DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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.
This action is in response to communications filed on 7/8/2024.
Claims 1-20 have been examined and are rejected.
Priority
This application is a continuation of PCT/CN2022/071437 filed 1/11/2022.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 7/8/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
(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 1-5, 8-9, 12-15, & 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Matsumura et al. (US 2025/0089065 A1).
With regard to Claim 1, Matsumura teaches:
A method for information processing, comprising:
receiving, by a terminal device, first information from a network device, wherein the first information is used for determining a transform-precoder enabling state of a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH); (a UE may receive, by using the DCI/MAC CE, an indication indicating enabling or disabling of the transform precoder for the PUSCH [Matsumura: 0061-62; 0065-66]).
With regard to Claim 2, Matsumura teaches:
The method of claim 1, wherein the first information comprises indication information of the transform-precoder enabling state; (the indication may be a DCI that includes a 1-bit field indicating a CP-OFDM or DFT-s-OFDM waveform used for the PUSCH [Matsumura: 0062]).
With regard to Claim 3, Matsumura teaches:
The method of claim 2, wherein the indication information is carried in first downlink control information (DCI); (a UE may receive, by using the DCI/MAC CE, an indication indicating enabling or disabling of the transform precoder for the PUSCH [Matsumura: 0061-62; 0065-66]).
With regard to Claim 4, Matsumura teaches:
The method of claim 3, wherein the first DCI comprises at least one of: DCI for scheduling PUSCH transmission; first common DCI; or first group common DCI; (a UE may receive, by using the DCI/MAC CE, an indication indicating enabling or disabling of the transform precoder for the PUSCH [Matsumura: 0061-62; 0065-66], wherein a group-common DCI may be used [Matsumura: 0064]).
With regard to Claim 5, Matsumura teaches:
The method of claim 3, further comprising: determining, by the terminal device, a transform-precoder enabling state of the PUSCH that is after a first time interval based on a transform-precoder enabling state indicated by the first DCI, in response to determining that the transform-precoder enabling state changes; (when group-common DCI is used, waveform switching may be applied after a certain time period from ACK transmission by the UE in response to reception of DCI format 2_x [Matsumura: 0064]).
With regard to Claim 8, Matsumura teaches:
The method of claim 2, wherein the indication information is carried in a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE); (a UE may receive, by using the DCI/MAC CE, an indication indicating enabling or disabling of the transform precoder for the PUSCH, wherein the MAC CE may include a 1-bit field indicating a CP-OFDM or DFT-s-OFDM waveform used for the PUSCH [Matsumura: 0061; 0063]).
With regard to Claim 9, Matsumura teaches:
The method of claim 8, further comprising: determining, by the terminal device, a transform-precoder enabling state of the PUSCH that is after a second time interval based on the transform-precoder enabling state indicated by the MAC CE; (when dynamic waveform switching for a PUSCH is performed by using MAC CE signaling, the UE may, after receiving an indication by a MAC CE, switch a waveform after certain time from ACK transmission for a PDSCH including the MAC CE [Matsumura: 0141]).
With regard to Claims 12-15 & 19, they appear substantially similar to the limitations recited by claims 1-4 and consequently do not appear to teach or further define over the citations provided for said claims. Accordingly, claims 12-15 & 19 are rejected for the same reasons as set forth in claims 1-4.
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 of this title, 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.
Claims 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsumura et al. (US 2025/0089065 A1) in view of Ganesan et al. (US 2023/0269664 A1).
With regard to Claim 6, Matsumura teaches:
The method of claim 3, wherein the indication information indicates a transform-precoder enabling state of the PUSCH; (a UE may receive, by using the DCI/MAC CE, an indication indicating enabling or disabling of the transform precoder for the PUSCH [Matsumura: 0061-62; 0065-66]).
However, Matsumura does not teach (where underlining indicates the portion of each limitation not taught):
wherein the indication information indicates a transform-precoder enabling state of the PUSCH that is within a first time range.
In a similar field of endeavor involving enabling/disabling transform pre-coder for PUSCH [Ganesan: 0065], Ganesan discloses:
wherein the indication information indicates a transform-precoder enabling state of the PUSCH that is within a first time range; (the waveform indicated by DCI-WUS for the DL physical channels is applicable to the UE 205 during its DRX Active Time 415 (i.e., when the DRX On Timer is running), wherein both DL and UL waveform types may be configured in a same/similar manner [Ganesan: 0097; 0127-28]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Matsumura in view of Ganesan in order to utilize a transform-precoder enabling state of the PUSCH that is within a first time range in the system of Matsumura.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Matsumura with Ganesan as doing so would allow the waveform indicated by the DCI to be maintained during the active period unless otherwise indicated, thereby reducing control signaling.
With regard to Claim 7, Matsumura-Ganesan teaches:
The method of claim 6, further comprising: determining, by the terminal device, a transform-precoder enabling state of the PUSCH that is after the first time range based on a semi-statically configured transform-precoder enabling state, in response to the transform-precoder enabling state indicated by the first DCI being different from the semi-statically configured transform-precoder enabling state; (in the absence of information about DL waveform to be used for PDCCH in the next occurrence of the DRX Active Time 415, the UE 205 may use the same waveform that it used to receive the PDCCH_WUS, may use a default waveform configured as part of RRC PDCCH configuration, or may continue to use the waveform type used in the previous onDuration when the DRX onDuration timer was running, wherein both DL and UL waveform types may be configured in a same/similar manner [Ganesan: 0101; 0127-28]).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsumura et al. (US 2025/0089065 A1) in view of Gu et al. (US 2024/0349278 A1).
With regard to Claim 10, Matsumura teaches the method of claim 2, but does not teach:
wherein the indication information is carried in configuration information of a configured grant (CG) resource; and wherein the configuration information of the CG resource comprises at least one of: activation DCI of the CG resource; second common DCI; or second group common DCI.
In a similar field of endeavor involving dynamically switching between CP-OFDM waveform and a DFT-S-OFDM waveform [Gu: 0003], Gu discloses:
wherein the indication information is carried in configuration information of a configured grant (CG) resource; and wherein the configuration information of the CG resource comprises at least one of: activation DCI of the CG resource; second common DCI; or second group common DCI; (the terminal determines dynamic waveform switch or the switched waveform of the CG-scheduled uplink transmission based on the dynamic waveform switch or the switched waveform indicated by the first signaling, wherein indication information of waveform switch is configured in activation DCI which may be CS-RNTI scrambled DCI or retransmission DCI [Gu: 0140-42]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Matsumura in view of Gu in order to carried indication information in configuration information of a configured grant (CG) resource in the system of Matsumura.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Matsumura with Gu as doing so would reduce control signaling by allowing the indication information associated with the CG activation to apply to subsequent transmissions.
Claims 11 & 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsumura et al. (US 2025/0089065 A1) in view of Yuan et al. (US 2023/0344555 A1).
With regard to Claim 11, Matsumura teaches the method of claim 1, but does not teach:
wherein the transform-precoder enabling state remains unchanged during PUSCH repetitions.
In a similar field of endeavor involving enabling/disabling transform precoding to utilize DFT-s-OFDM or CP-OFDM waveforms [Yuan: 0049], Yuan discloses:
wherein the transform-precoder enabling state remains unchanged during PUSCH repetitions; (the UE 120 may transmit, and the base station 110 may receive, a plurality of PUSCH repetitions, wherein PUSCH repetitions may be transmitted using the same waveform [Yuan: 0064]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Matsumura in view of Yuan in order to allow the transform-precoder enabling state to remain unchanged during PUSCH repetitions in the system of Matsumura.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Matsumura with Yuan as doing so would avoid the need to signal waveform changes thereby reducing control signaling while increasing PUSCH transport block decoding probability.
With regard to Claim 20, it appears substantially similar to the limitations recited by claim 11 and consequently does not appear to teach or further define over the citations provided for said claim. Accordingly, claim 20 is rejected for the same reasons as set forth in claim 11.
Claims 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsumura et al. (US 2025/0089065 A1) in view of Qian et al. (US 11,452,140 B2).
With regard to Claim 16, Matsumura teaches the method of claim 12, but does not teach:
wherein the first information comprises a first downlink (DL) signal, and the first DL signal is used for obtaining measurement information.
In a similar field of endeavor involving enabling transform precoding, Qian discloses:
wherein the first information comprises a first downlink (DL) signal, and the first DL signal is used for obtaining measurement information; (determining the waveform configuration or whether the transform precoding is enabled or not according to measurement results of the channel by comparing a reference signal received power RSRP obtained by measuring a synchronization signal block [Qian: 3:65-4:11; 18:47-61]. Examiner notes that the UE determines the RSRP by measuring a SSB (i.e. DL reference signal) transmitted from the base station).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Matsumura in view of Qian in order to utilize a first DL signal for obtaining measurement information in the system of Matsumura.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine Matsumura with Qian as doing so allows the waveform to be selected according to current radio channel conditions.
With regard to Claim 17, Matsumura-Qian teaches:
The method of claim 16, further comprising: receiving, by the network device, second information from the terminal device, wherein the second information indicates the transform-precoder enabling state of the PUSCH; (the transform precoding (i.e. DFT-s-OFDM) will be applied by the uplink shared channel carrying the data payload in the message A that is transmitted from the UE to the network device [Qian: 15:47-58; 16:46-60; 17:3-15]).
With regard to Claim 18, Matsumura-Qian teaches:
The method of claim 17, wherein the second information comprises a physical random access channel (PRACH), and the PRACH indicates a transform-precoder enabling state of a PUSCH for MsgA or Msg3 in a random access procedure; and wherein a resource of the PRACH corresponds to the transform-precoder enabling state of the PUSCH; (receiving, from a base station, system information including a configuration for a message A (MsgA) of a two-step random access procedure, the MsgA including physical random access channel (PRACH) and a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) in the two-step random access procedure, wherein the UE transmits to the base station the PRACH and the PUSCH based on the configuration [Qian: Claim 1]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Levitsky et al. (US 2022/0123983 A1) which teaches a base station may transmit a dynamic indication (e.g., via a medium access control control element (MAC-CE)) to a UE to switch from an initial MCS table (e.g., that is indicated by an RRC configuration) to a new MCS table, and enables the UE to determine a transform precoder activation state (e.g., enabled or disabled) and/or a transmit waveform type (e.g., DFT-s-OFDM or CP-OFDM) based at least in part on the new MCS table that is indicated [Levitsky: 0065].
In the case of amendments, Applicant is respectfully requested to indicate the portion(s) of the specification which dictate(s) the structure relied on for proper interpretation and support, for ascertaining the metes and bounds of the claimed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AUSTIN J MOREAU whose telephone number is (571) 272-5179. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 - 6:00 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 Song can be reached on 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.
/AUSTIN J MOREAU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2446
Prosecution Insights