DETAILED ACTION
This office action is a response to the 371 application entering national stage from PCT/SE2022/050458 filed on May 10, 2022.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claims 1-20 are rejected.
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 .
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 (IDS) submitted on November 8, 2023 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
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.
Claims 1, 9, 11 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chatterjee et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication 2019/0289622, hereinafter Chatterjee.
Regarding Claim 1, Chatterjee discloses a method performed by a wireless device operable to receive scheduling and data transmission from one or more downlink cells and perform uplink transmission with two or more uplink cells (Abstract; Figure 1-6 and 11; Paragraph [0024-0034, 0050 and 0059-0060]), the method comprising:
receiving, from one of the one or more downlink cells, scheduling for a downlink transmission in one of the one or more downlink cells and scheduling for an uplink transmission in one of the one or more uplink cells to provide feedback for the downlink transmission (Paragraph [0018-0031 and 0059-0062] Scheduled PDCCH and PDSCH as well as an uplink grant and scheduled PUSCH which can utilize carrier aggregation to communicate feedback over different serving cells);
determining whether the uplink transmission is scheduled at least a minimum processing time after the scheduled downlink transmission and wherein the minimum processing time is based on a numerology of the one or more downlink cells and the two or more uplink cells (Paragraph [0018] In this regard, the following disclosure provides the related definitions related to the characterization of Capability 1 values for N1 and N2. N1: The minimum processing time in symbols of a given numerology between the end of the PDSCH and the start of the earliest possible hybrid automatic repeat request acknowledge (HARQ-ACK) transmission corresponding to the PDSCH. N2: The minimum processing time in symbols of a given numerology between the end of the physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) with the uplink (UL) grant and the start of scheduled PUSCH transmission. As quoted below, these values are the nominal values of the minimum UE processing times, with the overall PDSCH processing and PUSCH preparation times given by T.sub.proc,1 and T.sub.proc,2 respectively);
and upon determining that the uplink transmission is not scheduled at least a minimum processing time after the scheduled downlink transmission, transmitting an indication to at least one cell of the one or more downlink cells (Paragraph [0018-0031 and 0202-0224] The method comprises indicating or causing to indicate a capability from the UE to the network in the form of capability reporting for support of Capability 2 processing times; multiplexing or causing to multiplex scheduling instances with Capabilities 1 or 2 within a serving cell; and applying or causing to apply a relaxation to the minimum UE processing times, N1, indicating time between end of PDSCH to earliest start of corresponding hybrid automatic repeat request-acknowledge (HARQ-ACK) feedback transmission when the PDSCH has specific durations and/or mapping types or has time-domain overlaps with the scheduling physical downlink control channel (PDCCH)).
Regarding Claim 9, Chatterjee discloses the method of Claim 1. Chatterjee further discloses wherein the uplink transmission comprises hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) feedback for the downlink transmission (Abstract; Paragraph [0018-0020 and 0202] HARQ-ACK feedback transmission when the PDSCH may have specific durations and/or mapping types or may have time-domain overlaps with the scheduling PDCCH).
Regarding Claim 11, Chatterjee discloses a wireless device operable to receive scheduling and data transmission from one or more downlink cells and perform uplink transmission with two or more uplink cells, the wireless device comprising processing circuitry (Abstract; Figure 1-6 and 11; Paragraph [0024-0034, 0050 and 0059-0060]) operable to:
receive, from one of the one or more downlink cells, scheduling for a downlink transmission in one of the one or more downlink cells and scheduling for an uplink transmission in one of the one or more uplink cells to provide feedback for the downlink transmission (Paragraph [0018-0031 and 0059-0062] Scheduled PDCCH and PDSCH as well as an uplink grant and scheduled PUSCH which can utilize carrier aggregation to communicate feedback over different serving cells);
determine whether the uplink transmission is scheduled at least a minimum processing time after the scheduled downlink transmission and wherein the minimum processing time is based on a numerology of the one or more downlink cells and the two or more uplink cells (Paragraph [0018] In this regard, the following disclosure provides the related definitions related to the characterization of Capability 1 values for N1 and N2. N1: The minimum processing time in symbols of a given numerology between the end of the PDSCH and the start of the earliest possible hybrid automatic repeat request acknowledge (HARQ-ACK) transmission corresponding to the PDSCH. N2: The minimum processing time in symbols of a given numerology between the end of the physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) with the uplink (UL) grant and the start of scheduled PUSCH transmission. As quoted below, these values are the nominal values of the minimum UE processing times, with the overall PDSCH processing and PUSCH preparation times given by T.sub.proc,1 and T.sub.proc,2 respectively);
and upon determining that the uplink transmission is not scheduled at least a minimum processing time after the scheduled downlink transmission, transmit an indication to at least one cell of the one or more downlink cells (Paragraph [0018-0031 and 0202-0224] The method comprises indicating or causing to indicate a capability from the UE to the network in the form of capability reporting for support of Capability 2 processing times; multiplexing or causing to multiplex scheduling instances with Capabilities 1 or 2 within a serving cell; and applying or causing to apply a relaxation to the minimum UE processing times, N1, indicating time between end of PDSCH to earliest start of corresponding hybrid automatic repeat request-acknowledge (HARQ-ACK) feedback transmission when the PDSCH has specific durations and/or mapping types or has time-domain overlaps with the scheduling physical downlink control channel (PDCCH)).
Regarding Claim 19, Chatterjee discloses the wireless device of Claim 11. Chatterjee further discloses wherein the uplink transmission comprises hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) feedback for the downlink transmission (Abstract; Paragraph [0018-0020 and 0202] HARQ-ACK feedback transmission when the PDSCH may have specific durations and/or mapping types or may have time-domain overlaps with the scheduling PDCCH).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 2, 3, 12 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chatterjee in view of Wei et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication 2024/0023080, hereinafter Wei.
Regarding Claim 2 and 12, Chatterjee discloses the method and wireless device of Claim 1 and 11.Chatterjee fails to disclose wherein the minimum processing time is based on a smallest subcarrier spacing of the two or more uplink cells.
However, Wei teaches wherein the minimum processing time is based on a smallest subcarrier spacing of the two or more uplink cells (Paragraph [0094-0098] where T.sub.proc may include a PUSCH/PUCCH preparation time (e.g., T.sub.proc,d) or a CSI computation time (e.g., T.sub.proc,CSI), and d may be a UE capability (e.g., d∈{0,1,2}), which is reported to the network. In certain aspects, T.sub.proc may include a PUSCH preparation time T.sub.proc,d (such as T.sub.proc,2, which is based on a transmission numerology p and N 2 symbols of minimum processing capability 2) for a PUSCH transmission as the latter transmission or a CSI computation delay T.sub.proc,CSI (such as the CSI computation delay requirement 1) for a PUCCH transmission as the latter transmission. In certain aspects, T.sub.proc,d may be based on a value of μ corresponding to the smallest subcarrier spacing (SCS) configuration among the overlapping transmissions; For certain aspects, the first and second uplink transmission may be on separate carriers (e.g., component carriers for operation with carrier aggregation or a single cell with two uplink carriers). As an example for operation with carrier aggregation, the first uplink transmission may be transmitted via a first component carrier associated with a Pcell, and the second uplink transmission may be transmitted via second component carrier associated with a Scell).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Chatterjee with the teachings of Wei. The method provides desirable uplink performance via demodulation reference signal (DMRS) bundling and/or joint channel estimation. The method improves spectral efficiency, lowering costs, improving services, making use of new spectrum, and better integrating with other open standards using orthogonal frequency division multiple access (OFDMA) with a cyclic prefix on the downlink (DL) and on the uplink (UL) to support beamforming, multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) antenna technology, and carrier aggregation (Wei Abstract; Paragraph [0001-0014]).
Regarding Claim 3 and 13, Chatterjee discloses the method and wireless device of Claim 1 and 11.Chatterjee fails to disclose wherein the minimum processing time is based on a smallest subcarrier spacing of the one or more downlink cells and the two or more uplink cells (Paragraph [0094-0098] where T.sub.proc may include a PUSCH/PUCCH preparation time (e.g., T.sub.proc,d) or a CSI computation time (e.g., T.sub.proc,CSI), and d may be a UE capability (e.g., d∈{0,1,2}), which is reported to the network. In certain aspects, T.sub.proc may include a PUSCH preparation time T.sub.proc,d (such as T.sub.proc,2, which is based on a transmission numerology p and N 2 symbols of minimum processing capability 2) for a PUSCH transmission as the latter transmission or a CSI computation delay T.sub.proc,CSI (such as the CSI computation delay requirement 1) for a PUCCH transmission as the latter transmission. In certain aspects, T.sub.proc,d may be based on a value of μ corresponding to the smallest subcarrier spacing (SCS) configuration among the overlapping transmissions; For certain aspects, the first and second uplink transmission may be on separate carriers (e.g., component carriers for operation with carrier aggregation or a single cell with two uplink carriers). As an example for operation with carrier aggregation, the first uplink transmission may be transmitted via a first component carrier associated with a Pcell, and the second uplink transmission may be transmitted via second component carrier associated with a Scell).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Chatterjee with the teachings of Wei. The method provides desirable uplink performance via demodulation reference signal (DMRS) bundling and/or joint channel estimation. The method improves spectral efficiency, lowering costs, improving services, making use of new spectrum, and better integrating with other open standards using orthogonal frequency division multiple access (OFDMA) with a cyclic prefix on the downlink (DL) and on the uplink (UL) to support beamforming, multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) antenna technology, and carrier aggregation (Wei Abstract; Paragraph [0001-0014]).
Claims 4, 5, 7, 14, 15 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chatterjee in view of Yi et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication 2019/0356524, hereinafter Yi.
Regarding Claim 4 and 14, Chatterjee discloses the method and wireless device of Claim 1 and 11. Chatterjee fails to disclose wherein the minimum processing time is based on a largest subcarrier spacing of the two or more uplink cells.
However, Yi teaches wherein the minimum processing time is based on a largest subcarrier spacing of the two or more uplink cells (Paragraph [0316-0319] , total blind detection based on the largest (or smallest or reference) subcarrier spacing may be assumed, and divided in to multiple CORESETs. Define total blind detection number (‘max-BD’) per OFDM symbol with given numerology: In this case, total blind detection may be defined based on the largest subcarrier spacing. If one CORESET of a numerology spans more than one OFDM symbol based on the largest subcarrier spacing, the maximum blind detection may be either ‘max-BD’ or m*‘max-BD’. Here, m is the number of OFDM symbols based on the largest subcarrier spacing for a CORESET with a given numerology. The ‘max-BD’ may also be defined based on a reference numerology or smallest subcarrier spacing. In such case, depending on numerology, ‘max-BD’ may be increased or decreased. Alternatively, the same number of ‘max-BD’ can be used regardless of numerology and proper processing time may be handled by min-round trip time (RTT) or minimum processing time between control and data by UE signaling or configuration. In other words, if minimum processing time is numerology-agnostic, actual blind detection and handled TBS, etc., may be linearly scaled with subcarrier spacing. Otherwise, actual minimum processing time in slots may be increased as the numerology increased).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Chatterjee with the teachings of Yi. Yi provides a solution which minimizes the latency of final data transmission by taking less time to retransmit data when a data transmission error occurs. The control channel or control resource set is defined efficiently (Yi Abstract; Paragraph [0001-00011]).
Regarding Claim 5 and 15, Chatterjee discloses the method and wireless device of Claim 1 and 11. Chatterjee fails to disclose wherein the minimum processing time is based on a largest subcarrier spacing of the one or more downlink cells and the two or more uplink cells.
However, Yi teaches wherein the minimum processing time is based on a largest subcarrier spacing of the one or more downlink cells and the two or more uplink cells (Paragraph [0316-0319] , total blind detection based on the largest (or smallest or reference) subcarrier spacing may be assumed, and divided in to multiple CORESETs. Define total blind detection number (‘max-BD’) per OFDM symbol with given numerology: In this case, total blind detection may be defined based on the largest subcarrier spacing. If one CORESET of a numerology spans more than one OFDM symbol based on the largest subcarrier spacing, the maximum blind detection may be either ‘max-BD’ or m*‘max-BD’. Here, m is the number of OFDM symbols based on the largest subcarrier spacing for a CORESET with a given numerology. The ‘max-BD’ may also be defined based on a reference numerology or smallest subcarrier spacing. In such case, depending on numerology, ‘max-BD’ may be increased or decreased. Alternatively, the same number of ‘max-BD’ can be used regardless of numerology and proper processing time may be handled by min-round trip time (RTT) or minimum processing time between control and data by UE signaling or configuration. In other words, if minimum processing time is numerology-agnostic, actual blind detection and handled TBS, etc., may be linearly scaled with subcarrier spacing. Otherwise, actual minimum processing time in slots may be increased as the numerology increased).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Chatterjee with the teachings of Yi. Yi provides a solution which minimizes the latency of final data transmission by taking less time to retransmit data when a data transmission error occurs. The control channel or control resource set is defined efficiently (Yi Abstract; Paragraph [0001-00011]).
Regarding Claim 7 and 17, Chatterjee discloses the method and wireless device of Claim 1 and 11. Chatterjee fails to disclose wherein the minimum processing time is based on a reference numerology irrespective of numerologies of the one or more downlink cells and the two or more uplink cells.
However, Yi teaches wherein the minimum processing time is based on a reference numerology irrespective of numerologies of the one or more downlink cells and the two or more uplink cells (Paragraph [0316-0319] , total blind detection based on the largest (or smallest or reference) subcarrier spacing may be assumed, and divided in to multiple CORESETs. Define total blind detection number (‘max-BD’) per OFDM symbol with given numerology: In this case, total blind detection may be defined based on the largest subcarrier spacing. If one CORESET of a numerology spans more than one OFDM symbol based on the largest subcarrier spacing, the maximum blind detection may be either ‘max-BD’ or m*‘max-BD’. Here, m is the number of OFDM symbols based on the largest subcarrier spacing for a CORESET with a given numerology. The ‘max-BD’ may also be defined based on a reference numerology or smallest subcarrier spacing. In such case, depending on numerology, ‘max-BD’ may be increased or decreased. Alternatively, the same number of ‘max-BD’ can be used regardless of numerology and proper processing time may be handled by min-round trip time (RTT) or minimum processing time between control and data by UE signaling or configuration. In other words, if minimum processing time is numerology-agnostic, actual blind detection and handled TBS, etc., may be linearly scaled with subcarrier spacing. Otherwise, actual minimum processing time in slots may be increased as the numerology increased).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Chatterjee with the teachings of Yi. Yi provides a solution which minimizes the latency of final data transmission by taking less time to retransmit data when a data transmission error occurs. The control channel or control resource set is defined efficiently (Yi Abstract; Paragraph [0001-00011]).
Claims 6 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chatterjee in view of Liu et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication 2022/0272557, hereinafter Liu.
Regarding Claim 6 and 16, Chatterjee discloses the method and wireless device of Claim 1 and 11. Chatterjee fails to disclose wherein the minimum processing time is based on a reference numerology irrespective of numerologies of the one or more downlink cells and the two or more uplink cells.
However, Liu teaches wherein the minimum processing time is based on a reference numerology irrespective of numerologies of the one or more downlink cells and the two or more uplink cells (Liu Paragraph [0097] The number of symbols corresponds to a minimum processing time for UL cancelation (canceling the uplink transmission). The minimum processing time for the uplink cancelation depends on subcarrier spacing. For example, for a subcarrier spacing of 15 kHz, the minimum processing time is equal to 5 symbols at 15 kHz. For subcarrier spacing of 30 kHz, the minimum processing time is equal to 5.5 symbols at 30 kHz, and so on. Therefore, in response to the UE detecting the UL CI, the UE determines the time-domain starting point of the corresponding RUR based on the subcarrier spacing. The subcarrier spacing can be one of the subcarrier spacing of the ULCI, determined based on frequency range (FR) (e.g., the subcarrier spacing is 15 kHz for FR1, 60 kHz for FR2, and so on), the minimum of the subcarrier spacing of the UL CI and the subcarrier spacing of the PUSCH (e.g., the canceled resource) of the UE, or the subcarrier spacing configured by the base station).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Chatterjee with the teachings of Liu. The method can provide enhanced mobile broadband, ultra-high reliability, ultra-low-latency transmission. Achieve a higher data communication rate, a massive number of communication links, and improved energy efficiency. Convey preemption indication information to the UE that has its transmission resources preempted (Liu Abstract; Paragraph [0002-0007 and 0024]).
Claims 8 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chatterjee in view of Nimbalker et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication 2023/0354312, hereinafter Nimbalker.
Regarding Claim 7 and 17, Chatterjee discloses the method and wireless device of Claim 1 and 11. Chatterjee fails to disclose wherein the wireless device is configured for uplink carrier switching.
However, Nimbalker teaches wherein the wireless device is configured for uplink carrier switching (Abstract; Paragraph [0019-0027] Systems and methods are disclosed herein that enable fast-switched uplink (UL) transmit (Tx) across carriers. Embodiments of a method performed by a wireless communication device are disclosed. In one embodiment, a method performed by a wireless communication device comprises determining whether uplink transmit switching from a first carrier to a second carrier is needed for an uplink transmission).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Chatterjee with the teachings of Nimbalker. The impact to wireless communication device implementation complexity due to support of UL Tx switching can be reduced. The uplink transmission related timing parameter is a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) processing time, which is a function of a PUSCH preparation time (Nimbalker Abstract; Paragraph [0026-0033]).
Claims 10 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chatterjee in view of Rastegardoost et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication 2023/0023656, hereinafter Rastegardoost.
Regarding Claim 10 and 20, Chatterjee discloses the method and wireless device of Claim 1 and 11. Chatterjee fails to disclose wherein the uplink transmission comprises acknowledgement of a release for a semi persistent scheduling (SPS) downlink transmission.
However, Rastegardoost teaches wherein the uplink transmission comprises acknowledgement of a release for a semi persistent scheduling (SPS) downlink transmission (Paragraph [0224-0235 and 0336] . A UE may or may not expect to be indicated to transmit HARQ-ACK information for more than one SPS PDSCH receptions in a same PUCCH. A UE may multiplex UCI in a PUCCH transmission that overlaps with a PUSCH transmission. The UE may multiplex only HARQ-ACK information, if any, from the UCI in the PUSCH transmission (e.g. piggyback), and may not transmit the PUCCH, e.g., if the UE multiplexes aperiodic and/or semi-persistent CSI reports in the PUSCH. a first symbol of the CG PUSCH may start after a time gap from a last symbol of the PDSCH reception/SPS PDSCH release associated with the pending HARQ-ACK (NNK). For example. The wireless device may not receive any DCI (UL DCI and/or DL DCI) indicating a time/resource for transmission of the pending HARQ-ACK during the time gap. For example, the time gap may be pre-defied/pre-configured/configured via RRC signaling. For example, a first symbol of the CG PUSCH may be earlier than a first symbol of a PDCCH monitoring occasion where a DCI indicating a time/uplink resource (PUSCH/PUCCH) for transmission of the pending HARQ-ACK is detected. The time gap may be a minimum processing time based on a UE capability for a configured grant configuration for the CG PUSCH. The time gap may be a processing time of the wireless device).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Chatterjee with the teachings of Rastegardoost. Rastegardoost provides a solution that facilitates its detection with low complexity may be useful for wireless device power saving, improved coexistence, spatial reuse at least within the same operator network, serving cell transmission burst acquisition, etc. The embodiments may improve a latency associated with the HARQ feedback transmission and the handling of the HARQ process, reduce a downlink control overhead associated with the HARQ feedback transmission, and increase a flexibility of resource scheduling for the wireless network operating in unlicensed spectrum and/or with URLLC traffic. (Rastegardoost Paragraph [0255 and 0289]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to IVAN O LATORRE whose telephone number is (571)272-6264. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 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, Hadi Armouche can be reached at (571) 270-3618. 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.
IVAN O. LATORRE
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2409
/IVAN O LATORRE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2409
Prosecution Insights