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 Continuation of 17156699 (filed 01/25/2021, now U.S. Patent # 12015567), which is a Continuation of PCT/CN2020/082280
(filed 03/31/2020) that claims foreign priority to application of CHINA: 201910338994.0 (filed 04/25/2019).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation 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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph:
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 of carrying out his invention.
Claims 23-30, and 33-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, 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, or for pre-AIA the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
NOTE: examiner has noticed that there are many “new matter” issues in the current claim set filed on 06/12/2026. The Remarks filed with the current claim set does not appear providing any explanations as to where supports can be found. Hence, examiner respectfully requests supports for the rejected features below are clearly listed and explained in subsequent Remarks for reconsiderations.
Claim 23, after careful review of applicant’s specification, the examiner cannot find any support for the newly amended feature “…wherein the PUSCH is transmitted according to PUSCH repetition Type B.” To be more specific, there is no mention in the specification of any PUSCH repetition Type, let alone it is being a Type B. Clarification is respectfully requested. Same or similar problem appears in claim 33.
Claims 24-25 are rejected based on claim 23 being rejected.
Claim 26, after careful review of applicant’s specification, the examiner cannot find any support for the newly amended feature “…wherein each actual repetition is determined by excluding one or more invalid symbols from a corresponding nominal repetition and comprises a consecutive set of potentially valid symbols within a slot.” To be more specific, there is no mention in the specification of valid or invalid symbols, let alone each actual repetition is determined by excluding one or more invalid symbols from a corresponding nominal repetition and comprises a consecutive set of potentially valid symbols within a slot. Clarification is respectfully requested. Same or similar problem appears in claim 36.
Claim 27, in view of claim 26 above, after careful review of applicant’s specification, the examiner cannot find any support for the newly amended feature “…wherein the one or more invalid symbols comprise one or more of: a downlink symbol indicated by a TDD uplink-downlink configuration, a symbol for SS/PBCH block reception, a symbol associated with Type0-PDCCH common search space, a symbol associated with DL/UL switching, or a symbol indicated by an invalid-symbol pattern.” To be more specific, there is no mention in the specification of valid or invalid symbols, let alone the one or more invalid symbols comprise each of one or more of: a downlink symbol indicated by a TDD uplink-downlink configuration, a symbol for SS/PBCH block reception, a symbol associated with Type0-PDCCH common search space, a symbol associated with DL/UL switching, or a symbol indicated by an invalid-symbol pattern. Clarification is respectfully requested. In particular, examiner respectfully request supports for each one of the features listed above. Same or similar problem appears in claim 37.
Claim 28, after careful review of applicant’s specification, the examiner cannot find any support for the newly amended feature “…a given time sub-window of the plurality of time sub-windows comprises a plurality of periods separated by a DL/UL switching point...”. Clarification is respectfully requested. Same or similar problem appears in claim 38.
Claim 29, after careful review of applicant’s specification, the examiner cannot find any support for the newly amended feature “…wherein the first parameter and the second parameter each comprise at least one of: a reference-signal index, a Sounding Reference Signal (SRS) indicator, an SRS resource, a transmission antenna port, a transmission antenna port group, a transmitting beam, a transmission beamforming matrix, a transmission beamforming vector, a transmission analog beamforming matrix, a transmission analog beamforming vector, or a Tx spatial filter.” To be more specific, where parameters are disclosed, however, there are no mention in the specification that the first parameter and the second parameter each comprise at least one of: a reference-signal index, a Sounding Reference Signal (SRS) indicator, an SRS resource, a transmission antenna port, a transmission antenna port group, a transmitting beam, a transmission beamforming matrix, a transmission beamforming vector, a transmission analog beamforming matrix, a transmission analog beamforming vector, or a Tx spatial filter. Clarification is respectfully requested. In particular, examiner respectfully request supports for each one of the features listed above. Same or similar problem appears in claim 39.
Claim 30, after careful review of applicant’s specification, the examiner cannot find any support for the newly amended feature “…wherein first and second SRS resource sets are associated with the plurality of nominal repetitions by considering nominal repetitions instead of slots, and wherein the first parameter corresponds to the first SRS resource set and the second parameter corresponds to the second SRS resource set.” To be more specific, there is no mention in the specification of any SRS resource sets, let alone the first and second SRS resource sets are associated with the plurality of nominal repetitions by considering nominal repetitions instead of slots, and wherein the first parameter corresponds to the first SRS resource set and the second parameter corresponds to the second SRS resource set. Clarification is respectfully requested. Same or similar problem appears in claim 40.
Claims 34-35 are rejected based on claim 23 being rejected.
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 nonobviousness.
Claims 21-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ying et al. (US 20190053211 A1, hereinafter Ying), in view of FAKOORIAN et al. (US 20200221478 A1, hereinafter FAKOORIAN).
Regarding claim 21, Ying teaches a User Equipment (UE) for wireless communications, comprising: a receiver; a transmitter; and a processor coupled to the receiver and the transmitter (Ying, see at least fig. 1, e.g. various components);
wherein the receiver, the transmitter, and the processor are configured to (Ying, in general, see fig. 31 in view of fig. 32 and/or fig. 33, along with their respectively paragraphs 262-286):
receive configuration information, the configuration information being used to determine a plurality of time sub-windows, the plurality of time sub-windows being respectively reserved for a plurality of repetitions of transmission of a first bit block, the first bit block comprising a Transport Block, wherein at least one of the plurality of time sub-windows comprises multiple symbols (Ying, see at least para. 263 and 266, e.g. see step 3112 and step 3114);
transmit, on an uplink physical-layer data channel, a first radio signal and a second radio signal respectively in a first time-frequency resource block and a second time-frequency resource block, the first radio signal carrying a first actual repetition of transmission of the first bit block, and the second radio signal carrying a second actual repetition of transmission of the first bit block (Ying, see at least para. 267-268 in view of fig. 33A/B, e.g. see step 3116 and step 3118);
wherein the first time-frequency resource block belongs to a first time sub-window of the plurality of time sub-windows in time domain, and the first actual repetition is determined from the first time sub-window (Ying, see at least fig. 32A and/or fig. 33A, e.g. TBs and Reps);
wherein the second time-frequency resource block belongs to a second time sub-window of the plurality of time sub-windows in time domain, and the second actual repetition is determined from the second time sub-window (Ying, see at least fig. 32A and/or fig. 33A, e.g. TBs and Reps);
wherein a first parameter is used to determine multi-antenna related transmission of the first radio signal, and a target parameter is used to determine multi-antenna related transmission of the second radio signal, the target parameter being either the first parameter or a second parameter; and wherein the target parameter is the first parameter when the first time sub-window and the second time sub-window are the same, and the target parameter is the second parameter when the first time sub-window and the second time sub-window are different (Ying, see at least para. 263 in view of para. 275 and at least fig. 33A/B, e.g. “...in action 3112, the UE 3102, using its receiving circuitry, receives the RRC message, which includes first information containing, among other parameters and configurations, a frequency hopping mode, a periodicity, a number of repetitions (e.g., a repetition number indicating a total number of repetitions), and a repetition enabler...”, note that fig. 33A/B discloses one non-limiting example of TB0 and TB1 being sent).
Ying does not specifically teach nominal repetitions.
FAKOORIAN teaches nominal repetitions (see at least para. 107 of fig. 4A, note that fig. 4A is one non-limiting example of plurality examples, such as fig. 4B/C/C, fig. 5, fig. 6A/B, and/or fig. 7A/B that also disclose nominal repetitions).
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 FAKOORIAN into Ying for effective latency reduction.
Regarding claim 22, Ying in view of FAKOORIAN teaches claim 21.
Ying further teaches wherein the uplink physical-layer data channel comprises a Physical Uplink Shared Channel (PUSCH). (Ying, see at least para. 268, e.g. see step 3118)
Regarding claim 23, Ying in view of FAKOORIAN teaches claim 22.
Ying does not teach wherein the PUSCH is transmitted according to PUSCH repetition Type B.
FAKOORIAN teaches wherein the PUSCH is transmitted according to PUSCH repetition Type B. (FAKOORIAN, see at least para. 137, e.g. PUSCH mapping Type B may be applied)
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 FAKOORIAN into Ying for effective latency reduction.
Regarding claim 24, Ying in view of FAKOORIAN teaches claim 23.
Ying further teaches wherein the configuration information comprises downlink control information scheduling the PUSCH and higher-layer configuration information associated with the PUSCH. (Ying, see at least para. 263 and 266, e.g. see step 3112 and step 3114);
Regarding claim 25, Ying in view of FAKOORIAN teaches claim 23.
Ying further teaches wherein the plurality of nominal repetitions are determined based on a start symbol, a length, and a number of repetitions associated with a time-domain resource allocation for the PUSCH. (Ying, see at least para. 263 and 266, e.g. see step 3112 and step 3114);
Regarding claim 26, Ying in view of FAKOORIAN teaches claim 23.
Ying further teaches wherein each actual repetition is determined by excluding one or more invalid symbols from a corresponding nominal repetition and comprises a consecutive set of potentially valid symbols within a slot. (Ying, see at least fig. 33A/B along with para. 287, e.g. for one non-limiting example, TB0, TB1, and their Reps)
Regarding claim 27, Ying in view of FAKOORIAN teaches claim 26.
Ying further teaches wherein the one or more invalid symbols comprise one or more of: a downlink symbol indicated by a TDD uplink-downlink configuration, a symbol for SS/PBCH block reception, a symbol associated with Type0-PDCCH common search space, a symbol associated with DL/UL switching, or a symbol indicated by an invalid-symbol pattern. (Ying, see at least fig. 33A/B along with para. 287, e.g. for one non-limiting example, TB0, TB1, and their Reps)
Regarding claim 28, Ying in view of FAKOORIAN teaches claim 21.
Ying further teaches wherein a given time sub-window of the plurality of time sub-windows comprises a plurality of periods separated by a DL/UL switching point or a time-domain unit boundary, and wherein an actual repetition of transmission of the first bit block is transmitted in each period of the plurality of periods. (Ying, see at least fig. 32C, for one of non-limiting example, see fig. 32C TB0 and TB1)
Regarding claim 29, Ying in view of FAKOORIAN teaches claim 21.
Ying further teaches wherein the first parameter and the second parameter each comprise at least one of: a reference-signal index, a Sounding Reference Signal (SRS) indicator, an SRS resource, a transmission antenna port, a transmission antenna port group, a transmitting beam, a transmission beamforming matrix, a transmission beamforming vector, a transmission analog beamforming matrix, a transmission analog beamforming vector, or a Tx spatial filter. (Ying, see at least para. 263 in view of para. 275 and at least fig. 33A/B, e.g. “...in action 3112, the UE 3102, using its receiving circuitry, receives the RRC message, which includes first information containing, among other parameters and configurations, a frequency hopping mode, a periodicity, a number of repetitions (e.g., a repetition number indicating a total number of repetitions), and a repetition enabler...”, note that fig. 33A/B discloses one non-limiting example of TB0 and TB1 being sent)
Regarding claim 30, Ying in view of FAKOORIAN teaches claim 29.
Ying does not teach wherein first and second SRS resource sets are associated with the plurality of nominal repetitions by considering nominal repetitions instead of slots, and wherein the first parameter corresponds to the first SRS resource set and the second parameter corresponds to the second SRS resource set.
FAKOORIAN teaches wherein first and second SRS resource sets are associated with the plurality of nominal repetitions by considering nominal repetitions instead of slots, and wherein the first parameter corresponds to the first SRS resource set and the second parameter corresponds to the second SRS resource set. (FAKOORIAN, see at least para. 118 and fig. 7A, e.g. reconciling one or more PUSCH repetitions with SRS transmission).
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 FAKOORIAN into Ying for effective latency reduction.
Regarding claims 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, and 40, these claims are rejected for the same reasoning as claims 21, 22 ,23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, and 30, respectively, except each of these claims is in method claim format.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/12/2026 have been fully considered. Regarding newly added independent claims 21 and 31, 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