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 .
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.
Application
The instant application is the national stage entry under 35 U.S.C. 371 of PCT Application No. PCT/CN2021/112713, filed 16 August 2021, having claims 1-30. Claims 1-30 have been examined.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 5 December 2023 was filed before the mailing date of the first action on the merits. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 17 and 23 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 17, “filed” in line 3 should be “field.”
Regarding claim 23, line 8 should end with a semi-colon, rather than a comma. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 22 and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Claim 22 refers to the method of claim 28, which is not a method. For purposes of the prior art search, it is being presumed that claim 22 is dependent upon claim 18. This presumption is being made based on the claim’s similarity to claim 8.
Claim 27 is recited as being dependent upon itself. For purposes of the prior art search, it is being presumed that claim 27 is dependent upon claim 26. This presumption is being made based on the claim’s similarity to claim 5.
Applicant may cancel the claims, amend the claims to place the claims in proper dependent form, rewrite the claims in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claims comply with the statutory requirements.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
Claims 5-7, 19-21, and 26-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 5, base claim 1 also recites a separate step in which the first DCI is received from the base station by the UE. Claim 5 then recites an additional step in which the UE again receives the first DCI in a DL communication from the base station. Since the disclosure contains no embodiment in which the first DCI is received more than once, claim 5 does not comply with the written description requirement.
Claims 6 and 7 are dependent upon base claim 5 and wholly incorporate its limitations, rendering them likewise as failing to comply with the written description requirement.
Regarding claim 19, base claim 14 also recites a separate step in which the first DCI is transmitted by the base station to the UE. Claim 19 then recites an additional step in which the BS again transmits the first DCI in a DL communication to the UE. Since the disclosure contains no embodiment in which the first DCI is transmitted more than once, claim 19 does not comply with the written description requirement.
Claims 20 and 21 are dependent upon base claim 19 and wholly incorporate its limitations, rendering them likewise as failing to comply with the written description requirement.
Regarding claim 26, base claim 23 also recites a separate step in which the first DCI is received from the base station by the UE. Claim 26 then recites an additional step in which the UE again receives the first DCI in a DL communication from the base station. Since the disclosure contains no embodiment in which the first DCI is received more than once, claim 26 does not comply with the written description requirement.
Claims 27-30 are dependent upon base claim 19 and wholly incorporate its limitations, rendering them likewise as failing to comply with the written description requirement.
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 1-4, 8-16, 18, and 22-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S Patent No. 10,736,140 to Park et al. (hereinafter Park).
As per claim 1, Park discloses a method of wireless communication performed by a user equipment (UE), the method comprising:
receiving, from a base station (BS), first downlink control information (DCI) scheduling an uplink (UL) communication (see column 16, lines 34-42);
receiving, from the BS, a request to perform a clear channel assessment (CCA) associated with a first CCA timing configuration (see column 17, lines 34-42; column 22, lines 22-33);
performing, based on an indication to change to a second CCA timing configuration different from the first CCA timing configuration, the CCA based on the second CCA timing configuration (see column 22, line 22 to column 24, line 7); and
transmitting, to the BS based on the CCA, the UL communication (see column 23, lines 49-58).
Regarding claim 2, Park further discloses the first CCA timing configuration is based on a random counter value, the indication includes an indication of a non-random counter value, the method further includes: determining, based on the non-random counter value, a duration of the CCA (see column 12, lines 20-41).
Regarding claim 3, Park further discloses the non-random counter value is one of: a statically-configured counter value (a DMTC period, see column 12, lines 20-41).
Regarding claim 4, Park further discloses receiving, from the BS, a downlink (DL) communication including the indication to change to the second CCA timing configuration (see column 22, lines 49-55).
Regarding claim 8, Park further discloses wherein the receiving the DL communication includes receiving a second DCI different from the first DCI, wherein the second DCI indicates a time resource associated with a BS-initiated channel occupancy time (COT), and wherein the transmitting the UL communication comprises transmitting the UL communication in the BS-initiated COT (see column 21, line 65 to column 22, line 21).
Regarding claim 9, Park further discloses wherein the performing the CCA is based on a time gap between a first time resource of the DL communication and a second time resource of the UL communication (see column 22, lines 39-43).
Regarding claim 10, Park further discloses a method of wireless communication performed by a user equipment (UE), the method comprising: receiving, from a base station (BS), first downlink control information (DCI) scheduling an uplink (UL) communication (see column 16, lines 34-42); refraining, based on an absence of a channel access parameter in the first DCI, from performing a clear channel assessment (CCA); and transmitting, to the BS over a shared frequency band, the UL communication without performing the CCA (see column 22, lines 34-38).
Regarding claim 11, Park further discloses monitoring for a second DCI indicating a time resource of a BS-initiated channel occupancy time (COT); and wherein the transmitting the UL communication comprises: transmitting, based on the monitoring for the second DCI and a type of the UL communication, the UL communication (see column 21, line 65 to column 22, line 21).
Regarding claim 12, Park further discloses the UL communication includes a UL control signal, the transmitting the UL communication is further based on a transmission power configuration, and the transmission power configuration is based on the monitoring for the second DCI (see column 8, line 56 to column 9, line 8; the control information therein is applicable to all DCIs).
Regarding claim 13, Park further discloses the UL communication is a UL data communication (see column 10, lines 40-55), the transmitting the UL communication comprises transmitting the UL data communication in the BS-initiated COT (see column 21, line 65 to column 22, line 21).
Regarding claim 14, Park further discloses a method of wireless communication performed by a base station (BS), the method comprising: transmitting, to a user equipment (UE), an indication of a first clear channel assessment (CCA) timing configuration (see column 17, lines 34-42; column 22, lines 22-33); transmitting, to the UE, first downlink control information (DCI) scheduling an uplink (UL) communication (see column 16, lines 34-42); transmitting, to the UE, a request to perform a CCA associated with a second CCA timing configuration (see column 22, line 22 to column 24, line 7); and receiving, from the UE, the UL communication in a time resource, wherein the time resource is associated with the first CCA timing configuration (see column 23, lines 49-58).
Regarding claim 15, Park further discloses the second CCA timing configuration is based on a random counter value, the first CCA timing configuration is based on a non-random counter value, the method further includes: determining, based on the non-random counter value, a duration of the CCA (see column 12, lines 20-41).
Regarding claim 16, Park further discloses the non-random counter value is one of: a statically-configured counter value (a DMTC period, see column 12, lines 20-41).
Regarding claim 18, Park further discloses transmitting, to the UE, an indication to change to the first CCA timing configuration (see column 22, lines 49-55).
Regarding claim 22, Park further discloses the transmitting the indication comprises transmitting a second DCI different from the first DCI, wherein the second DCI indicates a time resource associated with a BS-initiated channel occupancy time (COT), and wherein the receiving the UL communication comprises receiving the UL communication in the BS-initiated COT (see column 21, line 65 to column 22, line 21).
Regarding claim 23, Park further discloses a user equipment (UE), comprising: a transceiver; and a processor in communication with the transceiver and configured to: cause the transceiver to: receive, from a base station (BS), first downlink control information (DCI) scheduling an uplink (UL) communication (see column 16, lines 34-42); receive, from the BS, a request to perform a clear channel assessment (CCA) associated with a first CCA timing configuration (see column 17, lines 34-42; column 22, lines 22-33); perform, based on an indication to change to a second CCA timing configuration different from the first CCA timing configuration, the CCA based on the second CCA timing configuration (see column 22, line 22 to column 24, line 7); and cause the transceiver to: transmit, to the BS based on the CCA, the UL communication (see column 23, lines 49-58).
Regarding claim 24, Park further discloses the first CCA timing configuration is based on a random counter value, the indication includes an indication of a non-random counter value, the processor is further configured to: determine, based on the non-random counter value, a duration of the CCA (see column 12, lines 20-41).
Regarding claim 25, Park further discloses the processor is configured to cause the transceiver to: receive, from the BS, a downlink (DL) communication including the indication to change to the second CCA timing configuration (see column 22, lines 49-55).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 17 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 17, Park does not disclose the transmitting the indication of the first CCA timing configuration includes transmitting the DCI scheduling the UL communication, and wherein the DCI includes a channel access field indicating the non-random counter value.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Patent No. 9,763,225 to Ji et al. discloses a system for LTE CCA.
WIPO Patent Application No. WO2021/118743 to Qualcomm Inc. discloses a system for LBT communications.
U.S. Patent No. 11,490,417 to Talarico et al. discloses an analogous FBE framework.
U.S. Patent No. 11,910,433 to Li et al. discloses an analogous LBT system.
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2023/0189020 to Calcev et al. discloses a system for using DCI to control energy resources.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW E HENEGHAN whose telephone number is (571)272-3834. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5.
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, Michael Fuelling can be reached at (571)270-1367. 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.
/MATTHEW E HENEGHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3992