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 .
Drawings
The drawings Fig. 1 is objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because of lacking descriptive legends as described in the specification. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In Claim 1, line 7, “the one more muting occasions” should be “the one or more muting occasions”.
In Claim 3, line 1, “wherein where the first configuration message further comprises” should be “wherein
In Claim 8, line 4, “the time offsets or the frequency offsets” should be “the time offset[s] or the frequency offset[s]”.
In Claim 15, line 6, “the one more muting occasions” should be “the one or more muting occasions”.
In Claim 19, line 7, “the one more muting occasions” should be “the one or more muting occasions”.
In Claim 20, line 4, “the one more muting occasions” should be “the one or more muting occasions”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 2-14 and 16-18 are objected by virtue of their dependency on claims 1 and 15 respectively.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claim limitation “processor for wireless communication” in claims 15-18 invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 5, 10, 15 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) as being anticipated by Ibrahim et al (US 20230217477 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Ibrahim’477 discloses a user equipment (UE) for wireless communication (see, Fig. 2 and 9, UE in wireless communications system with inter-base station interference estimation, par 0119, 0185), comprising:
at least one memory (see, Fig. 9, memory, par 0185); and
at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory and configured to cause the UE to (see, Fig. 9, memory stores computer-executable code to be executed by processor to perform various functions, par 0188) :
receive a first configuration message indicating one or more uplink resource muting patterns (a set of muting patterns configured for uplink can be equated to uplink resource muting patterns, par 0121) each comprising one or more muting occasions (see, UE receives configuration message includes a set of muting patterns indicating time resources (symbols) for UE to cancel uplink transmissions over uplink beam, par 0121. Noted, time resources (symbols) can be equated to occasions, par 0121), wherein at least one of the one or more muting patterns or the one more muting occasions is associated with at least one of a spatial filter, a beam, or a reference signal (see, muting patterns indicating time resources (symbols) for UE to cancel uplink transmissions over uplink beam, par 0121. Noted, the examiner picks option to reject); and
transmit one or more uplink signals including to mute one or more uplink transmissions of one or more of uplink time-frequency resources (selected uplink resources for frequency and time can be equated to uplink time-frequency resources, par 0130) associated with at least one spatial filter, beam, or reference signal and based at least in part on the first configuration message (see, Fig. 3 310 and 340, UE transmits uplink communications to base station over the selected time-frequency resources according to muting patterns for uplink beam, par 0130-0131, 0138. Noted, muting patterns configuration can be equated to first configuration message, par 0131).
Regarding claim 5, Ibrahim’477 discloses the UE of claim 1 (see, Fig. 2 and 9, UE in wireless communications system with inter-base station interference estimation, par 0119, 0185), wherein at least one uplink resource muting pattern of the one or more uplink resource muting patterns (a set of uplink muting patterns can be equated to at least one uplink resource muting pattern of the one or more uplink resource muting patterns, par 0131) is associated with at least one of a time period, a time-domain period, a semi-persistent behavior, an aperiodic behavior, a number of muting occasions within a pattern period, or a first time-frequency resource configuration for one or more muting occasions (see, Fig. 3 310, a set of muting patterns for uplink transmission indicates selected resources (frequency resources and time resources) adjusted, and a set of muting patterns that indicate time resources (symbols) to cancel uplink transmissions (can be equated to a first time-frequency resource configuration for one or more muting occasions), par 0121, 0130-0131. Noted, the examiner picks option to reject).
Regarding claim 10, Ibrahim’477 discloses the UE of claim 1 (see, Fig. 2 and 9, UE in wireless communications system with inter-base station interference estimation, par 0119, 0185), wherein at least one uplink resource muting pattern (communication patterns including a set of muting patterns for uplink can be equated to uplink resource muting pattern, par 0131) is associated with at least one indicated bandwidth part (BWP) index, an open or closed loop uplink power control set, or a maximum uplink power threshold (see, UE reduce the transmit power of selected resources according to communication patterns including a set of muting patterns for uplink to amount matching CLI threshold, par 0131, 0135. Noted, transmit power amount matching CLI threshold can be equated to maximum uplink power threshold, par 0135).
Regarding claim 15, Ibrahim’477 recites a processor for wireless communication performing the steps recited in claim 1 and thereby, is rejected for the reasons discussed above with respect to claim 1.
Regarding claim 19, Ibrahim’477 discloses a network equipment for wireless communication (see, Fig. 2 and 13, base station in wireless communications system with inter-base station interference estimation, par 0119, 0229), comprising:
at least one memory (see, Fig. 13, memory, par 0229); and
at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory and configured to cause the network equipment to (see, Fig. 12, memory stores computer-executable code to be executed by processor to perform various functions, par 0232) :
transmit a first configuration message indicating one or more uplink resource muting patterns (a set of muting patterns configured for uplink can be equated to uplink resource muting patterns, par 0121) each comprising one or more muting occasions (see, UE receives configuration message includes a set of muting patterns indicating time resources (symbols) for UE to cancel uplink transmissions over uplink beam, par 0121. Noted, time resources (symbols) can be equated to occasions, par 0121), wherein at least one of the one or more muting patterns or the one more muting occasions is associated with at least one of a spatial filter, a beam, or a reference signal (see, muting patterns indicating time resources (symbols) for UE to cancel uplink transmissions over uplink beam, par 0121. Noted, the examiner picks option to reject).
Regarding claim 20, Claim 20 recites a method performed by a user equipment (UE) performing the steps recited in claim 1 and thereby, is rejected for the reasons discussed above with respect to claim 1.
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 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 col. 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 2 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ibrahim’477 in view of Hoang et al (US20250151010A1, Priority Date: Feb 6, 2023).
Regarding claim 2, Ibrahim’477 discloses the UE of claim 1 (see, Fig. 2 and 9, UE in wireless communications system with inter-base station interference estimation, par 0119, 0185).
Ibrahim’477 discloses all the claim limitations but fails to explicitly teach: wherein the spatial filter is based at least in part on a quasi co-location (QCL)-D relationship of a source reference signal, and wherein the source reference signal is received via one or more of a beam or a spatial filter.
However Hoang’010 from the same field of endeavor (see, Fig. 2, WTRU performs DPoA or PoA measurement, par 0094) discloses:
wherein the spatial filter (spatial filter can be equated to spatial filter, par 0171) is based at least in part on a quasi co-location (QCL)-D relationship of a source reference signal (see, UE determines transmission direction of spatial filter of SRSp according to QCL type D relationship between SRSp and SSB, par 0144, 0153, 0171, 0180. Noted, SSB can be equated to source reference signal, par 0144), and wherein the source reference signal is received via one or more of a beam or a spatial filter (see, spatial relationship between SSB and SRSp, and thus SSB receives through receiving spatial filter, par 0144, 0153. Noted, spatial filter (e.g., beamforming) and thus spatial filter can be equated to beam, par 0171).
In view of the above, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains to implement the UE as taught by Hoang’010 into that of Ibrahim’477. The motivation would have been to report phase measurements through configuration for NR Uu phase-based positioning (par 0004).
Regarding claim 16, Claim 16 recites a method performed by a user equipment (UE) performing the steps recited in claim 2 and thereby, is rejected for the reasons discussed above with respect to claim 2.
Claims 3-4 and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ibrahim’477 in view of Zhang et al (US20250024456A1, Priority Date: Jul 13, 2023).
Regarding claim 3, Ibrahim’477 discloses the UE of claim 1 (see, Fig. 2 and 9, UE in wireless communications system with inter-base station interference estimation, par 0119, 0185).
Ibrahim’477 discloses all the claim limitations but fails to explicitly teach: wherein where the first configuration message further comprises an index of an active muting pattern of a plurality of uplink resource muting patterns.
However Zhang’456 from the same field of endeavor (see, Fig. 8, communication between a UE and two network node for uplink resource muting in wireless network, par 0100) discloses: wherein where the first configuration message further comprises an index of an active muting pattern of a plurality of uplink resource muting patterns (see, UE receives predefined uplink resource muting pattern index to indicate uplink resource muting pattern of uplink resource muting patterns by DCI to activate uplink configured grant, par 0110).
In view of the above, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains to implement the UE as taught by Zhang’456 into that of Ibrahim’477. The motivation would have been to perform inter-network-node CLI measurement (par 0006).
Regarding claim 4, Ibrahim’477 discloses the UE of claim 3 (see, Fig. 2 and 9, UE in wireless communications system with inter-base station interference estimation, par 0119, 0185), wherein the at least one processor (see, Fig. 9, processor, par 0185) is configured to cause the UE to receive a downlink control message comprising an indication to activate or deactivate a muting pattern of the plurality of uplink resource muting patterns (see, UE receives DCI to activate or deactivate one or more patterns of the set of muting patterns for uplink transmission, par 0121-0122).
Regarding claim 17, Claim 17 recites a method performed by a user equipment (UE) performing the steps recited in claim 3 and thereby, is rejected for the reasons discussed above with respect to claim 3.
Regarding claim 18, Claim 18 recites a method performed by a user equipment (UE) performing the steps recited in claim 4 and thereby, is rejected for the reasons discussed above with respect to claim 4.
Claims 6-8 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ibrahim’477 in view of Zhang et al (US 20250323764 A1, Pro 63634312 Priority Date: Apr 15, 2024).
Regarding claim 6, Ibrahim’477 discloses the UE of claim 5 (see, Fig. 2 and 9, UE in wireless communications system with inter-base station interference estimation, par 0119, 0185).
Ibrahim’477 discloses all the claim limitations but fails to explicitly teach: wherein the first time-frequency resource configuration is configured for a first muting occasion, and a second time-frequency resource configuration for a second muting occasion is derived using at least one or more of indicated time-frequency resources of a first occasion, a time offset, a frequency offset, or a collision handling rule if a muting occasion overlaps fully or partially with a configured signal resource.
However Zhang’764 from the same field of endeavor (see, Fig. 2, wireless communications system supports uplink resource muting for various waveforms, par 0122) discloses:
wherein the first time-frequency resource configuration is configured for a first muting occasion (see, Fig. 3, PTRS and PDSCH with tones and symbols configuration on symbol 3 of resource muting scheme 301, par 0131-0132, 0137), and a second time-frequency resource configuration for a second muting occasion (see, Fig. 3, PTRS and PDSCH with tones and symbols configuration on symbol 4 of resource muting scheme 302, par 0131-0132, 0137) is derived using at least one or more of indicated time-frequency resources of a first occasion, a time offset (see, offset in time resources from PTRS resources, par 0138), a frequency offset (see, offset in frequency resources from PTRS resources, par 0138), or a collision handling rule if a muting occasion overlaps fully or partially with a configured signal resource (noted, network entity and UE communicates according to combination of resource muting scheme 301 and resource muting scheme 302, par 0130. Noted further, the examiner picks options to reject).
In view of the above, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains to implement the UE as taught by Zhang’764 into that of Ibrahim’477. The motivation would have been to provide resource muting pattens to minimize the need for adjusted transmission parameters or rate matching due to muted resources (par 0071).
Regarding claim 7, Ibrahim’477 discloses the UE of claim 6 (see, Fig. 2 and 9, UE in wireless communications system with inter-base station interference estimation, par 0119, 0185).
Ibrahim’477 discloses all the claim limitations but fails to explicitly teach:
wherein the collision handling rule comprises an indication to at least one of:
apply an uplink resource muting occasion and drop, postpone, or shift the configured signal resource using a determined or an indicated time or frequency shift value; or
drop or shift the uplink resource muting occasion using a determined, an indicated time value, or a frequency shift value and transmit the configured signal resource.
However Zhang’764 from the same field of endeavor (see, Fig. 2, wireless communications system supports uplink resource muting for various waveforms, par 0122) discloses:
wherein the collision handling rule (see, muted resources when overlapping with PTRS resources, par 0135) comprises an indication to at least one of:
apply an uplink resource muting occasion (Uplink muted symbols in resource muting pattern, par 0135) and drop (muting uplink symbol in resource muting pattern can be equated to drop, par 0135), postpone, or shift the configured signal resource using a determined or an indicated time or frequency shift value (see, configuring UE with uplink muted symbols in resource muting pattern as overlapping with one or more of the PTRS symbols using time offset and frequency offset, par 0135, 0138. Noted, time offset and frequency offset can be equated to indicated time or frequency shift value, par 0138); or
drop or shift the uplink resource muting occasion using a determined, an indicated time value, or a frequency shift value and transmit the configured signal resource (note, the examiner picks option to reject).
In view of the above, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains to implement the UE as taught by Zhang’764 into that of Ibrahim’477. The motivation would have been to provide resource muting pattens to minimize the need for adjusted transmission parameters or rate matching due to muted resources (par 0071).
Regarding claim 8, Ibrahim’477 discloses the UE of claim 6 (see, Fig. 2 and 9, UE in wireless communications system with inter-base station interference estimation, par 0119, 0185).
Ibrahim’477 discloses all the claim limitations but fails to explicitly teach:
wherein one or more of:
the time offset or the frequency offset are provided explicitly for each occasion, for odd occasions sets, or for even occasions sets; or
the time offsets or the frequency offsets for a muting occasion are derived based at least in part on indicated resources of a first muting occasion, an indicated initial offset, or an indicated time or frequency offset pattern.
However Zhang’764 from the same field of endeavor (see, Fig. 2, wireless communications system supports uplink resource muting for various waveforms, par 0122) discloses:
wherein one or more of:
the time offset or the frequency offset are provided explicitly for each occasion (see, resource muting pattern indicates an offset in time resources or frequency resources from the PTRS resources of the PTRS pattern, and thus for each occasion, par 0138), for odd occasions sets, or for even occasions sets (note, the examiner picks an option/options to reject); or
the time offsets or the frequency offsets for a muting occasion are derived based at least in part on indicated resources of a first muting occasion, an indicated initial offset, or an indicated time or frequency offset pattern (note, the examiner picks an option/options to reject).
In view of the above, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains to implement the UE as taught by Zhang’764 into that of Ibrahim’477. The motivation would have been to provide resource muting pattens to minimize the need for adjusted transmission parameters or rate matching due to muted resources (par 0071).
Regarding claim 14, Ibrahim’477 discloses the UE of claim 1 (see, Fig. 2 and 9, UE in wireless communications system with inter-base station interference estimation, par 0119, 0185).
Ibrahim’477 discloses all the claim limitations but fails to explicitly teach:
wherein the first configuration message provides a mutingOccasions-FDM message to indicate a number of muting occasions that are frequency-domain multiplexed in one time instance.
However Zhang’764 from the same field of endeavor (see, Fig. 2, wireless communications system supports uplink resource muting for various waveforms, par 0122) discloses: wherein the first configuration message provides a mutingOccasions-FDM message (configured resource muting pattern, abstract) to indicate a number of muting occasions that are frequency-domain multiplexed in one time instance (see, resource muting pattern configured indicating to mute every other RE of an uplink symbol, par 0071. Noted, every other RE and thus frequency-domain multiplexed, resource muting pattern can be equated to a number of muting occasions).
In view of the above, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains to implement the UE as taught by Zhang’764 into that of Ibrahim’477. The motivation would have been to provide resource muting pattens to minimize the need for adjusted transmission parameters or rate matching due to muted resources (par 0071).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ibrahim’477 in view of Shreevastav et al (US 20220209927 A1).
Regarding claim 9, Ibrahim’477 discloses the UE of claim 1 (see, Fig. 2 and 9, UE in wireless communications system with inter-base station interference estimation, par 0119, 0185).
Ibrahim’477 discloses all the claim limitations but fails to explicitly teach:
wherein an associated uplink beam indexes set is indicated explicitly for each uplink resource muting pattern or for each muting occasion of a muting pattern, or is determined based on a provided row index of a configured uplink beams codebook.
However Shreevastav’927 from the same field of endeavor (see, Fig. 1, wireless communication network including UE, BSs as NG-RAN and core network, par 0051-0053) discloses:
wherein an associated uplink beam indexes set (order of TX beams in beam switching can be equated to associated uplink beam indexes set, par 0078) is indicated explicitly for each uplink resource muting pattern or for each muting occasion of a muting pattern (see, UL reference signal configuration indicating order of TX beams in beam switching and UL signal muting pattern with time-frequency resource allocation (and thus order of TX beams applies to each resource in muting pattern), par 0078), or is determined based on a provided row index of a configured uplink beams codebook (note, the examiner picks option to reject).
In view of the above, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains to implement the UE as taught by Shreevastav’927 into that of Ibrahim’477. The motivation would have been to control transmission of uplink reference signals for positioning of the wireless device by wireless device (par 0001).
Claims 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ibrahim’477 in view of Fakoorian et al (US 20200351897 A1).
Regarding claim 11, Ibrahim’477 discloses the UE of claim 1 (see, Fig. 2 and 9, UE in wireless communications system with inter-base station interference estimation, par 0119, 0185).
Ibrahim’477 discloses all the claim limitations but fails to explicitly teach: wherein the first configuration message configures one or more time-frequency resources of a muting pattern by indicating a row index that points to a row of an uplink resource muting patterns table.
However Fakoorian’897 from the same field of endeavor (see, Fig. 2, wireless communications system including base station and multiple UEs supporting uplink transmission cancellation, par 0114) discloses: wherein the first configuration message (uplink cancellation indication (ULCI) can be equated to first configuration message, par 0112) configures one or more time-frequency resources of a muting pattern by indicating a row index that points to a row of an uplink resource muting patterns table (see, UE receives ULCI using bits indicating a particular row of SLIV table corresponding to cancellation resource pattern for uplink cancellation, par 0128. Noted, SLIV table corresponding to cancellation resource patterns for uplink cancellation can be equated to uplink resource muting patterns table, par 0128).
In view of the above, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains to implement the UE as taught by Fakoorian’897 into that of Ibrahim’477. The motivation would have been to improve methods, systems, devices, and apparatuses that support uplink transmission cancellation (par 0005).
Regarding claim 12, Ibrahim’477 discloses the UE of claim 11 (see, Fig. 2 and 9, UE in wireless communications system with inter-base station interference estimation, par 0119, 0185), wherein the at least one processor (see, Fig. 9, processor, par 0185) is configured to cause the UE to.
Ibrahim’477 discloses all the claim limitations but fails to explicitly teach:
use the uplink resource muting patterns table to determine at least one of a corresponding muting pattern period, a muting pattern frequency domain format or density, slot indexes or subframes where the muting pattern is to be mapped, a starting symbol, a number of muting occasions per slot or subframe, or a muting occasion duration expressed in terms of number of symbols.
However Fakoorian’897 from the same field of endeavor (see, Fig. 2, wireless communications system including base station and multiple UEs supporting uplink transmission cancellation, par 0114) discloses:
use the uplink resource muting patterns table (SLIV table corresponding to cancellation resource patterns for uplink cancellation can be equated to uplink resource muting patterns table, par 0128) to determine at least one of a corresponding muting pattern period (length or duration for cancellation of cancellation resource pattern can be equated to muting pattern period, par 0128), a muting pattern frequency domain format or density, slot indexes or subframes where the muting pattern is to be mapped, a starting symbol (starting symbol for uplink cancellation, par 0128), a number of muting occasions per slot or subframe, or a muting occasion duration expressed in terms of number of symbols (see, receives ULCI using bits indicating a particular row of SLIV table corresponding to cancellation resource pattern for uplink cancellation, each row indicating starting symbol and duration for cancellation, par 0128. Noted, the examiner picks option to reject).
In view of the above, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains to implement the UE as taught by Fakoorian’897 into that of Ibrahim’477. The motivation would have been to improve methods, systems, devices, and apparatuses that support uplink transmission cancellation (par 0005).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ibrahim’477 in view of Fakoorian’897 as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of MolavianJazi et al (US20240022931A1, Priority Date: Feb 24, 2023).
Regarding claim 13, Ibrahim’477 modified by Fakoorian’897 discloses the UE of claim 12 (see, Fig. 2 and 9, UE in wireless communications system with inter-base station interference estimation, par 0119, 0185), wherein the at least one processor (see, Fig. 9, processor, par 0185) is configured to cause the UE to.
Ibrahim’477 discloses all the claim limitations but fails to explicitly teach:
one or more of:
determine slot indexes based at least in part on an indicated or a configured reference subcarrier spacing; or
differentiate the muting pattern frequency domain format based at least in part on a density of muted resource elements or resource blocks.
However MolavianJazi’931 from the same field of endeavor (see, Fig. 5, SR relays communication between gNB and UE, par 0186) discloses:
one or more of:
determine slot indexes (slot n can be equated to slot indexes, par 0075) based at least in part on an indicated or a configured reference subcarrier spacing (see, number of symbols or slots can be with respect to the SCS configuration including reference SCS, and thus slot n is correlated to reference SCS in SCS configuration, par 0075, 0192); or
differentiate the muting pattern frequency domain format based at least in part on a density of muted resource elements or resource blocks (note, the examiner picks option to reject).
In view of the above, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains to implement the UE as taught by MolavianJazi’931 into that of Ibrahim’477 modified by Fakoorian’897. The motivation would have been to flexibly accommodate various services/applications with different requirements and support massive connections (par 0003).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Xiong et al (US20210203397A1) discloses: FIG. 4 illustrates one example of beam cycling pattern in case of cancellation of uplink transmission with repetition. In the example, PUSCH/PUCCH transmission in the slot #n+1 is dropped. Further, Tx beam is cycled in an alternative manner. Based on the aforementioned beam cycling pattern in case of cancellation, UE will follow the beam pattern without considering the cancellation of uplink transmission. In this case, UE applies Tx beam #0 in slot #n and #n+2 and Tx beam #1 in slot #3 (par 0046).
This applies to claim 9.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to XUAN LU whose telephone number is (571)272-2844. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 7:30am-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, KWANG Yao can be reached on (571)272-3182. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, 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.
/XUAN LU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2473
Prosecution Insights