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 .
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 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as failing to set forth 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.
The claims 6-8 state – “if the physical uplink shared channel includes a HARQ-ACK with higher priority than another HARQ-ACK;”
The examiner reviewed the specification and drawings – including specification paragraphs [0051], [0052], [0061], [0067], [0068], and [0121]. The examiner could not find support for the claim element stated above.
If the applicant finds support in the specification please inform 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)(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 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Zhang et al. (US 2022/0158794 A1) hereinafter Zhang.
Regarding claim 6 – Zhang discloses a processor – refer to paragraph [0062] - The memory medium may store program instructions (e.g., embodied as computer programs) that may be executed by one or more processors, also, paragraph [0095] - The UE 106 may include a processor that is configured to execute program instructions stored in memory.
that prioritizes allocation of transmission power, refer to paragraph [0151] - a priority rule may be defined to scale down transmission power for uplink signals with lowest priority, also, refer to paragraph [0215] - the UE may scale transmission power for the PUCCH-BFR and/or the at least one other signal based on the transmission power scaling rule, also, refer to paragraph [0153] - a PUCCH transmission with hybrid automatic repeat request acknowledgement (HARQ-ACK) information and/or a scheduling request SR or a PUSCH transmission with HARQ-ACK information may have a higher priority than a PUCCH transmission with CSI or PUSCH transmission with CSI, also, refer to paragraph [0158] - a priority rule may be defined such that UE may transmit the uplink signals with higher priority and drop other signals that are configured with a different spatial relationship information, also, paragraph [0161] - PUCCH with HARQ-ACK and/or SR or PUSCH with HARQ-ACK and/or SR having a higher priority than PUCCH with CSI or PUSCH with CSI,
to a physical uplink shared channel if the physical uplink shared channel includes a HARQ-ACK with higher priority than another HARQ-ACK, refer to paragraph [0006] - LTE defines a Physical Uplink Shared Channel (PUSCH) as a UL channel shared by all devices (user equipment, UE) in a radio cell to transmit user data to the network, also, refer to paragraph [0153] - a PUSCH transmission with HARQ-ACK information may have a higher priority than a PUCCH transmission with CSI or PUSCH transmission with CSI, also, paragraph [0161] - PUCCH with HARQ-ACK and/or SR or PUSCH with HARQ-ACK and/or SR having a higher priority than PUCCH with CSI or PUSCH with CSI,
a transmitter that transmits the physical uplink shared channel, refer to paragraph [0158] - UE may transmit the uplink signals with higher priority, also, paragraph [0190] - the UE may transmit failed a CC index and new beam index (if identified) in a MAC CE via PUSCH.
Regarding claim 7 – Zhang discloses a terminal, refer to Figure 5A and paragraph [0115] - FIG. 5A illustrates an example simplified block diagram of a communication device 106, according to some embodiments. It is noted that the block diagram of the communication device of FIG. 5A is only one example of a possible communication device. According to embodiments, communication device 106 may be a user equipment (UE) device, a mobile device or mobile station, a wireless device or wireless station, a desktop computer or computing device, a mobile computing device (e.g., a laptop, notebook, or portable computing device), a tablet,
a base station, refer to Figure 3 and paragraph [0102] - FIG. 3 illustrates an example block diagram of a base station 102, according to some embodiments. It is noted that the base station of FIG. 3 is merely one example of a possible base station. As shown, the base station 102 may include processor(s) 404 which may execute program instructions for the base station 102. The processor(s) 404 may also be coupled to memory management unit (MMU) 440, which may be configured to receive addresses from the processor(s) 404 and translate those addresses to locations in memory (e.g., memory 460 and read only memory (ROM) 450) or to other circuits or devices.
For the other claim elements of claim 7 refer to rejection of claim 6 elements above.
wherein the terminal comprises: a processor that prioritizes allocation of transmission power to a physical uplink shared channel if the physical uplink shared channel includes a HARQ-ACK with higher priority than another HARQ-ACK; and a transmitter that transmits the physical uplink shared channel.
Regarding claim 8 – Please refer to claim 6 for the rejection of the elements for claim 8.
Both the application and reference disclose transmission power rules, which are used to limit transmission power to be within capabilities of the UE. Both the application and the reference state priorities which give higher priority to certain kinds of PUSCH which include PUSCH with HARQ-ACK.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-5 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Loehr et al. (US 2022/0311498 A1) discloses SCELL beam failure recovery.
Jung et al. (US 2024/0089970 A1) discloses multiplexing uplink control information of different priorities.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to John Pezzlo whose telephone number is (571) 272-3090. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Friday from 8:30 AM to 5:00 PM. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ayman A. Abaza, can be reached at telephone number (571) 270-0422. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center and the Private Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center or Private PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center and Private PAIR to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form .
John Pezzlo
7 April 2026
/John Pezzlo/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2465B