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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 05/26/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s Amendments and Arguments filed 05/26/2026 have been considered for examination.
With regard to the 103 rejections, Applicant’s arguments filed 05/26/2026 in view of the amendments have been fully considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to any of the references being used in the current rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 1, 11, 15 and 16 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.
Claims 1, 11 and 15 each recites "wherein cyclic shift (CS) offsets for the HARQ-ACK information and the SR are determined . . . for a third case in which a positive SR is transmitted in the PUCCH without HARQ-ACK transmission.” (Emphasis added.) in last two lines, which however, does not appear to be described within the Specification.
Although the specification in ¶0366-0367 merely discloses that CS offsets are configured for cases for “Negative SR+NACK”, “Positive SR+NACK”, and “Positive SR+ACK”.
However, the specification fails to describe, “wherein cyclic shift (CS) offsets for the HARQ-ACK information and the SR are determined . . . for a third case in which a positive SR is transmitted in the PUCCH without HARQ-ACK transmission,” as recited in claims 1, 11 and 15.
The examiner does not find any relevant description that a skilled artisan would recognize Applicant was in possession of the claimed invention. As such, Examiner suggests Applicant to point to specific language within the Specification that fully discloses the above noted limitation of claims 1, 11 and 15, otherwise Applicant should amend the claims to recite limitations fully supported within Applicant’s Specification.
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 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 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 nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 11 and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al (US Publication No. 2020/0146037) in view of Noh et al (US Publication No. 2020/0177424 A1) and further in view of Wong et al (US Publication No. 2022/0279559 A1) and further in view of “Discussion on reliability improvement”, 3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #104b-3 e-Meeting, April 12th - 20th, 2021 (R1-2102901) (hereinafter, “3GPP1”).
Regarding claim 1, Park discloses, a method comprising:
receiving, by user equipment (UE), from a base station, configuration information related to hybrid automatic repeat and request (HARQ)-acknowledgement (ACK) reporting for a . . . physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) [FIGS. 13-15; their related descriptions; ¶1002, the UE first receives first configuration information for one or more first UL resources for SR transmission from an base station (S1510); further see ¶1003, the UE then receives second configuration information for a second UL resource for UCI transmission from the base station (S1520); further see ¶1010, the second UL resource may be a PUCCH resource carrying HARQ-ACK information; further see [¶0850, a PUCCH resource carrying HARQ-ACK information for a PDSCH scheduled by a DL assignment (or DL scheduling DCI)], wherein . . . the HARQ-ACK reporting for . . .PDSCH is configured based on the configuration information [FIGS. 13-15; their related descriptions; ¶1002-1003 and ¶1010, the second UL resource may be a PUCCH resource carrying HARQ-ACK information; note that transmission of the HARQ-ACK is configured];
receiving, by user equipment (UE), from the base station, downlink control information (DCI) for scheduling the PDSCH [¶0850, a PUCCH resource carrying HARQ-ACK information for a PDSCH scheduled by a DL assignment (or DL scheduling DCI); further see ¶0615 and 0995];
receiving, by the UE, from the base station, the PDSCH [¶0069-0070, receiving a PDSCH from base station; further see ¶0815, a PUCCH resource carrying HARQ-ACK information for a PDSCH scheduled by a DL assignment (or DL scheduling DCI); note that in order to transmit HARQ-ACK information for a PDSCH, receiving of the PDSCH is required beforehand]; and
based on resources for i) first physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) transmission with HARQ-ACK information related to the . . . PDSCH according to the . . . HARQ-ACK reporting and ii) second PUCCH transmission with a scheduling request (SR) [FIGS. 13-15; their related descriptions; ¶1016-1017, the UE first determines a first PUCCH format carrying positive SR information, and a second PUCCH format carrying HARQ-ACK information] overlapping in a slot [FIGS. 13-15; their related descriptions; ¶1004, the first UL resources/first PUCCH and the second UL resource/second PUCCH overlap in the time domain; note that overlapping of two resources in the time domain requires overlapping thereof at least in a (time) slot], transmitting, by the UE, the HARQ-ACK information and the SR in a PUCCH to the base station [FIGS. 13-15; their related descriptions; If N (N is a natural number larger than 1) first UL resources for N SR transmissions overlap with the second UL resource in the time domain, the UE transmits bit information indicating SR information for N SR configurations (or SR processes) together with the UCI in the second UL resource (S1530); further see ¶1010, the second UL resource may be a PUCCH resource carrying HARQ-ACK information], wherein a cyclic shift (CS) resource for the HARQ-ACK information and the SR are determined respectively for a second case in which a positive SR and a NACK are multiplexed in the PUCCH [¶0376, table 15, positive SR + NACK (second row), sequences 1 and 2 are used; further see ¶0137, “a cyclic shift (CS) resource for a specific sequence refers to a resource resulting from applying a cyclic time shift (a cyclic frequency shift) to the sequence on the time axis (on the frequency axis)”].
Although Park discloses, “receiving, by user equipment (UE), from a base station, configuration information related to hybrid automatic repeat and request (HARQ)-acknowledgement (ACK) reporting for a . . . physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH), wherein . . . the HARQ-ACK reporting for . . .PDSCH is configured based on the configuration information; receiving, by user equipment (UE), from the base station, downlink control information (DCI) for scheduling the PDSCH; receiving, by the UE, from the base station, the PDSCH; and based on resources for i) first physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) transmission with HARQ-ACK information related to the . . . PDSCH according to the . . . HARQ-ACK reporting and ii) second PUCCH transmission with a scheduling request (SR), transmitting, by the UE, the HARQ-ACK information and the SR in a PUCCH to the base station, wherein a cyclic shift (CS) resource for the HARQ-ACK information and the SR are determined for a second case in which a positive SR and a NACK are multiplexed in the PUCCH” as set forth above, Park does not explicitly disclose (see, italicized and bold limitations), wherein a cyclic shift (CS) resource for the HARQ-ACK information and the SR are determined respectively for a first case in which a negative SR and a NACK are multiplexed in the PUCCH, and a third case in which a positive SR is transmitted in the PUCCH without HARQ-ACK transmission.
However, Noh discloses, wherein a cyclic shift (CS) resource for the HARQ-ACK information and the SR are determined respectively for a first case in which a negative SR and a NACK are multiplexed in the PUCCH [¶0153-0156, the UE may determine a cyclic shift offset (hereinafter, ‘CS offset’) based on whether the SR is a positive SR. For example, when the SR is the positive SR, the CS offset may be ‘1’. In addition, when the SR is not the positive SR (namely, the SR is a negative SR), the CS offset may be ‘0’. In addition, the UE may calculate a first cyclic shift value (hereinafter, ‘first CS value’) calculated based on the HARQ-ACK information, and a second CS value indicating a final cyclic shift value based on the CS offset. Next, the UE may cyclic-shift the base sequence based on the second CS value to generate a cyclic-shifted sequence. Then, the UE may transmit a PUCCH for simultaneous transmission of the SR and the HARQ-ACK information based on the generated sequence; note that different CS offsets (e.g., 0 or 1) are determined for different combinations of the SR (e.g., a positive SR or a negative SR) and of the HARQ-ACK information; further see ¶0185, “the HARQ-ACK information may be classified into ACK and NACK”], and a second case in which a second case in which a positive SR and a NACK are multiplexed in the PUCCH [¶0153-0156, the UE may determine a cyclic shift offset (hereinafter, ‘CS offset’) based on whether the SR is a positive SR. For example, when the SR is the positive SR, the CS offset may be ‘1’. In addition, when the SR is not the positive SR (namely, the SR is a negative SR), the CS offset may be ‘0’. In addition, the UE may calculate a first cyclic shift value (hereinafter, ‘first CS value’) calculated based on the HARQ-ACK information, and a second CS value indicating a final cyclic shift value based on the CS offset. Next, the UE may cyclic-shift the base sequence based on the second CS value to generate a cyclic-shifted sequence. Then, the UE may transmit a PUCCH for simultaneous transmission of the SR and the HARQ-ACK information based on the generated sequence; note that different CS offsets (e.g., 0 or 1) are determined depending on whether the SR in PUCCH is a positive SR or a negative SR and further depending on the HARQ-ACK information; further see ¶0185, “the HARQ-ACK information may be classified into ACK and NACK”].
It is noted that the above-mentioned feature is a known technique in the field Applicant's endeavor, e.g., telecommunication art.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the system of Park with "the above-mentioned known feature(s)" taught by Noh to reach the claimed invention as set forth above. Since one having ordinary skill in the art could have recognized that applying the known technique taught by Noh into the system of Park would have yield predictable results and/or resulted in the improved system, such as e.g., ensure to overhead signaling in uplink control region and reduce latency, such a modification (or application) would have involved the mere application of a known technique to a piece of prior art ready for improvement," the claim is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a). Ex Parte Smith, 83 USPQ.2d 1509, 1518-19 (BPAI, 2007) (citing KSR v. Teleflex, 127 S.Ct. 1727, 1740, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007)).
Further, although Park in view of Noh discloses, “wherein a cyclic shift (CS) resource for the HARQ-ACK information and the SR are determined respectively for a first case in which a negative SR and a NACK are multiplexed in the PUCCH and a second case in which a second case in which a positive SR and a NACK are multiplexed in the PUCCH” as set forth above, Park in view of Noh does not explicitly disclose (see, italicized and bold limitations), a third case in which a positive SR is transmitted in the PUCCH without HARQ-ACK transmission.
However, Wong discloses, a third case in which a positive SR is transmitted in the PUCCH without HARQ-ACK transmission [¶0150, that is to say the HARQ-ACK(s) in the second PUCCH are bundled using logical AND such that (i) if the bundled HARQ-ACK is positive, then only the positive SR is transmitted using the first PUCCH; and (ii) if the bundled HARQ-ACK is negative, then only the HARQ-ACKs are transmitted using the second PUCCH].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the above-mentioned feature(s) as taught by Wong in the system of Park in view of Noh in order to efficiently resolve PUCCH collisions while maintaining reliable UCI delivery [e.g., ¶00150-0151 of Wong].
Further, Park in view of Noh and Wong (see, italicized and bold limitations), the PDSCH and HARQ-ACK reporting are “multicast” PDSCH and “NACK only based” HARQ ACK reporting, respectively.
However, the above-mentioned features are well known/established in the telecommunication art as recited in 3GPP standard, i.e., 3GPP1.
In particular, 3GPP1 discloses, multicast PDSCH and NACK only based HARQ ACK reporting [see section 3, NACK-only based HARQ ACK feedback; for NACK-only based HARQ-ACK feedback, UEs in the same group only report NACK for multicast PDSCH on the same PUCCH resource with the same sequence].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide well-established standard of providing the above-mentioned well-known feature, as taught by 3GPP1 in the system of Park in view of Noh and Wong, so that it would provide interoperability and compatibility between telecommunication equipment vendors and service providers, thereby providing users with easier and faster seamless transition regardless where the users are located in the country/world.
Regarding claim 11, Park discloses, a user equipment (UE) [FIGS. 13-15; their related descriptions; ¶1002-1003, user equipment (UE); further see FIG. 16], comprising:
at least one transceiver for transmitting and receiving a wireless signal [FIGS. 13-15; their related descriptions; ¶1002-1003, user equipment (UE); further see FIG. 16, transmitter 10 and receiver 20; note that every UE has at least one transceiver]; and
at least one processor for controlling the at least one transceiver [FIGS. 13-15; their related descriptions; ¶1002-1003, user equipment (UE); further see FIG. 16, processor 40; note that every UE has at least one processor].
Since claim 11 recites similar features to claim 1 without further additional features, claim 11 is rejected at least based on a similar rationale applied to claim 1.
Regarding claim 15, Park discloses, a base station [FIGS. 13-15; their related descriptions; ¶1002-1003, base station; further see FIG. 16] comprising:
at least one transceiver for transmitting and receiving a wireless signal [FIGS. 13-15; their related descriptions; ¶1002-1003, base station; further see FIG. 16, transmitter 110 and receiver 120; note that every base station has at least one transceiver]; and
at least one processor for controlling the at least one transceiver [FIGS. 13-15; their related descriptions; ¶1002-1003, base station; further see FIG. 16, processor 140; note that every base station has at least one processor].
Since claim 15 is merely different from claim 1 in that it recites claimed features from the perspective of a base station, but recites similar features to claim 1 without further additional features, claim 15 is rejected at least based on a similar rationale applied to claim 1.
Regarding claim 16, Park in view of Noh, Wong and 3GPP1 discloses, the method of claim 1 as set forth above.
Park does not explicitly disclose (see, italicized limitations), but Noh discloses, intervals between the CS offsets corresponding to different cases1 are non-uniform [[¶0153-0156, note that different CS offsets and intervals are determined for different combinations of SRs and HARQ-ACK information].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the above-mentioned feature(s) as taught by Noh in the system of Park for similar rationales set forth above in claim 1.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon are considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Pajukoskial (US Publication No. 2012/0207109 A1) [¶0133].
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SUN JONG KIM whose telephone number is (571)270-3216. The examiner can normally be reached on 7:30am-5:30pm (M-T).
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.f attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ian Moore can be reached on (571) 272-3085. 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 the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/SUN JONG KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2469
1 Park in view of Noh and Wong discloses, a first case, a second case and a third case. See supra rejections as set forth above in claim 1.
Prosecution Insights