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 Amendment
The Amendment filed July 30, 2026 (“Amendment”) has been entered. Prior to the Amendment, claims 1-10 were pending in the application. By the Amendment, claims 1-3, 5-7 and 10 were amended, claim 4, 8 and 9 were cancelled, and claim 11-13 were newly added. Accordingly, claims 1-3, 5-7, and 10-13 are currently pending and ready for examination.
Applicant’s claim amendment and remarks made in the Amendment were carefully and fully considered, but they were unpersuasive. The new grounds of rejection presented in this Office Action were necessitated by the claim amendments by the Amendment. Accordingly, this Office Action is made Final.
Relevant Technical Information Submittal Requirement
Applicant’s response, on p.6 of the Amendment, to this requirement is acknowledged with appreciation. The representation and confirmation that the Applicant has already submitted all relevant technical information known to the Applicant is accepted as a full response to the requirement. The Applicant is remined of the continued duty to disclose, particularly with respect to the technical documents relating to the 3GPP standard and essential patent (SEP) declaration.
Withdrawal of Double Patenting
In view of the amendments to the claims of this present application, and in view of the amendments to the claims of the co-pending Reference Application (Application No. 18/715,445)), the claims (as amended) of the two co-pending application being not coextensive in scope, the provisional double patenting rejections made in the previous Office Action are now withdrawn. See, MPEP §804/02.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 1-3, 5-7, and 10-13 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 as amended recites the limitation, inter alia, “receiving a first configured grant (CG) configuration and a scheduling request (SR) configuration related to the first CG configuration, wherein the first CG configuration includes mapping information between the first CG configuration and the SR configuration,” emphasis added.
Claim 5 as amended recites the limitation, inter alia, “ related to the first CG configuration, wherein the first CG configuration includes mapping information between the first CG configuration and the SR configuration,” emphasis added.
The Applicant cites, on p.6 of the Amendment, [130]- [139], [213]-[217], [253], [255], [256], and [259] of Applicant’s disclosure (“Specification”) as providing the purported support for the above claim language, which cited portions are reproduced below:
[130] A UE is provided with at least the following parameters via RRC signaling from a BS when the configured grant type 1 is configured:
[131] - cs-RNTI which is CS-RNTI for retransmission;
[132] - periodicity which provides periodicity of the configured grant Type 1;
[133] - timeDomainOffset which represents offset of a resource with respect to SFN=0 in time domain;
[134] - timeDomainAllocation value m which provides a row index m+1 pointing to an allocation table, indicating a combination of a start symbol S and length L and PUSCH mapping type;
[135] - frequencyDomainAllocation which provides frequency domain resource allocation; and
[136] - mcsAndTBS which provides IMCS representing the modulation order, target code
rate and transport block size. Upon configuration of a configured grant Type 1 for a serving cell by RRC, the UE stores the uplink grant provided by RRC as a configured uplink grant for the indicated serving cell, and initialise or re-initialise the configured uplink grant to start in the symbol according to timeDomainOffset and S (derived from SLIV), and to reoccur with periodicity. After an uplink grant is configured for a configured grant Type 1, the UE considers that the uplink grant recurs associated with each symbol for which: [(SFN * numberOfSlotsPerFrame (numberOfSymbolsPerSlot) + (slot number in the frame x numberOfSymbolsPerSlot) + symbol number in the slot] = (timeDomainOffset * numberOfSymbolsPerSlot + S + N * periodicity) modulo (1024 * numberOfSlotsPerFrame * numberOfSymbolsPerSlot), for all N >= 0.
[137] A UE is provided with at least the following parameters via RRC signaling from a BS when the configured gran Type 2 is configured:
[138] - cs-RNTI which is CS-RNTI for activation, deactivation, and retransmission; and
[139] - periodicity which provides periodicity of the configured grant Type 2. The actual uplink grant is provided to the UE by the PDCCH (addressed to CS-RNTI). After an uplink grant is configured for a configured grant Type 2, the UE considers that the uplink grant recurs associated with each symbol for which: [(SFN * numberOfS- lotsPerFrame * numberOfSymbolsPerSlot) + (slot number in the frame * numberOf- SymbolsPerSlot) + symbol number in the slot] = [(SFNstart time * numberOfS- lotsPerFrame * numberOfSymbolsPerSlot + slotstart time * numberOfSymbolsPerSlot + symbols,-start) + N * periodicity] modulo (1024 x numberOfSlotsPerFrame * num- berOfSymbolsPerSlot), for all N >= 0, where SFNstart time, slotstart time, and symbolstart time, are the SFN, slot, and symbol, respectively, of the first transmission opportunity of PUSCH where the configured uplink grant was (re-)initialised. numberOfS- lotsPerFrame and numberOfSymbolsPerSlot refer to the number of consecutive slots per frame and the number of consecutive OFDM symbols per slot, respectively.
[213] There are two types of transmission without dynamic grant:
[214] - configured grant Type 1 where an uplink grant is provided by RRC, and stored as configured uplink grant;
[215] - configured grant Type 2 where an uplink grant is provided by PDCCH, and stored or cleared as configured uplink grant based on L1 signalling indicating configured uplink grant activation or deactivation.
[216] Type 1 and Type 2 are configured by RRC for a Serving Cell per BWP. Multiple configurations can be active simultaneously in the same BWP. For Type 2, activation and deactivation are independent among the Serving Cells. For the same BWP, the MAC entity can be configured with both Type 1 and Type 2.
[217] Upon configuration of a configured grant Type 1 for a BWP of a Serving Cell by upper layers, the MAC entity shall store the uplink grant provided by upper layers as a configured uplink grant for the indicated BWP of the Serving Cell, and initialise or re- initialise the configured uplink grant to start in the symbol and to reoccur with pe-riodicity.
[253] If CG occasion is not sufficient to accommodate the all available data or if CG occasion cannot be used due to jitter, the UE needs to request an uplink resource and the request should be fast so that the corresponding uplink grant is received, e.g., before the next CG without hurting the latency requirement of the traffic. However, if there are multiple logical channels having data and mapping to the CG, the UE may need to trigger and send multiple SRs to the network, which may not be desirable from latency perspective depending on the SR configuration and the timing of data arrival.
[255] According to the present disclosure, it is suggested that when a UE is configured with a configured grant (CG) configuration, the UE should be configured with a scheduling request (SR) configuration associated with the CG configuration.
[256] The UE triggers and transmits a SR from the SR configuration associated with the CG configuration to the network, if a part or none of the data can be transmitted on a CG occasion of the configured CG configuration. Alternatively, the UE may trigger and transmit the SR from the SR configuration associated with the configured CG con- figuration when the UE needs a further uplink resource in addition to the CG occasion of the configured CG configuration.
[259] Preferably, multiple CG configurations can be associated with the same SR configurations; or
Other portions of the Specification the Examiner believes are also pertinent to the newly added claim limitation are reproduced below:
[257] When a UE is configured with a CG configuration, the CG configuration is associated with an SR configuration.
[258] Preferably, one CG configuration can be associated with one or more SR configurations; or
[260] Preferably, the mapping between the CG configuration and the SR configuration is provided via L2 signal; or
[261] Preferably, the mapping between the CG configuration and the SR configuration is provided when CG configuration is provided or when SR configuration is provided.
Upon a careful review of the above portions relied by the Applicant, and of the other remining portions of the Specification, the Examiner respectfully disagree that the Specification provides sufficient written description support that reasonably conveys to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
The portions relied by the Applicant, and elsewhere in the Specification, plainly do not describe a CG configuration including a mapping information between the first CG configuration and the SR configuration, as Applicant now characterizes as being required by the claims as amended. See, Amendment at p. 8 (“In contrast, by utilizing the explicit mapping information included directly within the first CG configuration as recited in amended independent claims,” emphasis added), and at p. 9 (“In particular, Sachs does not disclose or suggest a structure where mapping information between a CG configuration and an SR configuration is included within the CG configuration itself. In contrast, amended claim 1 recites that the mapping information is included within the first CG configuration, establishing a direct, high-layer structural link that bypasses conventional LCH-by-LCH evaluation bottlenecks,” bold and italic emphasis added, underlining original).
The Specification describes three (3) separate, distinct and standalone pieces of information, namely, 1) CG configuration; 2) SR configuration; and 3) the mapping between the CG configuration and the SR configuration, which mapping information can be provided via L2 signaling. See, Specification at ¶¶[260] and [261]. The statements regarding the ‘association’ between the two configurations (Specification, ¶¶[257]-[258]) notwithstanding, the Specification is devoid of any description of a CG configuration that includes directly within itself a mapping information. Moreover, the literal reading, and the apparent reading by Applicant, of this limitation necessarily requires the non-sensical circular result that the CG configuration being both the subject of the mapping and the entity that specifies such mapping. Specification at ¶¶[257]-[261] avoids the circular result.
Accordingly, claims 1 and 5 as amended are rejected for including newly added subject matter without sufficient support in the Specification. Claims 2, 3, 6, 7, and 10-13, because due to their dependency also include those recitations deemed to constitute new matter, are thus rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) for at least the same reason the independent claims are rejected.
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 (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.
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.
Claims 1-3, 5-7, and 10-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sachs et al. (US Patent Publication No. 2020/0259896)(“Sachs”) in view of Wang et al. (US Published Patent Application No. US 2021/0258853)(“Wang”)..
Regarding claim 1, Sachs teaches a method (See, e.g., Fig. 67) performed by a user equipment (See, e.g., Fig. 67, “UE;” Fig. 124, #2500; and ¶[1290]), the method comprising:
(See, e.g., Figs. 71 and 72, “RRC signaling;” ¶¶[0090]-[0091]; and ¶[1019], “pre-scheduling of multiple, periodically recurring UL grants…. it is called configured grant (Type 1 and Type 2) in the uplink (UL)”) and a scheduling request (SR) configuration (See, ¶[0992], “one SR configuration can be configured per each logical channel, and several logical channels may be configured with the same SR configuration.” See, also, Fig. 68) related to the first CG configuration (As discussed above, a SR configuration is related to a logical channel. See ¶[0992]. In ¶s[1039], et seq, , Sachs et al discusses multiple CG configurations each with corresponding association with different logical channels. See, Fig. 75; ¶[1044]; ¶[1039], “Because of their different stream characteristics, all of these streams cannot be supported with a single configuration (CG), even if the CG is supported using very short periodicity, because the CG will have a single set of configuration parameters, e.g., MCS index, latency, slot period, K-repetition;” and ¶[1063], “For example, applying restrictions like “ConfiguredGrantType2Allowed” or “max ReliabilityAllowed” to a LCH supporting critical traffic enable the UE to avoid data from a non-critical LCH being sent using too robust resources [i.e., on CG grants].” Accordingly, An SR would be related to a CG configuration through its relationship to a particular logical channel.1).
based on uplink data becoming available at the UE, determining whether a first CG occasion of the first CG configuration is available for transmission of the uplink data (See, Fig. 69 and the discussion above. The determination of whether the newly arrived uplink data can be transmitted using the current UL-SCH, i.e., a CG occasion.);
based on a determination that the first CG occasion of the first CG configuration is unavailable for the transmission of the uplink data, (See, Fig. 69, the newly arrived uplink data triggers a BSR and the SR upon determining the UL-SCH, i.e., the CG occasion is unavailable for the transmission of the uplink data.) determining an SR resource from the SR configuration related to the first CG configuration (See, Fig. 69, “SR;” and ¶¶[0992]-[0996], “The procedure can be summarized as follows: [0993] Data from a certain logical channel arrives. [0994] A Regular BSR is triggered due to the arrival, given the triggering specified criteria are met. [0995] No PUSCH resources are available to transmit the BSR. [0996] An SR is triggered and transmitted in the SR resource associated to the logical channel which triggered the BSR,” Emphasis added.);
transmitting an SR message on the determined SR resource (See, Fig. 69, “SR;” and ¶ [0996] An SR is triggered and transmitted in the SR resource associated to the logical channel which triggered the BSR,” Emphasis added.);
receiving a dynamic uplink grant in response to the SR message (See, e.g., Fig. 67, the “grant” in response to the “SR;” and ¶[0990], “the network provides a grant, i.e., UL-SCH resources to the UE to allow data transmissions….commonly known as dynamic scheduling”); and
transmitting the uplink data based on the dynamic uplink grant (See, Fig. 67, “data + BSR”).
Sachs, while teaching the logical channel association between the CG configuration and SR configuration (see, above discussion), fails to teach explicitly the mapping information2 between the first CG configuration and the SR configuration.
Wang teaches the mapping information between the first CG configuration and the SR configuration (See, ¶[0062], Furthermore, the gNB2 may configure the Uu and/or PC5 bearer configuration for UE1. The gNB2 can include the above resource configuration information and bearer configuration in the handover command. For example, in some embodiments, the gNB2 includes information for a resource pool for autonomous resource selection, a resource pool for sidelink reception, or an exceptional resource pool for sidelink transmission. The gNB2 can also indicate a mapping between a sidelink logical channel and a configured grant index, a scheduling request identity, a 5G QoS Identifier, a QoS Flow Identifier, a priority, a reliability, a delay, or a communication range level; a mapping between a sidelink logical channel group identity and a scheduling request identity, a 5G QoS Identifier, a QoS Flow Identifier, a priority, a reliability, a delay, or a communication range level; or a mapping between a scheduling request identity and a 5G QoS Identifier, a QoS Flow Identifier, a priority, a reliability, a delay, or a communication range level. In some embodiments, the resource configuration information is transmitted via an RRC container in the handover request response message sent to gNB1.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date
of the claimed invention to modify the above teachings of Sachs to incorporate the above teaching
of Wang, i.e., the provisioning of the napping between the CG index and the SR identity, in order to provide an efficient mechanism to manage higher mobility devices, e.g., vehicles, and to handle handover scenarios for such devices (See, e.g., Wang, ¶[0028]).
Regarding claim 2/1, Sachs in view of Wang teaches a method comprising all elements recited in claim 1 as discussed above.
Sachs further teaches that, based on a determination that the first CG occasion of the first CG configuration is available for the transmission of the uplink data, the uplink data is transmitted in the first CG occasion (See, Figs. 71 and 72, showing UL data transmission using the CG grants.).
Regarding claim 3/1, Sachs in view of Wang teaches a method comprising all elements recited in claim 1 as discussed above.
Sachs further teaches the method, further comprising:
receiving a second CG configuration (See, Fig. 75, showing multiple CG configurations; ¶[1040], “gNB might allocate overlapping configurations to address several scenarios: 1) overcoming the mis-alignment of critical data arrival 2) accommodating multiple TSN streams with different characteristics.”), wherein the SR configuration is related to the second CG configuration (As discussed above, Sachs et al. discloses a CG configuration may be associated with one or more logical channel(s). While it is possible that the second CG configuration is associated with a logical channel different from the logical channel associated with the first CG configuration. Sachs et al discloses that these different logical channels can still share the same SR configuration, and thus be “related” to the SR resources as the claim recites. See, ¶[0992], “several logical channels may be configured with the same SR configuration,” Emphasis added).
Regarding claim 5, Sachs teaches a user equipment (UE) (See, e.g., Fig. 124, #2500; and ¶[1290]), the UE comprising:
at least one transceiver (Fig. 124, #2506, “TRANSCEIVER(S)”);
at least one processor (Fig. 124, #2502, “PROCESSOR(S)”); and
at least one computer memory (Fig. 124, #2504, “MEMORY”) operably connectable to the at least one processor and storing instructions that, when executed, cause the at least one processor to perform operations comprising (See, ¶[1290]-[1291]):
(See, e.g., Figs. 71 and 72, “RRC signaling;” ¶¶[0090]-[0091]; and ¶[1019], “pre-scheduling of multiple, periodically recurring UL grants…. it is called configured grant (Type 1 and Type 2) in the uplink (UL)”) and a scheduling request (SR) configuration (See, ¶[0992], “one SR configuration can be configured per each logical channel, and several logical channels may be configured with the same SR configuration.” See, also, Fig. 68) related to the first CG configuration (As discussed above, a SR configuration is related to a logical channel. See ¶[0992]. In ¶s[1039], et seq, , Sachs et al discusses multiple CG configurations each with corresponding association with different logical channels. See, Fig. 75; ¶[1044]; ¶[1039], “Because of their different stream characteristics, all of these streams cannot be supported with a single configuration (CG), even if the CG is supported using very short periodicity, because the CG will have a single set of configuration parameters, e.g., MCS index, latency, slot period, K-repetition;” and ¶[1063], “For example, applying restrictions like “ConfiguredGrantType2Allowed” or “max ReliabilityAllowed” to a LCH supporting critical traffic enable the UE to avoid data from a non-critical LCH being sent using too robust resources [i.e., on CG grants].” Accordingly, An SR would be related to a CG configuration through its relationship to a particular logical channel.3).
based on uplink data becoming available at the UE, determining whether a first CG occasion of the first CG configuration is available for transmission of the uplink data (See, Fig. 69 and the discussion above. The determination of whether the newly arrived uplink data can be transmitted using the current UL-SCH, i.e., a CG occasion.);
based on a determination that the first CG occasion of the first CG configuration is unavailable for the transmission of the uplink data, (See, Fig. 69, the newly arrived uplink data triggers a BSR and the SR upon determining the UL-SCH, i.e., the CG occasion is unavailable for the transmission of the uplink data.) determining an SR resource from the SR configuration related to the first CG configuration (See, Fig. 69, “SR;” and ¶¶[0992]-[0996], “The procedure can be summarized as follows: [0993] Data from a certain logical channel arrives. [0994] A Regular BSR is triggered due to the arrival, given the triggering specified criteria are met. [0995] No PUSCH resources are available to transmit the BSR. [0996] An SR is triggered and transmitted in the SR resource associated to the logical channel which triggered the BSR,” Emphasis added.);
transmitting an SR message on the determined SR resource (See, Fig. 69, “SR;” and ¶ [0996] An SR is triggered and transmitted in the SR resource associated to the logical channel which triggered the BSR,” Emphasis added.);
receiving a dynamic uplink grant in response to the SR message (See, e.g., Fig. 67, the “grant” in response to the “SR;” and ¶[0990], “the network provides a grant, i.e., UL-SCH resources to the UE to allow data transmissions….commonly known as dynamic scheduling”); and
transmitting the uplink data based on the dynamic uplink grant (See, Fig. 67, “data + BSR”).
Sachs, while teaching the logical channel association between the CG configuration and SR configuration (see, above discussion), fails to teach explicitly the mapping information4 between the first CG configuration and the SR configuration.
Wang teaches the mapping information between the first CG configuration and the SR configuration (See, ¶[0062], Furthermore, the gNB2 may configure the Uu and/or PC5 bearer configuration for UE1. The gNB2 can include the above resource configuration information and bearer configuration in the handover command. For example, in some embodiments, the gNB2 includes information for a resource pool for autonomous resource selection, a resource pool for sidelink reception, or an exceptional resource pool for sidelink transmission. The gNB2 can also indicate a mapping between a sidelink logical channel and a configured grant index, a scheduling request identity, a 5G QoS Identifier, a QoS Flow Identifier, a priority, a reliability, a delay, or a communication range level; a mapping between a sidelink logical channel group identity and a scheduling request identity, a 5G QoS Identifier, a QoS Flow Identifier, a priority, a reliability, a delay, or a communication range level; or a mapping between a scheduling request identity and a 5G QoS Identifier, a QoS Flow Identifier, a priority, a reliability, a delay, or a communication range level. In some embodiments, the resource configuration information is transmitted via an RRC container in the handover request response message sent to gNB1.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date
of the claimed invention to modify the above teachings of Sachs to incorporate the above teaching
of Wang, i.e., the provisioning of the napping between the CG index and the SR identity, in order to provide an efficient mechanism to manage higher mobility devices, e.g., vehicles, and to handle handover scenarios for such devices (See, e.g., Wang, ¶[0028]).
Regarding claim 6/5, Sachs in view of Wang teaches a UE comprising all elements recited in claim 5 as discussed above.
Sachs further teaches that, based on a determination that the first CG occasion of the first CG configuration is available for the transmission of the uplink data, the uplink data is transmitted in the first CG occasion (See, Figs. 71 and 72, showing UL data transmission using the CG grants.).
Regarding claim 7/5, Sachs in view of Wang teaches a UE comprising all elements recited in claim 5 as discussed above.
Sachs further teaches the operation, further comprising:
receiving a second CG configuration (See, Fig. 75, showing multiple CG configurations; ¶[1040], “gNB might allocate overlapping configurations to address several scenarios: 1) overcoming the mis-alignment of critical data arrival 2) accommodating multiple TSN streams with different characteristics.”), wherein the SR configuration is related to the second CG configuration (As discussed above, Sachs et al. discloses a CG configuration may be associated with one or more logical channel(s). While it is possible that the second CG configuration is associated with a logical channel different from the logical channel associated with the first CG configuration. Sachs et al discloses that these different logical channels can still share the same SR configuration, and thus be “related” to the SR resources as the claim recites. See, ¶[0992], “several logical channels may be configured with the same SR configuration,” Emphasis added).
Regarding claim 10, Sachs teaches a non-transitory computer readable storage medium (Fig. 124, #2504, “MEMORY;” and ¶[1291], “a computer readable storage medium (e.g., a non-transitory computer readable medium such as a physical memory)”) storing at least one computer program comprising instructions (See, ¶[1290]) that, when executed by at least one processor, cause the at least one processor (Fig. 124, #2502, “PROCESSOR(S)”) to perform operations (See, ¶[1290]) for a user equipment (UE) (Fig. 124, #2500; and ¶[1290]), the operations comprising:
(See, e.g., Figs. 71 and 72, “RRC signaling;” ¶¶[0090]-[0091]; and ¶[1019], “pre-scheduling of multiple, periodically recurring UL grants…. it is called configured grant (Type 1 and Type 2) in the uplink (UL)”) and a scheduling request (SR) configuration (See, ¶[0992], “one SR configuration can be configured per each logical channel, and several logical channels may be configured with the same SR configuration.” See, also, Fig. 68) related to the first CG configuration (As discussed above, a SR configuration is related to a logical channel. See ¶[0992]. In ¶s[1039], et seq, , Sachs et al discusses multiple CG configurations each with corresponding association with different logical channels. See, Fig. 75; ¶[1044]; ¶[1039], “Because of their different stream characteristics, all of these streams cannot be supported with a single configuration (CG), even if the CG is supported using very short periodicity, because the CG will have a single set of configuration parameters, e.g., MCS index, latency, slot period, K-repetition;” and ¶[1063], “For example, applying restrictions like “ConfiguredGrantType2Allowed” or “max ReliabilityAllowed” to a LCH supporting critical traffic enable the UE to avoid data from a non-critical LCH being sent using too robust resources [i.e., on CG grants].” Accordingly, An SR would be related to a CG configuration through its relationship to a particular logical channel.5).
based on uplink data becoming available at the UE, determining whether a first CG occasion of the first CG configuration is available for transmission of the uplink data (See, Fig. 69 and the discussion above. The determination of whether the newly arrived uplink data can be transmitted using the current UL-SCH, i.e., a CG occasion.);
based on a determination that the first CG occasion of the first CG configuration is unavailable for the transmission of the uplink data, (See, Fig. 69, the newly arrived uplink data triggers a BSR and the SR upon determining the UL-SCH, i.e., the CG occasion is unavailable for the transmission of the uplink data.) determining an SR resource from the SR configuration related to the first CG configuration (See, Fig. 69, “SR;” and ¶¶[0992]-[0996], “The procedure can be summarized as follows: [0993] Data from a certain logical channel arrives. [0994] A Regular BSR is triggered due to the arrival, given the triggering specified criteria are met. [0995] No PUSCH resources are available to transmit the BSR. [0996] An SR is triggered and transmitted in the SR resource associated to the logical channel which triggered the BSR,” Emphasis added.);
transmitting an SR message on the determined SR resource (See, Fig. 69, “SR;” and ¶ [0996] An SR is triggered and transmitted in the SR resource associated to the logical channel which triggered the BSR,” Emphasis added.);
receiving a dynamic uplink grant in response to the SR message (See, e.g., Fig. 67, the “grant” in response to the “SR;” and ¶[0990], “the network provides a grant, i.e., UL-SCH resources to the UE to allow data transmissions….commonly known as dynamic scheduling”); and
transmitting the uplink data based on the dynamic uplink grant (See, Fig. 67, “data + BSR”).
Sachs, while teaching the logical channel association between the CG configuration and SR configuration (see, above discussion), fails to teach explicitly the mapping information6 between the first CG configuration and the SR configuration.
Wang teaches the mapping information between the first CG configuration and the SR configuration (See, ¶[0062], Furthermore, the gNB2 may configure the Uu and/or PC5 bearer configuration for UE1. The gNB2 can include the above resource configuration information and bearer configuration in the handover command. For example, in some embodiments, the gNB2 includes information for a resource pool for autonomous resource selection, a resource pool for sidelink reception, or an exceptional resource pool for sidelink transmission. The gNB2 can also indicate a mapping between a sidelink logical channel and a configured grant index, a scheduling request identity, a 5G QoS Identifier, a QoS Flow Identifier, a priority, a reliability, a delay, or a communication range level; a mapping between a sidelink logical channel group identity and a scheduling request identity, a 5G QoS Identifier, a QoS Flow Identifier, a priority, a reliability, a delay, or a communication range level; or a mapping between a scheduling request identity and a 5G QoS Identifier, a QoS Flow Identifier, a priority, a reliability, a delay, or a communication range level. In some embodiments, the resource configuration information is transmitted via an RRC container in the handover request response message sent to gNB1.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date
of the claimed invention to modify the above teachings of Sachs to incorporate the above teaching
of Wang, i.e., the provisioning of the napping between the CG index and the SR identity, in order to provide an efficient mechanism to manage higher mobility devices, e.g., vehicles, and to handle handover scenarios for such devices (See, e.g., Wang, ¶[0028]).
Regarding claim 11/1, Sachs in view of Wang teaches a method comprising all elements recited in claim 1 as discussed above.
Sachs further teaches that the dynamic uplink grant is received before a second CG occasion of the first CG configuration occurs (See, Fig. 79, showing the transmission of data (“labeled 10KB”) on a dynamic grant received in response to the SR (see, dotted arrow) between the two CG occasions (see, ¶[1062], “configured grant (1 KB per transmission occasion”.). Sachs explains that, although not ideal, the data of the logical channel configured with CG will be sent on the dynamic grant due to the higher priority for the critical data. See, ¶[1065].).
Regarding claim 12/5, Sachs in view of Wang teaches a UE comprising all elements recited in claim 5 as discussed above.
Sachs further teaches that the dynamic uplink grant is received before a second CG occasion of the first CG configuration occurs (See, Fig. 79, showing the transmission of data (“labeled 10KB”) on a dynamic grant received in response to the SR (see, dotted arrow) between the two CG occasions (see, ¶[1062], “configured grant (1 KB per transmission occasion”.). Sachs explains that, although not ideal, the data of the logical channel configured with CG will be sent on the dynamic grant due to the higher priority for the critical data. See, ¶[1065].).
Regarding claim 13/10, Sachs in view of Wang teaches a non-transitory computer readable storage medium comprising all elements recited in claim 10 as discussed above.
Sachs further teaches that the dynamic uplink grant is received before a second CG occasion of the first CG configuration occurs (See, Fig. 79, showing the transmission of data (“labeled 10KB”) on a dynamic grant received in response to the SR (see, dotted arrow) between the two CG occasions (see, ¶[1062], “configured grant (1 KB per transmission occasion”.). Sachs explains that, although not ideal, the data of the logical channel configured with CG will be sent on the dynamic grant due to the higher priority for the critical data. See, ¶[1065].).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on July 30, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the prior art references relied upon in support of the rejections in the previous Office Action, namely, Sachs, allegedly fails to teach the features of claim 1, 5 and 10 as amended, i.e., " wherein the first CG configuration includes mapping information between the first CG configuration and the SR configuration". See, Amendment at p. 9.
In support of the above argument, Applicant asserts that “by utilizing the explicit mapping information included directly within the first CG configuration as recited in amended independent claims, a single target SR resource is uniquely determined and streamlined into an optimized, unified single SR transmission regardless of how many logical channels are active.” Amendment at id., 8., Emphasis added. Applicant further alleges the explicit, direct structural architecture defined in amended claim 1 distinguishes over Sachs, which Applicant alleges “merely reflects a standard 3GPP framework where CG and SR configurations are completely separate, distinct entities that are independently bound to an LCH,” and which is “a conventional, indirect connection via LCH restriction”. Id., p. 9, Emphasis added.
To the extent Applicant is arguing that Sachs fails to disclose or teach a CG configuration containing within itself the mapping information, this argument has no persuasion. The argued feature lacks any support in the Specification, which also describes each of the CG, SR and the logical channel configurations as separate and distinct entities. See paragraph 6 of this Office Action above.
To the extent that Applicant is arguing that Sachs fails to disclose or teaching of an explicit mapping between the CG and SR configuration, this argument is now moot in light of the new grounds rejections presented in this Office Action.
For at least the above reasons, the Examiner remains unpersuaded by Applicant’s arguments.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure.
1) Wang et al. (US Published Patent Application No. US2022/0022228) teaches various aspects of the claimed subject matter, including a mapping information between the CG and SR configurations, e.g., see, ¶[0012];
2) Awad et al. (US Published Patent Application No. US2022/0232618) teaches various aspects of the claimed subject matter, including an association between the CG and SR configurations through the logical channel configuration, e.g., see, ¶[0089];
3) Luo et al. (US Published Patent Application No. US2021/0258980) teaches various aspects of the claimed subject matter, including mapping between various configurations, e.g., see, ¶[0143];
4) Nam et al. (US Published Patent Application No. US2022/0061084) teaches various aspects of the claimed subject matter, including a configured grant-specific scheduling request, e.g., see, Abstract; and
5) Ma et al. (US Published Patent Application No. US2024/0089959) teaches various aspects of the claimed subject matter, including respective periodicity of CG occasions and the SR occasions, e.g., see, Fig. 6 and ¶[0099].
12. New grounds of rejection presented in this Office action were necessitated by Applicant’s amendments to the claims. 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 KI S KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-9141. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7:00AM - 5:30PM.
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, Moo R Jeong can be reached at (571) 272-9617. 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.
/K.S.K./Examiner, Art Unit 2418 October 11, 2026
/Moo Jeong/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2418
1 See, 3GPP TS 38.331 V16.7.0 (2021-12), “Technical Specification 3rd Generation Partnership Project; Technical Specification Group Radio Access Network; NR; Radio Resource Control (RRC) protocol specification (Release 16), published by 3GPP Organizational Partners, 2021, Pp. 1-2 and 444-447.
For the sole purpose of facilitating a better understanding of the state of art at the relevant time frame relating to the association between the SR and CG configurations, the following portion of the 3GPP technical specification 38.331 released and published prior to the effective date of the present application is provided. As shown in the technical specification, each logical group configuration (RRC message, i.e., an L2 signaling) “LogicalChannelConfig” includes the “allowedCG-List-r16,” identifying the configured grant configuration for the logical channel (i.e., the QoS flow) and the “schedulingRequestID” specifying the scheduling request to be triggered for requesting a dynamic grant. Sachs teaches this association between the CG configuration and the SR configuration provided by the means of the logical channel configuration (am L2 signaling) well known to those skilled in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
– LogicalChannelConfig
The IE LogicalChannelConfig is used to configure the logical channel parameters.
LogicalChannelConfig information element
-- ASN1START
-- TAG-LOGICALCHANNELCONFIG-START
LogicalChannelConfig ::= SEQUENCE {
ul-SpecificParameters SEQUENCE {
priority INTEGER (1..16),
prioritisedBitRate ENUMERATED {kBps0, kBps8, kBps16, kBps32, kBps64, kBps128, kBps256, kBps512,
kBps1024, kBps2048, kBps4096, kBps8192, kBps16384, kBps32768, kBps65536, infinity},
bucketSizeDuration ENUMERATED {ms5, ms10, ms20, ms50, ms100, ms150, ms300, ms500, ms1000,
spare7, spare6, spare5, spare4, spare3,spare2, spare1},
allowedServingCells SEQUENCE (SIZE (1..maxNrofServingCells-1)) OF ServCellIndex
OPTIONAL, -- Cond PDCP-CADuplication
allowedSCS-List SEQUENCE (SIZE (1..maxSCSs)) OF SubcarrierSpacing OPTIONAL, -- Need R
maxPUSCH-Duration ENUMERATED {ms0p02, ms0p04, ms0p0625, ms0p125, ms0p25, ms0p5, spare2, spare1}
OPTIONAL, -- Need R
configuredGrantType1Allowed ENUMERATED {true} OPTIONAL, -- Need R
logicalChannelGroup INTEGER (0..maxLCG-ID) OPTIONAL, -- Need R
schedulingRequestID SchedulingRequestId OPTIONAL, -- Need R
logicalChannelSR-Mask BOOLEAN,
logicalChannelSR-DelayTimerApplied BOOLEAN,
...,
bitRateQueryProhibitTimer ENUMERATED {s0, s0dot4, s0dot8, s1dot6, s3, s6, s12, s30} OPTIONAL, -- Need R
[[
allowedCG-List-r16 SEQUENCE (SIZE (0.. maxNrofConfiguredGrantConfigMAC-1-r16)) OF ConfiguredGrantConfigIndexMAC-r16
OPTIONAL, -- Need S
allowedPHY-PriorityIndex-r16 ENUMERATED {p0, p1} OPTIONAL -- Need S
]]
} OPTIONAL, -- Cond UL
...,
[[
channelAccessPriority-r16 INTEGER (1..4) OPTIONAL, -- Need R
bitRateMultiplier-r16 ENUMERATED {x40, x70, x100, x200} OPTIONAL -- Need R
]]
}
-- TAG-LOGICALCHANNELCONFIG-STOP
-- ASN1STOP
2 The limitation “wherein the first CG configuration includes mapping information between the first CG configuration and the SR configuration” is construed to be consistent with the Specification. That is, the mapping information is not required to be contained within the CG configuration itself, but can be provided by the network, e.g., via L2 signaling, separately from the CG configuration, where the “mapping” provides a one-to-one correspondence.. See, above paragraph 6 of this Office Action.
3 See footnote 1 above.
4 See footnote 2 above.
5 See footnote 1 above.
6 See footnote 2 above.
Prosecution Insights