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 .
Priorities and Examiner Remarks
This application is a National Stage entry of PCT/SE2022/050280 (International Filing Date: 03/24/2022) that claims priority from Provisional Application 63210279
(filed 06/14/2021).
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.
Claim 55 is 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 55 line 1-2, "each of the multiple slots" has no antecedent basis.
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 non-obviousness.
Claims 53-55, 58-64, 66, and 68 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fakoorian et al. (US 2019/0313419 A1, hereinafter Fakoorian), in view of El Hamss et al. (US 20220078768 A1, hereinafter El Hamss).
Regarding claim 53, Fakoorian teaches a network node configured to communicate with a wireless device (WD), the network node comprising processing circuitry configured to (in general, see fig. 6A/B/C along with fig. 7 and their respectively paragraphs):
allocate at least a first resource for physical uplink or downlink shared channel (PxSCH) for a first type of traffic of the WD, the first resource including at least one transport block (Fakoorian, see at least para. 121 and 124, “...The second set of resources 610 represents an eMBB (or another non-URLLC or non-low latency communication protocol) resource...”, note that fig. 6A shows various examples of transport blocks 610-a/b/c/d for eMBB traffic),
allocate at least a second resource for the PxSCH for a second type of traffic of the WD, at least a first portion of the first resource overlapping at least a second portion of the second resource (Fakoorian, see at least para. 122 and 124, for one non-limiting example, “...For example, as illustrated by the resource overlap handling technique 600B, a UE 120 may transmit the first transmission (e.g., a URLLC data transmission) in the first set of resources 605-b and may refrain from transmitting the second transmission (e.g., an eMBB data transmission) in the second set of resources 610-b based on the overlap between the sets of resources...”);
and
refrain from at least one of transmitting and receiving the first type of traffic over an overlapping region of the first resource that collides with the second resource (Fakoorian, see at least para. 122 and 124, for one non-limiting example, “...For example, as illustrated by the resource overlap handling technique 600B, a UE 120 may transmit the first transmission (e.g., a URLLC data transmission) in the first set of resources 605-b and may refrain from transmitting the second transmission (e.g., an eMBB data transmission) in the second set of resources 610-b based on the overlap between the sets of resources...”);
the refraining including: refraining from transmitting or receiving the first type of traffic over a portion of a transport block of the at least one transport block that overlaps at least partially with the second resource; and transmitting a remaining portion of the transport block that is non-overlapping as a resized transport block (Fakoorian, see at least para. 123-124, for one non-limiting example, “...As illustrated by the resource overlap handling technique 600C, in Option 1b, a UE 120 may rate match the second transmission (e.g., the eMBB transmission) around the first set of resources 605-c for the first transmission (e.g., the URLLC transmission) based on the overlap. The UE 120 may transmit the first transmission in the first set of resources 605-c and may transmit the second transmission in a subset of the second set of resources distinct in time from the first set of resources 605-c based on the rate matching. For example, after rate matching around the first set of resources 605-c, the second set of resources may include a second set of resources 610-c and a second set of resources 610-d for transmission of the second transmission (e.g., the eMBB transmission).
Fakoorian does not specifically teach transmit to the WD a resource allocation indication indicating the first resource and the second resource, the first resource and the second resource usable by the WD to at least one of transmit and receive the corresponding first type of traffic and second type of traffic.
El Hamss teaches transmit to the WD a resource allocation indication indicating the first resource and the second resource, the first resource and the second resource usable by the WD to at least one of transmit and receive the corresponding first type of traffic and second type of traffic (EL Hamss, see at least para. 87-88, for one non-limiting example, “...FIG. 2 is a diagram illustrating time-frequency resources used to carry control signaling for a URLLC/eURLLC service and an eMBB service. Referring to FIG. 2, a plurality of time-frequency resources 200-1, 200-2 ... 200-N may carry control signaling for a plurality of services (e.g., control DCI scheduling for eMBB 210, DCI scheduling for URLLC service/eURLLC service 220, PDSCH for eMBB 230, PDSCH for URLLC service/eURLLC service 240...”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to a person having ordinary skill in the art to incorporate El Hamss into Fakoorian for improving prioritized traffic type to reduce latency.
Regarding claim 54, Fakoorian in view of El Hamss teaches claim 53.
Fakoorian further teaches when the second type of traffic has higher priority than the first type of traffic, refrain from transmitting and receiving the first type of traffic on the overlapping region of the first resource. (Fakoorian, see at least para. 121-122, for a non-limiting example, “...For example, as illustrated by the resource overlap handling technique 600B, a UE 120 may transmit the first transmission (e.g., a URLLC data transmission) in the first set of resources 605-b and may refrain from transmitting the second transmission (e.g., an eMBB data transmission) in the second set of resources 610-b based on the overlap between the sets of resources.”)
Regarding claim 55, Fakoorian in view of El Hamss teaches claim 53.
Fakoorian further teaches each of the multiple slots includes at least one symbol (Fakoorian, see at least para. 123, not that “...a non-URLLC (or slot based) PUSCH may be rate matched (or punctured) around OFDM symbols that overlap in time with the URLLC resource...”),
and the processing circuitry is configured to: refrain from transmitting and receiving the first type of traffic over any one of:
any slot of the multiple slots that overlaps at least partially with the second resource;
and
any symbol of the at least one symbol that overlaps at least partially with the second resource. (Fakoorian, see at least para. 123-124, for a non-limiting example, “...In a second aspect of the first option, Option 1b, a non-URLLC (or slot based) PUSCH may be rate matched (or punctured) around OFDM symbols that overlap in time with the URLLC resource...”)
Regarding claim 58, Fakoorian in view of El Hamss teaches claim 53.
Fakoorian in view of El Hamss further teaches wherein the at least first resource includes at least one transport block (Fakoorian, see at least para. 121-122 in view of para. 75, “...In FIG. 6A, the first sets of resources 605 represents a URLLC (or another low latency communication protocol) resource. For example, a UE 120 may schedule a first transmission using a first communication protocol (e.g., a URLLC protocol) in the first set of resources 605, where the first transmission may include URLLC data such as PUSCH, or both. The second set of resources 610 represents an eMBB (or another non-URLLC or non-low latency communication protocol) resource...”, El Hamss, see fig. 2, e.g. DIC scheduling TB for eMBB service or URLLC service),
and the processing circuitry is configured to refrain from transmitting and receiving the first type of traffic over any one of:
any transport block of the at least one transport block that overlaps at least partially with the second resource (Fakoorian, see at least para. 121-122, “...In a first option, Option 1, the URLLC is not piggybacked on the non-URLLC (or slot based) PUSCH. That is, the URLLC transmission may be transmitted by a UE 120 in the URLLC resources. In a first aspect of the first option, Option 1a, the non-URLLC (or slot based) PUSCH may be completely dropped and the URLLC data may be transmitted on the URLLC resource...”, El Hamss, see fig. 2, e.g. DIC scheduling TB for eMBB service or URLLC service),
and
a portion of a transport block of the at least one transport block, overlapping at least partially with the second resource, where another portion of the transport block that is non-overlapping being indicated as a resized transport block to be used by the WD.
Regarding claim 59, this claim is rejected for the same reasoning as claim 53 except this claim is in method claim format.
Regarding claim 60, this claim is rejected for the same reasoning as claim 54 except this claim is in method claim format.
Regarding claim 61, Fakoorian in view of El Hamss teaches claim 59.
Fakoorian further teaches wherein any one of the first type of traffic and the second type of traffic includes at least one of extended reality, XR, traffic, ultra-reliable low latency communication, URLLC, traffic, enhanced Mobile Broadband, eMBB, traffic, and a traffic associated with a radio access technology. (Fakoorian, see at least para. 121-122, for a non-limiting example, “...The second set of resources 610
represents an eMBB (or another non-URLLC or non-low latency communication protocol) resource...”).
Regarding claim 62, this claim is rejected for the same reasoning as claim 53, except this claim is in method claim format. To be more specific, although reciting subject matters slightly different, one skilled in the art would have known claim 62 performs reverse (or corresponding) procedures of claim 53. For example, it would be a WD of claim 62 that performs the reverse (or corresponding) receiving from and transmitting to the network node of claim 53. Hence, the examiner applies the same rejection reasoning as set forth in claim 53.
Regarding claims 63, 64, and 66, in view of claim 62 above, these claims are rejected for the same reasoning as claims 54, 55, and 58, respectively.
Regarding claim 68, this claim is rejected for the same reasoning as claim 62 except this claim is in apparatus claim format.
To be more specific, Fakoorian in view of El Hamss also teaches a same or similar apparatus comprising memory and processing circuitry (Fakoorian, see at least fig. 13), which are well known in the art and commonly used for providing and enabling robust and reliable data communication hardware and software.
Claims 56-57, 65, and 67 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fakoorian in view of El Hamss, and further in view of YANG et al. (US 20210068195 A1, hereinafter YANG).
Regarding claim 56, Fakoorian in view of El Hamss teaches claim 53.
Fakoorian further teaches the first resource includes at least one resource block (RB) (Fakoorian, see at least para. 121-122 in view of para. 139 of fig. 6C, note that “...Each set of frequency hopped resources 615 may span a different set of resource blocks (RBs) in the frequency domain...”),
and the processing circuitry is configured to: refrain from transmitting and receiving the first type of traffic over any RB of the at least one RB that overlaps at least partially with the second resource. (Fakoorian, see at least para. 121-122 in view of para. 139, “...a UE 120 may transmit the first transmission (e.g., a URLLC data transmission) in the first set of resources 605-b and may refrain from transmitting the second transmission (e.g., an eMBB data transmission) in the second set of resources 610-b based on the overlap between the sets of resources.”).
Fakoorian in view of El Hamss does not specifically teach physical resource block, PRB.
YANG teaches physical resource block, PRB (YANG, see at least para. 40 and fig. 2, “...A resource grid may be used to represent the frame structure. Each time slot includes a resource block (RB) (also referred to as physical RBs (PRBs)) that extends 12 consecutive subcarriers...”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to a person having ordinary skill in the art to incorporate YANG into Fakoorian in view of El Hamss to improve spectrum utilization.
Regarding claim 57, Fakoorian in view of El Hamss teaches claim 53.
Fakoorian further teaches wherein the at least first resource includes at least one reference resource (Fakoorian, see at least fig. 6A and/or 6B, for example, second set of resources 610-a, 610-b, 610-cd, 610-e, 610-fg, etc.),
and the processing circuitry is further configured to: refrain from transmitting and receiving the first type of traffic over any reference resource of the at least one reference resource that overlaps at least partially with the second resource (Fakoorian, see at least para. 125, for a non-limiting example, “...as illustrated by the resource overlap handling technique 600E, the UE 120 may transmit the first transmission (e.g., a URLLC transmission) in the first set of resources 605-b and may refrain from transmitting the second transmission (e.g., an eMBB transmission)...”).
Fakoorian in view of El Hamss does not specifically teach at least one reference resource each of which having a first reference resource length in time domain and a second reference resource length in a frequency domain.
YANG teaches at least one reference resource each of which having a first reference resource length in time domain and a second reference resource length in a frequency domain (YANG, see at least para. 56 and fig. 4, “...A base station may send a UE a ULCI and a ULCI bitmap 402. The time and frequency resources of an uplink channel can be represented as a grid. For example, time and frequency resources may be divided into X*Y grids in which X corresponds to frequency resources and Y corresponds to time resources. In FIG. 4, X=2 and Y=7. Each cell of the ULCI bitmap 402 may represent one time-frequency resource....”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to a person having ordinary skill in the art to incorporate YANG into Fakoorian in view of El Hamss to improve spectrum utilization.
Regarding claim 65, in view of claim 62 above, this claim is rejected for the same reasoning as claim 56.
Regarding claim 67, Fakoorian in view of El Hamss teaches claim 62.
Fakoorian further teaches refraining from transmitting and receiving the first type of traffic until a time associated with any one of the network node and the WD has been met. (Fakoorian, see at least para. 124 along with para. 123, for a non-limiting example, “...For example, after rate matching around the first set of resources 605-c, the second set of resources may include a second set of resources 610-c and a second set of resources 610-d for transmission of the second transmission (e.g., the eMBB transmission). In some cases, if the rate matching involves puncturing the second transmission for at least one symbol of the second set of resources with the first transmission, the UE 120 may insert a DMRS symbol into the second transmission following the first resource (e.g., in the second set of resources 610-d) based on puncturing the second transmission for the at least one symbol...”, note that “...after resuming the transmission in the slot-based PUSCH following the punctured resources, the channel phase may be different. In some cases, more DMRS symbols may be introduced after the puncturing to address phase continuity...”, in other words transmission of resources 610-d is resumed after transmission of resources 605-c).
Fakoorian in view of El Hamss does not specifically teach predetermined processing time.
YANG teaches predetermined processing time (YANG, see at least para. 57, “...The portion 404 of the ULCI bitmap 402 may correspond to the uplink channel resources where the scheduled uplink data 420 was scheduled to transmit. Based on the values in the portion 404 of the ULCI bitmap 402, the middle segment 424 of the scheduled uplink data 420 will be pre-empted (and, e.g., replaced with higher-priority uplink data) and the beginning segment 422 and the end segment 426 may not be pre-empted. The UE scheduled for the eMBB data compares its uplink transmission with the indicated resource in the ULCI and preempts its eMBB transmission, e.g., cancels or stops its eMBB transmission, starting from the first overlapping OFDM symbol. In some aspects, the UE may resume its uplink transmission of scheduled uplink data 420 on resources which are not pre-empted, e.g., may transmit the end portion 426 of the scheduled uplink data 420. The resumption of transmission after stopping in response to the ULCI may be referred to as a “stop with resume....”, note that the stopping and resuming of the eMMB transmission, or otherwise the starting and finishing of the URLLC transmission, are determined in the ULCI bitmap 402).
Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to a person having ordinary skill in the art to incorporate YANG into Fakoorian in view of El Hamss to improve spectrum utilization.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/03/2026 have been fully considered. Regarding independent claims 53, 59, 62, and 68, since applicant's amendment necessitated new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action, previous Office action's rejections are moot. Accordingly, corresponding dependent claims have also been rejected in this Office action.
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YEE F LAM whose telephone number is (571)270-7577. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-5pm. 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, Ayman Abaza can be reached on 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 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.
/YEE F LAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2465
Prosecution Insights