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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
Acknowledgment is made of the information disclosure statement filed on November 15, 2024, and March 5, 2025. U.S. patent applications, foreign patents, and non-patent literature documents have been considered.
Priority
Applicant cannot rely upon the certified copy of the foreign priority application to overcome this rejection because a translation of said application has not been made of record in accordance with 37 CFR 1.55. When an English language translation of a non-English language foreign application is required, the translation must be that of the certified copy (of the foreign application as filed) submitted together with a statement that the translation of the certified copy is accurate. See MPEP §§ 215 and 216.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because Figure 1 appears blurry as compared to the other figures. 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 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)(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 1-2, 4-5, 8-9, 11, 14-15, and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) as being unpatentable over 3GPP TSG RAN WG1 Meeting NR#3, “Discussion on Resource Allocation and TBS Determination”, R1-1715885, Nagoya Japan, September 18-21, 2017, herein referred to as “R1-1715885”. This reference was provided in the information disclosure statement dated March 25, 2025.
Regarding Claim 1,
R1-1715885 discloses: An information transmission method applied to a communication apparatus, the method comprising:
receiving first indication information, wherein the first indication information indicates a first time domain resource in a first time period, the first time period comprises two or more slots, the first time domain resource is located in at least M slots in the first time period, and M is an integer greater than 1
(Section 3.2, page 7)
Proposal 9: For multi-slot scheduling, a single PDSCH or PUSCH is mapped within a slot.
In terms of resource allocation, multi-slot aggregation may need to support non-contiguous time-domain resource allocation. For instance, UL transmission with multi-slot aggregation may need to reserve DL resources for possible DL control channel at the beginning of each aggregated slot. Similarly, DL transmission with multi-slot aggregation may need to reserve UL resources for UL control channel at the end of aggregated slot(s). These kinds of slot formats in terms of DL portion and UL portion can be different slot-by-slot. In case, following options can be considered for time-domain resource allocation across multiple aggregated slots:
Option 1: Scheduling DCI indicates one of RRC configured sets for time-domain resource allocation parameters across aggregated slots.
Note: PDSCH is configured over multiple slots, and the multiple slots correspond to the time period. The RRC configuration in Option 1 above is being interpreted as the first indication information.
receiving scheduling information, wherein the scheduling information indicates a second time domain resource for receiving first data, the second time domain resource is a subset or a universal set of the first time domain resource, and the second time domain resource belongs to at least two slots
(Section 3.2, pages 7-8)
Option 1: Scheduling DCI indicates one of RRC configured sets for time-domain resource allocation parameters across aggregated slots.
In case of Option I, RRC configured set for time-domain resource allocation would be consists of
starting slot index, ending slot index (or the number of aggregated slots), stating symbol index within a slot for each aggregated slot, and ending symbol index within a slot for each aggregated slot. In other words, it is necessary to configure RRC configured sets for multi-slot case in addition to RRC configured set for one slot case. Since the number of parameters within a set would be large, it could be inefficient in terms of scheduling flexibility if the RA bit field size is kept to be constant. Alternatively, it may need to increase RA bit field size for multi-slot case compared to one slot case.
wherein the at least two slots comprise a first slot, the second time domain resource comprises a first symbol and a second symbol in the first slot, the first symbol and the second symbol are separated by N symbols, the first symbol and the second symbol are two adjacent symbols on the second time domain resource, and N is an integer greater than or equal to 1;
or the at least two slots comprise the first slot and a second slot, and a symbol that is in the first slot and that is comprised in the second time domain resource is different from a symbol that is in the second slot and that is comprised in the second time domain resource;
or a quantity of symbols that are in at least one of the at least two slots and that are comprised in the second time domain resource is 1; and receiving the first data on the second time domain resource.
(Section 3.2, pages 7-8)
Option 1: Scheduling DCI indicates one of RRC configured sets for time-domain resource allocation parameters across aggregated slots.
In case of Option I, RRC configured set for time-domain resource allocation would be consists of
starting slot index, ending slot index (or the number of aggregated slots), stating symbol index within a slot for each aggregated slot, and ending symbol index within a slot for each aggregated slot. In other words, it is necessary to configure RRC configured sets for multi-slot case in addition to RRC configured set for one slot case. Since the number of parameters within a set would be large, it could be inefficient in terms of scheduling flexibility if the RA bit field size is kept to be constant. Alternatively, it may need to increase RA bit field size for multi-slot case compared to one slot case.
Note: The underlined portions of the alternative limitations are being addressed. Option 2 of the reference provides time-domain resource allocation of one slot applied to all of the slots. Option 2 is distinguished from Option 1 since each slot has its own start and end symbol.
Regarding Claim 2,
R1-1715885 discloses: The method according to claim 1, further comprising:
receiving second indication information, wherein the second indication information indicates whether a symbol comprised in the first time domain resource is for receiving data, and the data comprises the first data.
(Section 3.2, pages 7-8)
Option 1: Scheduling DCI indicates one of RRC configured sets for time-domain resource allocation parameters across aggregated slots.
In case of Option I, RRC configured set for time-domain resource allocation would be consists of
starting slot index, ending slot index (or the number of aggregated slots), stating symbol index within a slot for each aggregated slot, and ending symbol index within a slot for each aggregated slot. In other words, it is necessary to configure RRC configured sets for multi-slot case in addition to RRC configured set for one slot case. Since the number of parameters within a set would be large, it could be inefficient in terms of scheduling flexibility if the RA bit field size is kept to be constant. Alternatively, it may need to increase RA bit field size for multi-slot case compared to one slot case.
Regarding Claim 4,
R1-1715885 discloses: The method according to claim 1, further comprising: receiving time domain position information, wherein the time domain position information indicates an interval between any two adjacent symbols on the first time domain resource.
(Section 3.2, page 7)
Option 1: Scheduling DCI indicates one of RRC configured sets for time-domain resource allocation parameters across aggregated slots.
Option 2: Time-domain resource allocation parameters for one slot case are applied to all the aggregated slots.
Option 3: Time-domain resource allocation parameters for one slot case are applied to certain aggregated slot(s). Remaining time-domain resources across aggregated slot are configured by additional RRC signalling and/or DCI indication.
Regarding Claim 5,
R1-1715885 discloses: The method according to claim 1, further comprising: determining the second time domain resource based on a slot for receiving the second indication information, the first time domain resource, and the scheduling information.
4.4. TBS determination for multi-slot aggregation
Even though multi-slot aggregation is configured and used, the maximum TBS is determined based on the one slot case. Assuming multi-slot aggregation is used for scheduling each TB in each slot repeatedly, TBS determination for multi-slot aggregation case would be dependent on MCS and reference REs in a slot. In terms of defining the reference REs in a slot, we can consider 'the smallest' or 'average' or 'the largest' Res among the scheduled slots. For example, if there are full slot scheduled and the largest reference REs is chosen, full slot case is assumed for TBS determination. In case multi-slot is also supported for mapping a TB across multiple slot without repetition/retransmission, TBS computation of single slot case may be expanded to the multiple slot case.
Regarding Claim 8,
Claim 8 is rejected on the same grounds set forth in Claim 1.
R1-1715885 discloses: An information transmission method applied to a communication apparatus, the method comprising: sending first indication information, wherein the first indication information indicates a first time domain resource in a first time period, the first time period comprises two or more slots, the first time domain resource is located in at least M slots in the first time period, and M is an integer greater than 1
(Section 3.2, page 7)
Proposal 9: For multi-slot scheduling, a single PDSCH or PUSCH is mapped within a slot.
In terms of resource allocation, multi-slot aggregation may need to support non-contiguous time-domain resource allocation. For instance, UL transmission with multi-slot aggregation may need to reserve DL resources for possible DL control channel at the beginning of each aggregated slot. Similarly, DL transmission with multi-slot aggregation may need to reserve UL resources for UL control channel at the end of aggregated slot(s). These kinds of slot formats in terms of DL portion and UL portion can be different slot-by-slot. In case, following options can be considered for time-domain resource allocation across multiple aggregated slots:
Option 1: Scheduling DCI indicates one of RRC configured sets for time-domain resource allocation parameters across aggregated slots.
Note: PDSCH is configured over multiple slots, and the multiple slots correspond to the time period. The RRC configuration in Option 1 above is being interpreted as the first indication information.
sending scheduling information, wherein the scheduling information indicates a second time domain resource for receiving first data, the second time domain resource is a subset or a universal set of the first time domain resource, and the second time domain resource belongs to at least two slots
(Section 3.2, pages 7-8)
Option 1: Scheduling DCI indicates one of RRC configured sets for time-domain resource allocation parameters across aggregated slots.
In case of Option I, RRC configured set for time-domain resource allocation would be consists of
starting slot index, ending slot index (or the number of aggregated slots), stating symbol index within a slot for each aggregated slot, and ending symbol index within a slot for each aggregated slot. In other words, it is necessary to configure RRC configured sets for multi-slot case in addition to RRC configured set for one slot case. Since the number of parameters within a set would be large, it could be inefficient in terms of scheduling flexibility if the RA bit field size is kept to be constant. Alternatively, it may need to increase RA bit field size for multi-slot case compared to one slot case.
wherein the at least two slots comprise a first slot, the second time domain resource comprises a first symbol and a second symbol in the first slot, the first symbol and the second symbol are separated by N symbols, the first symbol and the second symbol are two adjacent symbols on the second time domain resource, and N is an integer greater than or equal to 1;
or the at least two slots comprise the first slot and a second slot, and a symbol that is in the first slot and that is comprised in the second time domain resource is different from a symbol that is in the second slot and that is comprised in the second time domain resource;
or a quantity of symbols that are in at least one of the at least two slots and that are comprised in the second time domain resource is 1; and sending the first data on the second time domain resource.
(Section 3.2, pages 7-8)
Option 1: Scheduling DCI indicates one of RRC configured sets for time-domain resource allocation parameters across aggregated slots.
In case of Option I, RRC configured set for time-domain resource allocation would be consists of
starting slot index, ending slot index (or the number of aggregated slots), stating symbol index within a slot for each aggregated slot, and ending symbol index within a slot for each aggregated slot. In other words, it is necessary to configure RRC configured sets for multi-slot case in addition to RRC configured set for one slot case. Since the number of parameters within a set would be large, it could be inefficient in terms of scheduling flexibility if the RA bit field size is kept to be constant. Alternatively, it may need to increase RA bit field size for multi-slot case compared to one slot case.
Note: The underlined portions of the alternative limitations are being addressed. Option 2 of the reference provides time-domain resource allocation of one slot applied to all of the slots. Option 2 is distinguished from Option 1 since each slot has its own start and end symbol.
Regarding Claim 9,
Claim 9 is rejected on the same grounds set forth in Claim 2.
Regarding Claim 11,
Claim 11 is rejected on the same grounds set forth in Claim 4.
Regarding Claim 14,
Claim 14 is rejected on the same grounds set forth in Claim 1.
R1-1715885 discloses: A communications apparatus comprising: at least one processor; and a memory storing programming instructions for execution by the as least one processor, the programming instructions instructing the communication apparatus to perform operations comprising:
receiving first indication information, wherein the first indication information indicates a first time domain resource in a first time period, the first time period comprises two or more slots, the first time domain resource is located in at least M slots in the first time period, and M is an integer greater than 1
(Section 3.2, page 7)
Proposal 9: For multi-slot scheduling, a single PDSCH or PUSCH is mapped within a slot.
In terms of resource allocation, multi-slot aggregation may need to support non-contiguous time-domain resource allocation. For instance, UL transmission with multi-slot aggregation may need to reserve DL resources for possible DL control channel at the beginning of each aggregated slot. Similarly, DL transmission with multi-slot aggregation may need to reserve UL resources for UL control channel at the end of aggregated slot(s). These kinds of slot formats in terms of DL portion and UL portion can be different slot-by-slot. In case, following options can be considered for time-domain resource allocation across multiple aggregated slots:
Option 1: Scheduling DCI indicates one of RRC configured sets for time-domain resource allocation parameters across aggregated slots.
Note: PDSCH is configured over multiple slots, and the multiple slots correspond to the time period. The RRC configuration in Option 1 above is being interpreted as the first indication information.
receiving scheduling information, wherein the scheduling information indicates a second time domain resource for receiving first data, the second time domain resource is a subset or a universal set of the first time domain resource, and the second time domain resource belongs to at least two slots
(Section 3.2, pages 7-8)
Option 1: Scheduling DCI indicates one of RRC configured sets for time-domain resource allocation parameters across aggregated slots.
In case of Option I, RRC configured set for time-domain resource allocation would be consists of
starting slot index, ending slot index (or the number of aggregated slots), stating symbol index within a slot for each aggregated slot, and ending symbol index within a slot for each aggregated slot. In other words, it is necessary to configure RRC configured sets for multi-slot case in addition to RRC configured set for one slot case. Since the number of parameters within a set would be large, it could be inefficient in terms of scheduling flexibility if the RA bit field size is kept to be constant. Alternatively, it may need to increase RA bit field size for multi-slot case compared to one slot case.
wherein the at least two slots comprise a first slot, the second time domain resource comprises a first symbol and a second symbol in the first slot, the first symbol and the second symbol are separated by N symbols, the first symbol and the second symbol are two adjacent symbols on the second time domain resource, and N is an integer greater than or equal to 1;
or the at least two slots comprise the first slot and a second slot, and a symbol that is in the first slot and that is comprised in the second time domain resource is different from a symbol that is in the second slot and that is comprised in the second time domain resource;
or a quantity of symbols that are in at least one of the at least two slots and that are comprised in the second time domain resource is 1; and receiving the first data on the second time domain resource.
(Section 3.2, pages 7-8)
Option 1: Scheduling DCI indicates one of RRC configured sets for time-domain resource allocation parameters across aggregated slots.
In case of Option I, RRC configured set for time-domain resource allocation would be consists of
starting slot index, ending slot index (or the number of aggregated slots), stating symbol index within a slot for each aggregated slot, and ending symbol index within a slot for each aggregated slot. In other words, it is necessary to configure RRC configured sets for multi-slot case in addition to RRC configured set for one slot case. Since the number of parameters within a set would be large, it could be inefficient in terms of scheduling flexibility if the RA bit field size is kept to be constant. Alternatively, it may need to increase RA bit field size for multi-slot case compared to one slot case.
Note: The underlined portions of the alternative limitations are being addressed. Option 2 of the reference provides time-domain resource allocation of one slot applied to all of the slots. Option 2 is distinguished from Option 1 since each slot has its own start and end symbol.
Regarding Claim 15,
Claim 15 is rejected on the same grounds set forth in Claim 2.
Regarding Claim 17,
Claim 17 is rejected on the same grounds set forth in Claim 4.
Regarding Claim 18,
Claim 18 is rejected on the same grounds set forth in Claim 5.
.
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 3, 10, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over R1-1715885 in view of Liu et. al. (U.S. Pat. Pub. 2023/0224027), herein referred to as “Liu.”
Regarding Claim 3,
R1-1715885 does not disclose all of the limitations of Claim 3.
However, Liu discloses: The method according to claim 1, wherein the first indication information further comprises a slot offset, and the slot offset indicates a slot index of a 1st slot in the first time period.
[0040] Both the first time domain index and the second time domain index are in unit of at least one of a slot and a symbol. For example, in some embodiments of the present application, the first time domain index and the second time domain index are symbol indexes, e.g., symbol#10 and symbol#12 respectively. In some other embodiments of the present application, the first time domain index and the second time domain index are slot indexes, e.g., slot#1 and slot#2. In some other embodiments of the present application, the first time domain index and the second time domain index are slot and symbol indexes, e.g., symbol#10 of slot#1, and symbol#12 of slot#2. That is, offset value(s) can only applied to the time domain index in unit of a symbol index, or only applied to a slot index, or applied to both the symbol index and slot index. The offset value(s) applied to the symbol index and slot index can be the same or different.
R1-1715885 in view of Liu are considered to be analogous because they pertain to communications over a wireless network. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify R1-1715885 to include the concept of a slot offset as taught by Liu as to aid in reducing the complexity of demodulating data in a wireless network.
Regarding Claim 10,
Claim 10 is rejected on the same grounds set forth in Claim 3.
Regarding Claim 16,
Claim 16 is rejected on the same grounds set forth in Claim 3.
Claims 6-7, 12-13, 10, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over R1-1715885 in view of Liang et. al. (WO 2020164102 A1), herein referred to as “Liang.”
Regarding Claim 6,
R1-1715885 does not disclose all of the limitations of Claim 6.
However, Liang discloses: The method according to claim 1, wherein that a size of the first data is determined based on a first parameter, and the first parameter comprises at least one of the following:
a quantity Nsymb sh of symbols comprised in the second time domain resource, an overhead NDMRS PRB of a demodulation reference signal comprised in the second time domain resource, a higher layer signaling configuration overhead Noh PRB, and a quantity nPRB of physical resource blocks comprised in the second time domain resource.
Pages 12-13
PNG
media_image1.png
104
556
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
272
554
media_image2.png
Greyscale
R1-1715885 in view of Liang are considered to be analogous because they pertain to communications over a wireless network. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify R1-1715885 to include the concepts various quantities in a parameter contained in a time-domain resource as taught by Liang as to aid in reducing the complexity of demodulating data in a wireless network.
Regarding Claim 7,
R1-1715885 does not disclose all of the limitations of Claim 7.
However, Liang discloses: The method according to claim 6, wherein the first parameter satisfies the following relationship:
PNG
media_image3.png
52
292
media_image3.png
Greyscale
wherein
PNG
media_image4.png
54
306
media_image4.png
Greyscale
is a quantity of subcarriers comprised in a physical resource block in frequency domain.
Pages 12-13
PNG
media_image1.png
104
556
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
272
554
media_image2.png
Greyscale
R1-1715885 in view of Liang are considered to be analogous because they pertain to communications over a wireless network. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify R1-1715885 to include the concept of subcarriers in a physical resource block various quantities in a parameter contained in a time-domain resource as taught by Liang as to aid in reducing the complexity of demodulating data in a wireless network.
Regarding Claim 12,
Claim 12 is rejected on the same grounds set forth in Claim 6.
Regarding Claim 13,
Claim 13 is rejected on the same grounds set forth in Claim 7.
Regarding Claim 19,
Claim 19 is rejected on the same grounds set forth in Claim 6.
Regarding Claim 20,
Claim 20 is rejected on the same grounds set forth in Claim 7.
Conclusion
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 JESSE P. SAMLUK whose telephone number is (571)270-5607. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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, Derrick Ferris can be reached on 571-272-3123. 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.
/JESSE P. SAMLUK/Examiner, Art Unit 2411
/DERRICK W FERRIS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2411
Prosecution Insights