Detailed Action
The office action is in response to the communications filed on 06/10/2024 .
Notice of 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 .
Claims Status
Claims 1-20 are pending in this application.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 01/02/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Prior Art Made of Record
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Park et al. ( Publication No. US 2024/0357583), the prior art discloses that the terminal configures unused transmission occasion (UTO)—uplink control information (UCI) for indicating an unused transmission occasion of the one CG-PUSCH configuration; see ¶ 6.
Claim Objections
Claim 7 is objected to because an ambiguity. The claim recites “enabled resource skipping state for two or more resource allocations of the one or more resource allocations”. Examiner notes that if only one resource is allocated the limitation would be ambiguous. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 4, 6-8, 13-14, and 17-19 are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Yang et al. (Patent No. US 20250055642, hereinafter referred to as Yang).
Regarding claims 1, 13, and 18, Yang discloses an apparatus for wireless communication at a user equipment (UE), comprising (A communication system includes a user equipment in communication with an access node; see figure 11.):
one or more memories (It is inherent that the UE includes one or more memories in order to communicate with the access node.); and
one or more processors, coupled to the one or more memories, configured to cause the UE to (It is inherent that the UE includes one or more processors, coupled to the one or more memories in order to communicate with the access node.):
receive a first indication of one or more resource allocations that are assigned to the UE (The UE obtains, from the access node, a first configured grant (CG) configuration for an uplink carrier; see figure 11 step 1102.); and
transmit a second indication of a UE-selected resource skipping configuration that is based at least in part on the one or more resource allocations (The UE generates at least one unused transmission occasion (UTO) uplink control information (UCI), wherein the UTO-UCI indicates which of the multiple transmission occasions are unused by the UE for the first CG configuration; see figure 11 step 1104. The UE transmit the at least one UTO-UCI to an access node; see figure 11 step 1106.).
Regarding claims 2, 14, and 19, Yang discloses that the UE-selected resource skipping configuration indicates at least one of: a selected resource allocation from the one or more resource allocations and an enabled resource skipping state for the selected resource allocation, an uplink channel for communicating an unused transmission occasion (UTO) indication, a UTO overlap state, a UTO indication communication type, a UTO indication resource unit type, or a UTO indication component carrier mode (The UE generates at least one unused transmission occasion (UTO) uplink control information (UCI), wherein the UTO-UCI indicates which of the multiple transmission occasions are unused by the UE for the first CG configuration; see figure 11 step 1104.).
Regarding claim 4, Yang discloses transmitting an unused transmission occasion (UTO) indication based at least in part on the UE-selected resource skipping configuration (The UE transmit the at least one UTO-UCI to an access node; see figure 11 step 1106.).
Regarding claim 6, Yang discloses that the UE-selected resource skipping configuration indicates a duration for an unused transmission occasion (UTO) sliding window (Determination of the UTO-UCI payload size (e.g., bitmap size) may be based on the maximum number of TOs contained in a time duration from a starting time; see ¶ 79. It may be noted that, depending on the starting time, the number of TOs enclosed in the time duration may be different; see ¶ 79. This is because changing the starting time causes the time duration window to slide, and at different points the time duration may include different number of TOs; see ¶ 79.).
Regarding claim 7, Yang discloses that the UE-selected resource skipping configuration indicates: an enabled resource skipping state for two or more resource allocations of the one or more resource allocations, and a mapping of a respective unused transmission occasion (UTO) indication for each resource allocation of the two or more resource allocations (Determination of the UTO-UCI payload size (e.g., bitmap size) may be based on the maximum number of TOs contained in a time duration from a starting time; see ¶ 79. It may be noted that, depending on the starting time, the number of TOs enclosed in the time duration may be different; see ¶ 79. This is because changing the starting time causes the time duration window to slide, and at different points the time duration may include different number of TOs; see ¶ 79.).
Regarding claim 8, Yang discloses that the UE-selected resource skipping configuration indicates an applicability duration of an unused transmission occasion (UTO) indication (Determination of the UTO-UCI payload size (e.g., bitmap size) may be based on the maximum number of TOs contained in a time duration from a starting time; see ¶ 79. It may be noted that, depending on the starting time, the number of TOs enclosed in the time duration may be different; see ¶ 79. This is because changing the starting time causes the time duration window to slide, and at different points the time duration may include different number of TOs; see ¶ 79.)..
Regarding claim 17, Yang discloses transmitting an unused transmission occasion (DTO) indication based at least in part on the UE-selected resource skipping configuration (The UTO-UCI provides a bitmap in which a bit corresponds to a TO within a time duration/range; see ¶ 50. The bit indicates whether the TO is “unused”; see ¶ 50.).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived 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 AIA 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 5 and 16 are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang et al. (Patent No. US 2025/0055642, hereinafter referred to as Yang) in view of Babaei et al. (Patent No. US 2024/0147478, hereinafter referred to as Babaei).
Regarding claims 5 and 16, Yang discloses that the transmission of the UTO-UCI, indicating which of the multiple transmission occasions are unused, via MAC PDU, but fails to explicitly disclose transmitting the second indication of the UE-selected resource skipping configuration in an uplink medium access control (MAC) control element (CE). However, in analogous art, Babaei discloses that the number of unused transmission occasions in the CG period are carried by a MAC-CE; see figure 24 & ¶ 171. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yang with the MAC-CE mechanism of Babaei in order to enhance processes and signaling for indication of unused configured grant transmission occasions.
Claim 9 is rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang et al. (Patent No. US 2025/0055642, hereinafter referred to as Yang) in view of Kuo et al. (Patent No. US 2025/0039868, hereinafter referred to as Kuo).
Regarding claim 9, Yang discloses that the transmission of the UTO-UCI to indicate which of the multiple transmission occasions are unused, but fails to explicitly disclose transmitting the second indication of the UE-selected resource skipping configuration based at least in part on a buffer status report. However, in analogous art, Kuo discloses that the UE can transmit, to a base station, UTO uplink control information (UTO-UCI) that includes information that identifies the UTOs, wherein the UE can identify the UTOs based on a buffer status; see ¶ 10. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yang with the duration mechanism of Kuo in order to enhance processes and signaling for indication of unused configured grant transmission occasions.
Claim 10 is rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang et al. (Patent No. US 2025/0055642, hereinafter referred to as Yang) in view of Tsai et al. (Patent No. US 2025/0203622, hereinafter referred to as Tsai).
Regarding claim 10, Yang discloses that the transmission of the UTO-UCI to indicate which of the multiple transmission occasions are unused, but fails to explicitly disclose transmitting a resource skipping capability that indicates support for UE-selected resource skipping. However, in analogous art, Tsai discloses a UE may indicate it supports the capability of unused CGO indication by sending the UECapabilitylnformation message, wherein each unused CGO indication may indicate a next/following/subsequent CG resource(s) will not be used (e.g., will be skipped) by the UE.; see ¶ 540/570. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yang with the capability mechanism of Tsai in order to enhance processes and signaling for indication of unused configured grant transmission occasions.
Claims 3, 11, 15, and 20 are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang et al. (Patent No. US 2025/0055642, hereinafter referred to as Yang) in view of Saeed et al. (Patent No. US 2025/0113363, hereinafter referred to as Saeed).
Regarding claim 3, Yang discloses that the transmission of the UTO-UCI to indicate which of the multiple transmission occasions are unused, but fails to explicitly disclose receive a network-node-selected resource skipping configuration that is based at least in part on the UE-selected resource skipping configuration; and transmit an unused transmission occasion (UTO) indication based at least in part on the network-node-selected resource skipping configuration.. However, in analogous art, Saeed discloses the UE receive, from the RAN node, a configuration for UCI skipping, wherein the configuration comprises rules for skipping a transmission, and the UE determine whether to skip transmission based on the configuration see figure 4 steps 403-405. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yang with the configuration information of Saeed in order to enhance processes and signaling for indication of unused configured grant transmission occasions.
Regarding claims 11 and 20, Yang discloses that the transmission of the UTO-UCI to indicate which of the multiple transmission occasions are unused, but fails to explicitly disclose receive, prior to transmitting the second indication of the UE-selected resource skipping configuration, a third indication of one or more allowed resource skipping parameters that are configurable by the UE, wherein the UE-selected resource skipping configuration is based at least in part on the one or more allowed resource skipping parameters. However, in analogous art, Saeed discloses the UE receive, from the RAN node, a configuration for UCI skipping, wherein the configuration comprises rules for skipping a transmission, and the UE determine whether to skip transmission based on the configuration see figure 4 steps 403-405. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yang with the configuration information of Saeed in order to enhance processes and signaling for indication of unused configured grant transmission occasions.
Regarding claim 15, Yang discloses that the transmission of the UTO-UCI to indicate which of the multiple transmission occasions are unused, but fails to explicitly disclose transmitting an unused transmission occasion (DTO) indication based at least in part on the DE-selected resource skipping configuration.. However, in analogous art, Saeed discloses the UE receive, from the RAN node, a configuration for UCI skipping, wherein the configuration comprises rules for skipping a transmission, and the UE determine whether to skip transmission based on the configuration see figure 4 steps 403-405. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yang with the configuration information of Saeed in order to enhance processes and signaling for indication of unused configured grant transmission occasions.
Claim 12 is rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang et al. (Patent No. US 2025/0055642, hereinafter referred to as Yang) in view of Wang et al. (Patent No. US 2024/0283615, hereinafter referred to as Wang).
Regarding claim 12, Yang discloses that the transmission of the UTO-UCI to indicate which of the multiple transmission occasions are unused, but fails to explicitly disclose that the UE-selected resource skipping configuration is based at least in part on a data traffic profile at the UE. However, in analogous art, Wang discloses that given the variable packet size characteristic of the services, more than one PUSCH occasion within a CG periodicity may be needed to support the transmission of a large packet [data traffic profile], as it might not be possible to transmit such a large packet in just one PUSCH occasion; see ¶ 147. However, some packets may be smaller in size [data traffic profile],; see ¶ 147. In these cases, when it is sufficient to transmit a small packet via a single PUSCH occasion, other PUSCH occasions configured for the UE within the same CG periodicity may not be needed and may not be used for PUSCH transmission; see ¶ 147. As a result, it is advantageous for the UE to indicate (any) the unused PUSCH occasions to the gNB, so that the gNB may reallocate the resources of the unused PUSCH occasions to other UEs; see ¶ 147. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yang with the variable packet size mechanism of Wang in order to enhance processes and signaling for indication of unused configured grant transmission occasions.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Hector Reyes (Hector.Reyes@uspto.gov) whose telephone number is (571) 270-0239. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6-5.
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, Kevin Bates (Kevin.Bates@uspto.gov) can be reached on (571) 270-0239. 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.
/H.R/Examiner, Art Unit 2472
/KEVIN T BATES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2472
Prosecution Insights