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 .
Initial Examination
Applicant's submission filed on 09/27/23, including preliminary amendments filed on 09/27/23 (and refiled on 03/16/26), has been entered.
Claims 1-11, 23, and 26-33 are pending.
Claims 12-22 and 24-25 have been canceled.
Claims 26-33 have been added.
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-6, 23, 26-30, 32 and 7, 9, 31, 33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Li (CN 109792746 A, cited by Applicant of Record).
Regarding claim 7, Li discloses a method for determining time domain resource for an uplink transmission (TD resource distribution used in a terminal (i.e., determining TD in UL) [fig. 4, pg. 26 ln. 4-7 (P26:L4-7)]), comprising:
sending, by a network device [fig. 8, pg. 17], a scheduling grant for indicating time domain resource for the uplink transmission (The BS transmits DCI to UE [P26:L9, fig. 4 no. S401]) to user equipment (UE) [fig. 9, pg. 17]; and
sending first configuration information or a first predefined rule to the UE (The DCI includes at least one time slot and at least one gap (i.e., first config. info.) [P26:L11-13]),
wherein the first configuration information or the first predefined rule is configured to indicate a manner of determining the time domain resource for the uplink transmission by the UE (The DCI includes at least one time slot and at least one gap for accessing the PUSCH transmission (i.e., manner of determining TD resource for UL transmission by UE) [P26:L10-13]).
Regarding claim 31, it is substantially similar to claim 7, except is in apparatus claim format, and is rejected under substantially similar reasoning, where Li further discloses a network device [fig. 8, pg. 17], comprising a processor [fig. 8 (inherent), pg. 40], a transceiver (Sending module [fig. 8 no. 801, pg. 40]), a memory [fig. 8 (inherent), pg. 40], and an executable program stored on the memory and executable by the processor [fig. 4, pg. 17].
Regarding claim 33, it is substantially similar to claim 7, except is in CRM claim format, and is rejected under substantially similar reasoning, where Li further discloses a non-transitory computer readable storage medium [fig. 8 (inherent), pg. 40], storing an executable program [fig. 4, pg. 17].
Regarding claim 9, Li discloses everything claimed, as applied above.
Li further discloses: wherein
the information field in the scheduling grant is a predefined value or a reserved value (The DCI includes at least one time slot and at least one gap (i.e., predefined/reserved) [P26:L11-13]); and
the first configuration information or the first predefined rule comprises a manner of determining a first time domain resource as the time domain resource for the uplink transmission (The DCI includes at least one time slot and at least one gap for accessing the PUSCH transmission (i.e., manner of determining TD resource for UL transmission by UE) [P26:L10-13]).
Regarding claim 1, it is substantially similar to claim 7, except is from the perspective of the UE and is rejected under substantially similar reasoning.
Regarding claim 23, it is substantially similar to claim 1, except is in apparatus claim format, and is rejected under substantially similar reasoning, where Li further discloses a user equipment (UE) [fig. 9-10], comprising a processor [fig. 10 no. 1002, pg. 46], a transceiver (Sending/Receiving modules [fig. 9 no. 901-902, 10 no. 1016, pg. 43, 46]), a memory [fig. 10 no. 1004, pg. 46], and an executable program stored on the memory and executable by the processor [fig. 4, pg. 17].
Regarding claim 32, it is substantially similar to claim 1, except is in CRM claim format, and is rejected under substantially similar reasoning, where Li further discloses a non-transitory computer readable storage medium [fig. 10 no. 1004, pg. 46], storing an executable program [fig. 4, pg. 17].
Regarding claims 2 and 26, Li discloses everything claimed, as applied above.
Li further discloses wherein monitoring, by the UE, the scheduling grant for scheduling the uplink transmission comprises:
monitoring the scheduling grant by the UE only on restricted or partial time domain resources according to second configuration information or a second predefined rule of network side (The UE will continue to monitor based on further communication from the network (i.e., restricted or partial) [P26]).
Regarding claims 3 and 27, Li discloses everything claimed, as applied above.
Li further discloses wherein determining the time domain resource for the uplink transmission comprises:
determining, in response to determining that a value indicated by an information field in the scheduling grant is a predefined value or a reserved value, a first time domain resource as the time domain resource for the uplink transmission according to the first configuration information or the first predefined rule [P26].
Regarding claims 4 and 28, Li discloses everything claimed, as applied above.
Li further discloses wherein determining the time domain resource for the uplink transmission comprises:
monitoring, in response to determining that a value indicated by an information field in the scheduling grant is a predefined value or a reserved value, second indication information on other time domain resources according to the first configuration information or the first predefined rule (Various slots are monitored (i.e., second indications based on first config info indicating other TD resources) [P26]), and
determining the time domain resource for the uplink transmission according to the second indication information [P26].
Regarding claims 5 and 29, Li discloses everything claimed, as applied above.
Li further discloses wherein determining the time domain resource for the uplink transmission comprises:
determining the time domain resource for the uplink transmission based on an information field in the scheduling grant according to the first configuration information or the first predefined rule [P26:L9-13], wherein information indicated by the information field comprises information of the time domain resource with an existing value range or an extended value range (Existing value range [P26]).
Regarding claims 6 and 30, Li discloses everything claimed, as applied above.
Li further discloses further comprising:
transmitting, by the UE, uplink data on the determined time domain resource for the uplink transmission [P26].
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 8 and 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of Panteleev (US 20220159706 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Li discloses everything claimed, as applied above.
Although Li discloses sending second configuration information or a second predefined rule to the UE on a condition that the network device determines an information field in the scheduling grant or determines that an indication range of the information field, and wherein the second configuration information or the second predefined rule is configured to indicate a time domain resource range for the UE to bear the scheduling grant, as discussed above, Li does not explicitly disclose further comprising: is not extended. However, these concepts are well known as disclosed by Panteleev.
In the same field of endeavor, Panteleev discloses further comprising:
is not extended [par. 0211].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Li with Panteleev. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to perform such a modification given the benefit of distinguishing between Type 1 and Type 2 [Panteleev par. 0211].
Regarding claim 10, Li discloses everything claimed, as applied above.
Although Li discloses a value indicated by an information field of the scheduling grant is a predefined value or a reserved value, and second indication information is sent on the time domain resource after a slot bearing the set indication information; and the second indication information is configured to indicate, as discussed above, Li does not explicitly disclose wherein an offset of the time domain resource for the uplink transmission. However, these concepts are well known as disclosed by Panteleev.
In the same field of endeavor, Panteleev discloses: wherein
an offset of the time domain resource for the uplink transmission [par. 0196, 212].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Li with Panteleev. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to perform such a modification given the benefit of distinguishing between type A/B and SLIV [Panteleev par. 0196].
Regarding claim 11, Li discloses everything claimed, as applied above.
Although Li discloses of an information field in the scheduling grant or indicated by the information field in the scheduling grant, wherein the first configuration information or the first predefined rule … information of the information field, as discussed above, Li does not explicitly disclose further comprising: extending a length … or extending a range … comprises extended indication. However, these concepts are well known as disclosed by Panteleev.
In the same field of endeavor, Panteleev discloses further comprising:
extending a length … or extending a range … comprises extended indication [par. 0218].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Li with Panteleev. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to perform such a modification given the benefit of optimizing RV sequences [Panteleev par. 0218].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Walter J DiVito whose telephone number is (571)272-2556. The examiner can normally be reached M-R: 8 am - 6 pm (PST).
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, Gary Mui can be reached at 571-270-1420. 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.
/WALTER J DIVITO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2465