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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims filed on 05/13/2026 have been considered but are moot because the arguments are on the amended features raising a new scope and do not apply to any of the references being used in the instant office action, thus rendering the applicant’s arguments moot.
The applicant also presented other arguments drawn to the various dependent claims. However, said other arguments are all dependency based, depending from the arguments drawn to the independent claims’ limitations discussed above.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 4-6 and 16-19 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kumagai et al. (US 2024/0057175, “Kumagai”) in view of Li et al. (US 2021/0084683, “Li”) and Bagheri et al. (US 2024/0260030, “Bagheri”).
Examiner’s note: in what follows, references are drawn to Kumagai unless otherwise mentioned.
Kumagai comprises the following features:
With respect to independent claims:
Regarding claim 1, a method of wireless communication by a user equipment (UE) operating in frame-based equipment (FBE) mode ([0056] “As a mechanism for the LBT, FBE (frame-based equipment) may be used”), comprising:
transmitting, to a base station, during a shared base station first channel occupancy time (COT) (See Fig. 1 for UL in the first gNB-Initiated COT.), a first physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) actual repetition (This will be discussed in view of Li.) prior to an idle period (See Fig. 1 for the idle period in the first FFP.) in a first fixed frame period of the base station (See Fig. 1 for the first FFP.);
attempting to detect a downlink signal during a predetermined number of invalid symbols occurring at a beginning of a second fixed frame period of the base station that occurs immediately after the idle period (See Fig. 1 for the DL in the second FFP after the first idle period of the first FFP. Note that a predetermined number of invalid symbols will be discussed in view of Bagheri.);
segmenting a nominal repetition around the idle period and the invalid symbols; and
transmitting a second PUSCH actual repetition (This will be discussed in view of Li.) in the second fixed frame period after the idle period (See Fig. 1 for second UL in the second FFP.), in response to detecting the downlink signal (See Fig. 1 for UL after the DL in the second FFP.) and in response to a processing timeline being satisfied (See Fig. 1 for DL and UL in the LBT after the first idle.).
It is noted that while disclosing configuration information related to COT as well as UL transmissions, Kumagai does not specifically teach about PUSCH for the UL transmissions and actual repetition. It, however, had been known in the art before the effective date of the instant application as shown by Li and Bagheri, respectively as follows;
transmitting a first PUSCH and a second PUSCH (See [Li, Fig. 16] for CG-PUSCHs in the first COT in the first FFP and in the second COT in the second FFP.),
a predetermined number of invalid symbols ([Bagheri, 0134] “a symbol is considered as an invalid symbol in any of the multiple serving cells for PUSCH repetition Type B transmission with Type 1 or Type 2 configured grant except for the first Type 2 PUSCH transmission (including all repetitions) after activation if … the UE is configured by higher layers to receive PDCCH, PDSCH, or CSI-RS on the reference cell in the symbol.”); segmenting a nominal repetition around the idel period and the invalid symbols ([Bagheri, 0135] “For PUSCH repetition Type B, after determining the invalid symbol(s) for PUSCH repetition type B transmission for each of the K nominal repetitions, the remaining symbols are considered as potentially valid symbols for PUSCH repetition Type B transmission. If the number of potentially valid symbols for PUSCH repetition type B transmission is greater than zero for a nominal repetition, the nominal repetition consists of one or more actual repetitions, where each actual repetition consists of a consecutive set of all potentially valid symbols that can be used for PUSCH repetition Type B transmission within a slot.”); PUSCH actual repetition ([Bagheri, 0165] “actual PUSCH repetitions associated to a nominal PUSCH repetition have the same COT initiator. The UE can determine the same COT initiator for actual PUSCH repetitions associated to a nominal PUSCH repetition.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of instant application to modify Kumagai by using the features of Li and Bagheri in order to effectively provide uplink transmissions in frame-based equipment in unlicensed bands such that “determine a first portion of the COT for a downlink transmission from the BS and a second portion of the COT for an uplink transmission to the BS, wherein the COT includes a gap between the first and second portions of the COT” [Li, 0005], and “a processor that determines a channel occupancy time (“COT”) initiator for each PUSCH transmission of the set of PUSCH transmissions” [Bagheri, 0005].
Regarding claim 16, it is a method claim at a base station corresponding to the method claim 1 in a reciprocal way, and is therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of claim 1.
With respect to dependent claims:
Regarding claim 4, the method of claim 1, in which the attempting to detect the downlink signal occurs during the predetermined number of invalid symbols occurring at a beginning of the second fixed frame period (See Fig. 1.) and the method further comprises
receiving, from the base station, a radio resource control (RRC) configuration indicating the predetermined number of invalid symbols ([0076] “The period of the FFP may be configured for/notified to the UE, via higher layer signaling. The higher layer signaling may be System Information Block 1 (SIB1) signaling/RRC signaling. A higher layer parameter configured/notified via the higher layer signaling may be SemiStaticChannelAccessConFIG. The period may be determined out of 1 ms, 2 ms, 2.5 ms, 4 ms, 5 ms, and 10 ms, for example.”).
Regarding claim 5, the method of claim 1, in which the attempting to detect the downlink signal occurs during a predetermined number of invalid symbols occurring at the beginning of the second fixed frame period, the predetermined number of invalid symbols corresponding to a UE capability ([0125] “A higher layer parameter (RRC information element)/UE capability corresponding to at least one function (characteristic, feature) in the first and second embodiments may be defined. The UE capability may indicate support of the function.”).
Regarding claim 6, the method of claim 1, further comprising starting uplink transmission in the second fixed frame period at a beginning of the second PUSCH actual repetition after the predetermined number of invalid symbols (See [Li, Fig. 16]).
Regarding claim 17, the method of claim 16, further comprising transmitting, to the UE, a radio resource control (RRC) configuration indicating a predetermined number of invalid symbols after the idle period for detecting the downlink signal ([0076] “The period of the FFP may be configured for/notified to the UE, via higher layer signaling. The higher layer signaling may be System Information Block 1 (SIB1) signaling/RRC signaling. A higher layer parameter configured/notified via the higher layer signaling may be SemiStaticChannelAccessConFIG. The period may be determined out of 1 ms, 2 ms, 2.5 ms, 4 ms, 5 ms, and 10 ms, for example.”).
Regarding claim 18, the method of claim 16, in which a predetermined number of invalid symbols after the idle period for detecting the downlink signal corresponds to a UE capability ([0125] “A higher layer parameter (RRC information element)/UE capability corresponding to at least one function (characteristic, feature) in the first and second embodiments may be defined. The UE capability may indicate support of the function.”).
Regarding claim 19, the method of claim 16, further comprising receiving the second PUSCH actual repetition in the second fixed frame period based on a scheduled beginning of the second PUSCH actual repetition (See Fig. 1, and [0105] “a piece of information related to the period of the second FFP to be applied to the second COT, based on a specific field included in DCI for scheduling transmission of a UL signal/channel in the second COT.”).
Claim(s) 3 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kumagai et al. (US 2024/0057175, “Kumagai”) in view of Li et al. (US 2021/0084683, “Li”) and Bagheri et al. (US 2024/0260030, “Bagheri”), and further in view of Singh et al. (US 2023/0189338, “Singh”).
Examiner’s note: in what follows, references are drawn to Kumagai unless otherwise mentioned.
Regarding claim 3, it is noted that while disclosing configuration information related to COT as well as UL transmissions, Kumagai does not specifically teach about segmenting a PUSCH. It, however, had been known in the art before the effective date of the instant application as shown by Singh as follows;
the method of claim 1, further comprising segmenting a PUSCH nominal repetition around a predetermined number of invalid symbols occurring at a beginning of the second fixed frame period ([Singh, 0068 and Fig. 4] “Rep #2 occurs over the Idle period plus the resource meant for gNB-COT initiation in the next FFP, and Rep #3 occurs in the COT of next FFP after gNB-initiation.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of instant application to modify Kumagai by using the features of Singh in order to effectively utilize resource for URLLC such that “If a PUSCH is segmented over the time-period that spans over part of two FFPs, then its segmentation behavior may depend on type of initiation—gNB or UE based.” [Singh, 0014].
Claim(s) 7-8 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kumagai et al. (US 2024/0057175, “Kumagai”) in view of Sha et al. (US 2024/0179706, “Sha”).
Examiner’s note: in what follows, references are drawn to Kumagai unless otherwise mentioned.
Regarding claim 7, a method of wireless communication by a user equipment (UE) operating in frame-based equipment (FBE) mode, comprising:
transmitting, to a base station (See Fig. 1 for UL in the first gNB-Initiated COT.), a first physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) repetition prior to an idle period (See Fig. 1 for the idle period in the first FFP.) in a first fixed frame period (See Fig. 1 for the first FFP.); and
dropping all subsequent PUSCH repetitions (This will be discussed in view of Sha.), which are scheduled in a second fixed frame period that occurs immediately after the idle period (See Fig. 1 for second UL in the second FFP.).
It is noted that while disclosing configuration information related to COT as well as UL transmissions, Kumagai does not specifically teach about dropping subsequent PUSCHs. It, however, had been known in the art before the effective date of the instant application as shown by Sha as follows;
dropping all subsequent PUSCH repetitions ([Sha, 0040] “the UE stops transmitting the subsequent repetition number of the PUSCH.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of instant application to modify Kumagai by using the features of Sha in order to effectively utilize resources and reduce battery consumption such that “a physical downlink control channel-based hybrid automatic repeat request acknowledgment function can be implemented, the repeated transmissions of a physical uplink shared channel can be stopped in advance, and the power consumption of a user equipment in the wireless communication process can be reduced.” [Sha, 0005].
Regarding claim 8, the method of claim 7, in which the first fixed frame period is a first base station fixed frame period and the second fixed frame period is a second base station fixed frame period (See Fig. 1 for gNB-Initiated COT in the first and the second FFPs.).
Claim(s) 9 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kumagai et al. (US 2024/0057175, “Kumagai”) in view of Sha et al. (US 2024/0179706, “Sha”) and further in view of Li et al. (US 2021/0084683, “Li”).
Examiner’s note: in what follows, references are drawn to Kumagai unless otherwise mentioned.
Regarding claim 9, it is noted that while disclosing configuration information related to COT as well as UL transmissions, Kumagai does not specifically teach about UE’s FFP. It, however, had been known in the art before the effective date of the instant application as shown by Li as follows;
the method of claim 7, in which the first fixed frame period is a first UE fixed frame period and the second fixed frame period is a second UE fixed frame period (See [Li, Fig. 16]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of instant application to modify Kumagai by using the features of Li in order to effectively provide uplink transmissions in frame-based equipment in unlicensed bands such that “determine a first portion of the COT for a downlink transmission from the BS and a second portion of the COT for an uplink transmission to the BS, wherein the COT includes a gap between the first and second portions of the COT” [Li, 0005].
Claim(s) 10 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kumagai et al. (US 2024/0057175, “Kumagai”) in view of Sha et al. (US 2024/0179706, “Sha”) and Li et al. (US 2021/0084683, “Li”), and further in view of Wang et al. (US 2020/0052828, “Wang”).
Examiner’s note: in what follows, references are drawn to Kumagai unless otherwise mentioned.
Regarding claim 10, it is noted that while disclosing configuration information related to COT as well as UL transmissions, Kumagai does not specifically teach about an orphan symbol for dropping uplink. It, however, had been known in the art before the effective date of the instant application as shown by Wang as follows;
the method of claim 9, in which the dropping of all subsequent PUSCH repetitions is based on the first actual PUSCH repetition including an orphan symbol, which is scheduled at a beginning of the second UE fixed frame period ([Wang, 0034] “the repetition sequence RS comprises the repetitions R1, R2 and R3, each of which requires two time points to be transmitted. In this example, the processor 211 may postpone the repetition R3 because the symbol location corresponding to the repetition R3 is unusable in the time slot 10 (i.e., the time point 106 arranged to the semi-static flexible symbol F and the time point 107 arranged to the downlink symbol D).”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of instant application to modify Kumagai by using the features of Wang in order to improve conventional uplink repetitions such that “The processor may also be configured to schedule the repetition sequence on a time slot or on a plurality of consecutive time slots, and at least one of the plurality of consecutive time slots is arranged to at least two of the plurality of repetitions.” [Wang, 0004].
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Harry H. Kim whose telephone number and email address are as follows; 571-272-5009, harry.kim2@uspto.gov.
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, Derrick Ferris can be reached at 571-272-3123.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from www.uspto.gov. For questions or assistance, 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.
/HARRY H KIM/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2411
Prosecution Insights