.]); and
transmitting the generated TB on the indicated uplink resources (Zhang, 0066: The UE 602 may communicate with the base station 604, such as receiving PDCCH/PDSCH 610 or transmitting PUCCH/[PUSCH] 610 according to the PHY layer priority levels of various communication. [Note: Zhang, 0066 contains a typo corrected here for clarity: “transmitting PUCCH/PSCCH” has been corrected to “transmitting PUCCH/[PUSCH]” as is consistent with the context and symbol 610 in FIG. 6.]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Abotabl with the PHY layer priority level indicated by DCI of Zhang. The resulting invention would provide for improvements for co-existing full-duplex and half-duplex operations (Zhang, 0025).
Re. Claim 2. Abotabl in view of Zhang teaches claim 1.
Abotabl further teaches wherein the first duplex mode corresponds to a full duplex mode and the second duplex mode corresponds to a non-full duplex mode (Abotabl, 0190: receiving, from a base station, a configuration message indicating a scheduling request configuration that includes at least one resource associated with a half-duplex mode of the UE and at least one resource associated with a full-duplex mode of the UE.).
Re. Claim 3. Abotabl in view Zhang teaches claim 2.
Abotabl further teaches wherein for the first duplex mode, at least one symbol of the set of symbols allocated in the uplink resource allocation is indicated as downlink according to the slot format information (Abotabl, 0066: Utilizing full-duplex communication may provide reduced latency by allowing a full-duplex node to transmit or receive a downlink signal in an uplink-only slot, or to transmit or receive an uplink signal in a downlink-only slot, which may enable latency savings.).
Yet, Abotabl does not explicitly teach receiving slot format information,
wherein for the first duplex mode, at least one symbol of the set of symbols allocated in the uplink resource allocation is indicated as downlink according to the slot format information. [For clarity, Abotabl does not positively recite receiving slot format information.]
However, in the related art, Zhang teaches receiving slot format information (Zhang, 0041: Other slot formats 2-61 include a mix of DL, UL, and flexible symbols. UEs are configured with the slot format (dynamically through DL control information (DCI), or semi-statically/statically through radio resource control (RRC) signaling) through a received slot format indicator (SFI).),
wherein for the first duplex mode, at least one symbol of the set of symbols allocated in the uplink resource allocation is indicated as downlink according to the slot format information (Zhang, 0041: Other slot formats 2-61 include a mix of DL, UL, and flexible symbols. UEs are configured with the slot format (dynamically through DL control information (DCI), or semi-statically/statically through radio resource control (RRC) signaling) through a received slot format indicator (SFI). [For clarity, both Abotabl and Zhang are directed toward full-duplex and half-duplex co-existence and the mixing of DL and UP symbols. Abotabl, 0066, discloses transmitting an uplink signal in a downlink slot, and Zhang, 0041, discloses configuring UEs with a slot format received through a slot format indicator.])
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Abotabl with the PHY layer priority level indicated by DCI of Zhang. The resulting invention would provide for improvements for co-existing full-duplex and half-duplex operations (Zhang, 0025).
Re. Claim 7. Abotabl in view of Zhang teaches claim 1.
Yet, Abotabl does not explicitly teach wherein receiving the uplink resource allocation comprises receiving downlink control information ("DCI") scheduling the PUSCH transmission, the method further comprising determining a duplex mode corresponding to the uplink resource allocation based on an indication in the DCI of the duplex mode.
However, in the related art, Zhang teaches wherein receiving the uplink resource allocation comprises receiving downlink control information ("DCI") scheduling the PUSCH transmission (Zhang, 0074: The half-duplex mode or the full-duplex mode may be indicated by the DCI that activates or schedules single (e.g., half-duplex) or bi-directional (e.g., full-duplex) transmissions (e.g. whether uplink transmissions for PUCCH or PUSCH or reception of a downlink transmission of PDCCH or PDSCH).),
the method further comprising determining a duplex mode corresponding to the uplink resource allocation based on an indication in the DCI of the duplex mode (Zhang, 0074: The half-duplex mode or the full-duplex mode may be indicated by the DCI that activates or schedules single (e.g., half-duplex) or bi-directional (e.g., full-duplex) transmissions (e.g. whether uplink transmissions for PUCCH or PUSCH or reception of a downlink transmission of PDCCH or PDSCH).).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Abotabl with the PHY layer priority level indicated by DCI of Zhang. The resulting invention would provide for improvements for co-existing full-duplex and half-duplex operations (Zhang, 0025).
Re. Claim 8. Abotabl in view of Zhang teaches claim 1.
Abotabl further teaches wherein receiving the uplink resource allocation comprises receiving downlink control information ("DCI") scheduling the PUSCH transmission (Abotabl, 0105: the base station transmits, and UE transmits data to the base station based on the uplink grant in the full-duplex mode or the half duplex mode),
the method further comprising determining a duplex mode corresponding to the uplink resource allocation based on an indication in the DCI of which set of LCH restriction configurations to use (Abotabl, 0157: For example, the UE (e.g., using reception component 1102, depicted in FIG. 11) may receive the configuration message indicating a logical channel configuration that maps a logical channel to a corresponding scheduling request configuration associated with the half-duplex mode of the UE, to a corresponding scheduling request configuration associated with the full-duplex mode of the UE, or to a combination thereof, as described above. And 0158: For example, the UE (e.g., using transmission component 1104, depicted in FIG. 11) may transmit the scheduling request using the logical channel, as described above. And 0160: In some aspects, the logical channel configuration further includes an indicator excluding the logical channel from being used in the half-duplex mode or in the full-duplex mode. [For clarity, the UE transmits using the logical channel which is restricted to being used in the half-duplex mode or the full-duplex mode such that the logical channel indicates the duplex mode.]).
While Abotabl teaches receiving the uplink resource allocation and determining the duplex mode based on the logical channel, Abotabl does not explicitly teach wherein receiving the uplink resource allocation comprises receiving downlink control information ("DCI") scheduling the PUSCH transmission,
the method further comprising determining a duplex mode corresponding to the uplink resource allocation based on an indication in the DCI of which set of LCH restriction configurations to use. [To clarify, Abotabl does not teach the resource allocation is a DCI scheduling a PUSCH transmission.]
However, in the related art, Zhang teaches wherein receiving the uplink resource allocation comprises receiving downlink control information ("DCI") scheduling the PUSCH transmission (Zhang, 0066: As illustrated in FIG. 6, the base station 604 may indicate a PHY layer priority level 606 to the UE 602 via radio resource control (RRC) message, e.g., for configured grant or in response to a received scheduling request 605, or downlink control information (DCI), e.g., for dynamic PUCCH/PUSCH/PDCCH/PDSCH.),
the method further comprising determining a duplex mode corresponding to the uplink resource allocation based on an indication in the DCI of which set of LCH restriction configurations to use (Zhang, 0074: The half-duplex mode or the full-duplex mode may be indicated by the DCI that activates or schedules single (e.g., half-duplex) or bi-directional (e.g., full-duplex) transmissions (e.g. whether uplink transmissions for PUCCH or PUSCH or reception of a downlink transmission of PDCCH or PDSCH).).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Abotabl with the PHY layer priority level indicated by DCI of Zhang. The resulting invention would provide for improvements for co-existing full-duplex and half-duplex operations (Zhang, 0025).
Re. Claim 16. Abotabl teaches a user equipment ("UE") for wireless communication (Abotabl, Fig. 2, 0048: FIG. 2 is a diagram illustrating an example 200 of a base station 110 in communication with a UE 120 in a wireless network 100, in accordance with the present disclosure.), comprising:
at least one memory (Abotabl, Fig. 2: Symbol 282, 0056: The means for the UE to perform operations described herein may include, for example, one or more of antenna 252, demodulator 254, MIMO detector 256, receive processor 258, transmit processor 264, TX MIMO processor 266, modulator 254, controller/processor 280, or memory 282.); and
at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory (Abotabl, Fig. 2: Symbol 280, 0056: The means for the UE to perform operations described herein may include, for example, one or more of antenna 252, demodulator 254, MIMO detector 256, receive processor 258, transmit processor 264, TX MIMO processor 266, modulator 254, controller/processor 280, or memory 282.)
Further components of Claim 16 correspond to the method of Claim 1 and are rejected for similar reasons (See Claim 1 above).
Re. Claim 17, Abotabl in view of Zhang teaches claim 16.
Claim 17 is directed toward an apparatus corresponding to the method of claim 2. Claim 17 does not further define or limit over the subject matter of claim 2. Therefore, claim 17 is rejected for similar reasons as laid out for claim 2 above.
Re. Claim 18, Abotabl in view of Zhang teaches claim 16.
Claim 18 is directed toward an apparatus corresponding to the method of claim 3. Claim 18 does not further define or limit over the subject matter of claim 3. Therefore, claim 18 is rejected for similar reasons as laid out for claim 3 above.
Re. Claim 22, Abotabl in view of Zhang teaches claim 16.
Claim 22 is directed toward an apparatus corresponding to the method of claim 7. Claim 22 does not further define or limit over the subject matter of claim 7. Therefore, claim 22 is rejected for similar reasons as laid out for claim 7 above.
Re. Claim 23, Abotabl in view of Zhang teaches claim 16.
Claim 23 is directed toward an apparatus corresponding to the method of claim 8. Claim 23 does not further define or limit over the subject matter of claim 8. Therefore, claim 23 is rejected for similar reasons as laid out for claim 8 above.
Claims 4 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abotabl in view of Zhang further as applied to claims 2 and 17, further in view of Xu et al. (US 2021/0136771), Xu hereinafter.
Re. Claim 4. Abotabl in view of Zhang teaches claim 2.
Yet, neither Abotabl nor Zhang explicitly teaches wherein the second set of LCH restriction configurations supports a higher level of Quality of Service ("QoS") than the first set of LCH restriction configurations.
However, in the related art, Xu teaches wherein the second set of LCH restriction configurations supports a higher level of Quality of Service ("QoS") than the first set of LCH restriction configurations (Xu, 0042: For example, a CORESET or SS set for high priority or critical control information (e.g., CORESET #0 for initial access information) may be configured with a [half-duplex] HD mode to avoid [full-duplex] FD self-interference, while a CORESET or SS set for other control information (e.g., CORESETs for downlink scheduling information) may be configured with a FD mode to improve spectrum efficiency. [For clarity, claim 1 associates the second set of LCH restriction configurations with the second duplex mode, and claim 2 associates the second duplex mode with a non-full duplex mode (e.g. half-duplex). Therefore, use of a half-duplex mode corresponds to using the second set of restriction configurations, and avoiding full-duplex self-interference corresponds to supporting a higher level of Quality of Service.]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further combine the invention of Abotabl as modified by the teaching of Zhang with the information priority dependent duplex mode configured CORESET or SS of Xu. The resulting invention would provide for resolving conflicting duplex mode configurations (Xu, 0042).
Re. Claim 19, Abotabl in view of Zhang teaches claim 16.
Claim 19 is directed toward an apparatus corresponding to the method of claim 4. Claim 19 does not further define or limit over the subject matter of claim 4. Therefore, claim 19 is rejected for similar reasons as laid out for claim 4 above.
Claims 5 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abotabl in view of Zhang as applied to claim 2 further in view of Alabbasi et al. (US 2022/0338211), Alabbasi hereinafter.
Re. Claim 5. Abotabl in view of Zhang teaches claim 2.
Abotabl further teaches the method further comprising receiving a parameter indicating whether a particular LCH is allowed to be multiplexed in a respective TB when the network entity operates in full duplex mode (Abotabl, 0160: In some aspects, the logical channel configuration further includes an indicator excluding the logical channel from being used in the half-duplex mode or in the full-duplex mode.).
Neither Abotabl nor Zhang explicitly teaches wherein the first set of LCH restriction configurations comprises a restriction against multiplexing data of certain LCHs.
However, in the related art, Alabbasi teaches wherein the first set of LCH restriction configurations comprises a restriction against multiplexing data of certain LCHs (Alabbasi, 0166: In a particular embodiment, the method further includes signalling, to the wireless device 110, logical channel prioritization restrictions for multiplexing at least one MAC CE into a transmission made for the new grant or the previous grant.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Abotabl as modified by the teaching of Zhang with the MAC CE priority assignments of Alabbasi. The resulting invention would provide for avoiding mixed priority levels with a single grant (Alabbasi, 0058).
Re. Claim 20, Abotabl in view of Zhang teaches claim 16.
Claim 20 is directed toward an apparatus corresponding to the method of claim 5. Claim 20 does not further define or limit over the subject matter of claim 5. Therefore, claim 20 is rejected for similar reasons as laid out for claim 5 above.
Claims 9 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abotabl in view of Zhang as applied to claim 1 above further in view of Huang et al. (US 2022/0191800), Huang hereinafter.
Re. Claim 9. Abotabl in view of Zhang teaches claim 1.
Neither Abotabl nor Zhang explicitly teaches wherein the received configuration further comprises a first power control parameter set and a second power control parameter set, wherein transmitting the generated TB on the indicated uplink resources comprises:
applying the first power control parameter set when the PUSCH transmission is to be transmitted in a set of symbols associated with the first duplex mode; and
applying the second power control parameter set when the PUSCH transmission is to be transmitted in a set of symbols having at least one symbol associated with the second duplex mode.
However, in the related art, Huang teaches wherein the received configuration further comprises a first power control parameter set and a second power control parameter set (Huang, 0056: As shown in FIG. 3A, and by reference number 302, the BS may transmit, based at least in part on determining the time-frequency resource in which full-duplex communication and non-full-duplex communication are to be performed, an indication of a first transmit power configuration and a second transmit power configuration to the wireless communication device.),
wherein transmitting the generated TB on the indicated uplink resources comprises:
applying the first power control parameter set when the PUSCH transmission is to be transmitted in a set of symbols associated with the first duplex mode (Huang, 0057: The first transmit power configuration may be associated with the full-duplex portion of the time-frequency resource and the second transmit power configuration may be associated with the non-full-duplex portion of the time-frequency resource.); and
applying the second power control parameter set when the PUSCH transmission is to be transmitted in a set of symbols having at least one symbol associated with the second duplex mode (Huang, 0057: The first transmit power configuration may be associated with the full-duplex portion of the time-frequency resource and the second transmit power configuration may be associated with the non-full-duplex portion of the time-frequency resource.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Abotabl as modified by the teaching of Zhang with the duplex mode determined power configurations of Huang. The resulting invention would provide for reducing self-interference in full-duplex transmission/reception and improving performance and efficiency for non-full-duplex transmission (Huang, 0026).
Re. Claim 24, Abotabl in view of Zhang teaches claim 16.
Claim 24 is directed toward an apparatus corresponding to the method of claim 9. Claim 24 does not further define or limit over the subject matter of claim 9. Therefore, claim 24 is rejected for similar reasons as laid out for claim 9 above.
Claims 10 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abotabl in view of Zhang as applied to claim 1, further in view of Su et al. (US 2022/0159580), Su hereinafter.
Re. Claim 10. Abotabl in view of Zhang teaches claim 1.
Neither Abotabl nor Zhang explicitly teaches wherein transmitting the generated TB on the indicated uplink resources comprises applying a predetermined power offset when the PUSCH transmission is to be transmitted in a set of symbols predicted as being operated in the first duplex mode.
However, in the related art, Su teaches wherein transmitting the generated TB on the indicated uplink resources comprises applying a predetermined power offset when the PUSCH transmission is to be transmitted in a set of symbols predicted as being operated in the first duplex mode (Su, 0301: Specifically, when the uplink transmission type of the current scheduling is the full-duplex transmission, it may be determined to use the power shifting scheme, that is, adding a power offset to the uplink transmit power or the target receive power when the uplink transmission type of the current scheduling is a full-duplex transmission).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Abotabl as modified by the teaching of Zhang with the uplink power control configuration scheme of Su. The resulting invention would provide for reducing cross-link interference between terminals when employing full-duplex transmissions (Su, 0006).
Re. Claim 25, Abotabl in view of Zhang teaches claim 16.
Claim 25 is directed toward an apparatus corresponding to the method of claim 10. Claim 25 does not further define or limit over the subject matter of claim 10. Therefore, claim 25 is rejected for similar reasons as laid out for claim 10 above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6 and 21 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Re. Claim 6. The prior art of record fails to teach or suggest
wherein the configuration indicates that multiplexing a medium access control ("MAC") control element ("CE") into the TB is forbidden when the PUSCH transmission is to be transmitted in a set of symbols associated with a first duplex mode.
For clarity, the prior art does not teach forbidding the multiplexing of a MAC CE based on the duplex mode of the PUSCH transmission.
Re. Claim 21. The prior art of record fails to teach or suggest
wherein the configuration indicates that multiplexing a medium access control ("MAC") control element ("CE") into the TB is forbidden when the PUSCH transmission is to be transmitted in a set of symbols associated with a first duplex mode.
For clarity, the prior art does not teach forbidding the multiplexing of a MAC CE based on the duplex mode of the PUSCH transmission.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CASON H MORSE whose telephone number is (571)270-5235. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30-6:00 Mon.-Thurs., Fri. varies.
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, Rebecca Song can be reached at (571) 270-3667. 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.
/C.H.M./Examiner, Art Unit 2417
/REBECCA E SONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2417
Prosecution Insights