DETAILED ACTION
This communication is in response to Application No. 18/754,352 filed on 6/26/2024. The amendment presented on 8/6/2026, which cancels claims 2, 9, and 15 and amends claims 1, 8, and 14, is hereby acknowledged. Claims 1, 3-8, 10-14, and 16-20 have been examined.
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 .
Specification
The amendment to the Title "CHANNEL OCCUPANCY TIME (COT) SHARING METHOD, TERMINAL DEVICE, NETWORK DEVICE, AND CHIP” has been considered and is acceptable.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 3-8, 10-14, and 16-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
Claims 1, 3-8, 10-14, and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Salem (US 2021/0105815) in view of Zhou et al. (hereinafter Zhou)(US 2020/0196351).
Regarding claim 1, Salem teaches as follows:
A method for wireless communication, comprising:
transmitting, by a terminal device, configured grant-uplink control information (CG-UCI) to a network device, wherein the CG-UCI indicates whether the network device is instructed to share a third COT using target COT sharing information, the third COT being a COT initiated by the terminal device, and the target COT sharing information comprising a duration and a time offset (the UE 110a initiated COT (equivalent to applicant’s third COT initiated by UE) having a MCOT 318 of four time slots 320, 322, 324, and 326 in the time resource 300. The COT in the MCOT 318 is therefore a COT initiated by the UE 110a. During the COT in the MCOT 318, the UE 110a transmits an uplink transmission to the base station 170a in a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) 328 in the time slot 302, in a PUSCH 330 in the time slot 304, and in a PUSCH 332 in the time slot 304. The PUSCHs 328, 330, and 332 therefore form an uplink burst 334 in an uplink transmission from the UE 110a to the base station 170a in the time resource 300 in the unlicensed spectrum in the cell 175a of the base station 170a, see, ¶ [0134] and figure 3)(the PUSCH 328 in the time slot 302 includes a configured-grant uplink control information (CG-UCI) 338. In general, a CG-UCI as described herein may include one or more of: a HARQ ID, a new data indicator (NDI), a redundancy version (RV), COT sharing information (equivalent to applicant’s target COT sharing information) as described below, or other information such as a UE ID, see, ¶ [0136] and figure 3)(the COT sharing information of the CG-UCI 338 includes an indication that the downlink transmission opportunity 336 begins two time slots after the time slot 302, indicated by l=2 in FIG. 3. More generally, l is a “DL offset” that may indicate a number of time slots of COT from transmission of the CG-UCI 338 to the beginning of the downlink transmission opportunity 336. The COT sharing information of the CG-UCI 338 also includes an indication that the downlink transmission opportunity 336 has a duration of two time slots, indicated by d=2 in FIG. 3. More generally, d may indicate a duration of the downlink transmission opportunity 336 as a number of time slots of the downlink transmission opportunity 336, see, ¶ [0137] and figure 3), and
wherein the duration is less than 320 slots (the COT sharing information of the CG-UCI 338 also includes an indication that the downlink transmission opportunity 336 has a duration of two time slots, indicated by d=2 in FIG. 3, see, ¶ [0137] and figure 3).
Salem does not explicitly teach applying the COT sharing to a high-frequency unlicensed band above 52.6 GHz.
Zhou teaches as follows:
FIG. 4A depicts a diagram 400 illustrating an example channel occupancy time (COT) 402 for a base station, e.g., for transmitting and/or receiving communication using an unlicensed frequency band. In unlicensed bands where the transmission medium is generally shared among multiple devices (e.g. 60 GHz), the base station first performs a clear channel assessment (CCA), e.g., at 404, to determine if the medium is available for use by the base station. If the CCA clears (i.e. the base station is successful in its contention for the medium), the base station is able to use the channel for the duration of a COT 402 to schedule grants and transmit/receive data to one or more UEs (see, ¶0059 and figure 4A); and
in the unlicensed band, the base station NR-U, which focuses on higher, unlicensed frequency bands (e.g. 60 GHz), data can only be transmitted within each COT due to the shared nature of the medium (see, ¶0064).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Salem with Zhou to include sharing COT among multiple devices using unlicensed frequency band 60 GHz as taught by Zhou in order to efficiently share COT among multiple devices operating at 60 GHz.
Regarding claims 3, 10, and 16, Salem teaches as follows:
The COT sharing information (equivalent to applicant’s sharing information) indicating, at least, an index value corresponding to a combination of: an indication of an offset to a beginning of a downlink transmission opportunity during the COT; an indication of a duration of the downlink transmission opportunity during the COT; and an indication of a channel access priority class (CAPC) value (equivalent to applicant’s channel access priority) used by the UE to initiate the COT (see, ¶ [0069]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Salem in view of Zhou not to include the indication of a channel access priority class (CAPC) value in the COT sharing information in order to minimize or optimize the size of the COT sharing information.
Regarding claims 4, 11, and 17, Salem teaches as follows:
Wherein the target COT sharing information is determined based on index information and a sharing information list carried by the UCI (the COT sharing information of a CG-UCI may include an identifier of a combination in an ordered set of combinations of (l, d)… In this example, the CG-UCI 338 may include a combination index value (CIV) or other identifier identifying the combination (l=2, d=2) in an ordered set of combinations of (l, d), see, ¶ [0142]).
Regarding claims 5, 12, and 18, Salem teaches as follows:
Wherein in a case that the index information corresponds to first information in the sharing information list, the CG-UCI indicates that the network device is instructed not to share the third COT, wherein the first information indicates that COT sharing is not available (the PUSCH 356 includes a CG-UCI 358, and the COT sharing information of the CG-UCI 358 includes a “disabling” indication indicating no downlink transmission opportunity thereafter, see, ¶ [0149] and figure 3).
Regarding claims 6, 13, and 19, Salem teaches as follows:
Wherein in a case that the index information corresponds to sharing information in the sharing information list, the CG-UCI indicates that the network device is instructed to share the third COT using target COT sharing information, wherein the target COT sharing information is sharing information corresponding to the index information in the sharing information list (the COT sharing information of the CG-UCI 338 includes an indication that the downlink transmission opportunity 336 begins two time slots after the time slot 302, indicated by l=2 in FIG. 3. More generally, l is a “DL offset” that may indicate a number of time slots of COT from transmission of the CG-UCI 338 to the beginning of the downlink transmission opportunity 336. The COT sharing information of the CG-UCI 338 also includes an indication that the downlink transmission opportunity 336 has a duration of two time slots, indicated by d=2 in FIG. 3. More generally, d may indicate a duration of the downlink transmission opportunity 336 as a number of time slots of the downlink transmission opportunity 336, see, ¶ [0137] and figure 3).
Regarding claim 7, Salem teaches as follows:
Wherein a channel access type (interpreted as the LBT category) of the network device is determined based on a first interval (the DL LBT procedure 346 is a category 2 (CAT2) DL LBT procedure, which does not involve a random back-off, but in alternative embodiments, the base station may initiate a downlink transmission using other procedures such as CAT1 (no LBT) procedure, for instance when the gap (equivalent to applicant’s first interval) between UL and DL is 16 μs or less, see, ¶ [0146]).
Regarding claim 8, Salem teaches similar limitations as presented above and further teaches as follows:
A terminal device (interpreted as the UE 110 in figure 2A), comprising: a processor (processing unit 200 in figure 2A) and a memory (208 in figure 2A), wherein the memory is configured to store one or more computer programs, which when executed by the processor (see, ¶ [0095] and [0098] and figure 2A).
Regarding claim 14, Salem teaches similar limitations as presented above and further teaches as follows:
A network device (interpreted as base station 170 in figure 2B), comprising: a processor (250 in figure 2B) and a memory (258 in figure 2B), wherein the memory is configured to store one or more computer programs, which when executed by the processor (the base station 170 includes at least one processing unit 250, at least one transmitter 252, at least one receiver 254, one or more antennas 256, at least one memory 258, and one or more input/output devices or interfaces 266, see, ¶ [0099] and figure 2B).
Regarding claim 20, Salem teaches as follows:
A chip, comprising: a processor, wherein the processor, when executing one or more computer programs from a memory, cause a device equipped with the chip to perform the method according to claim 1 (a user equipment (UE) apparatus comprising: at least one processor; and at least one processor-readable storage device comprising stored thereon processor-executable instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to, at least, execute the method, see, ¶ [0025]).
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 Jeong S Park whose telephone number is (571)270-1597. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 8:00-4:30 ET.
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, Rebecca E Song can be reached at 571-270-3667. 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.
/JEONG S PARK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2417
October 14, 2026
