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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the application filed on 08/06/2024.
Claims 1-20 are currently pending.
Claim 19 is objected to as being dependent upon rejected base claims.
Claims 1-18, 20 are rejected.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 3 recites the limitation “based on a location of the configured time and frequency resource including one or more resources within a threshold proximity of at least one of:”.
First, it is not clear which one of but not both the location or the configured time and frequency resource that is including one or more resources.
Second, it also not clear which one of the location or the configured time and frequency resource or the [included] one or more resources is within a threshold proximity.
Finally, Examiner is unable to ascertain how a threshold proximity is determined. Thus, the metes and bounds of a threshold proximity are deemed to be vague.
Accordingly, claim 3 is rejected for being vague and indefinite.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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.
The factual inquiries 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.
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 1, 9, 11-12, 14-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Chunyan Gao et al (US 20140146719 A1) in view of Marian Rudolf et al (US 63645676 filed on May 10, 2024, represented herein by US 20250266947 A1).
For Claim 1, Gao discloses an apparatus for wireless communication at a user equipment (UE), comprising: one or more memories storing processor-executable code; and one or more processors coupled to the one or more memories (Gao teaches, in Fig. 1B, a block diagram of a UE that includes: a TRANSCEIVER MODULE 21, PROCESSOR MODULE 22 and MEMORY 23), at least one processor of the one or more processors configured to cause the UE to:
receive configuration information associated with scheduling an uplink shared channel transmission in a configured time and frequency resource (Gao teaches, in ¶ 0074, that In step S3, the eNB #1 sends configuration information, which include information about the REs to be muted, to the UE); and
selectively transmit in at least one portion of the configured time and frequency resource, scheduled for the uplink shared channel (Goa teaches, in ¶ 0071, that the term "muting" means that the RE to be muted is not transmitted, or is transmitted with zero power), in accordance with a rule (Gao teaches, in ¶ 0094, that For example, the rules can be: [0094] I. Muting REs should avoid the UCI to be transmitted in PUSCH).
Gao fails to expressly disclose that the rule is at least one of: a frequency domain resource allocation rule, a time domain resource allocation rule, or a slot type rule.
However, Rudolf, in the analogous art, discloses that the rule is at least one of: a frequency domain resource allocation rule, a time domain resource allocation rule, or a slot type rule (Rudolf teaches, in ¶ 0152, The UE may determine an SBFD configuration for a symbol or a slot or a set of symbols or a set of slots using higher layer parameters provided for an SBFD configuration and based on reception or transmission conditions such as a slot type ‘D’, ‘U’, or ‘F). Rudolf also teaches, in ¶ 0254, that the UE applies the UL muting pattern to one or more REs of one or more indicated symbols of the PUSCH transmission in the slot, else the UE does not apply the UL muting pattern to the PUSCH and transmits the PUSCH in the slot, or the UE may drop or defer the PUSCH transmission in the slot.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system in Gao with the Full-duplex (FD) communications taught in Rudolf. The motivation is to offer increased spectral efficiency, improved capacity, and reduced latency in wireless networks [Rudolf: ¶ 0125].
For Claim 9, please refer to the rejection of Claim 1, above.
For Claim 11, Gao discloses all of the claimed subject matter with the exception of applying an uplink resource muting pattern to the configured time and frequency resource.
However, Rudolf, in the analogous art, discloses applying an uplink resource muting pattern to the configured time and frequency resource (Rudolf teaches, in ¶ 0254, that the UE applies the UL muting pattern to one or more REs of one or more indicated symbols of the PUSCH transmission in the slot).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system in Gao with the Full-duplex (FD) communications taught in Rudolf. The motivation is to offer increased spectral efficiency, improved capacity, and reduced latency in wireless networks [Rudolf: ¶ 0125].
For Claim 12, Gao discloses a method, wherein the rule is a frequency domain resource allocation rule, and wherein selectively transmitting in the at least one portion of the configured time and frequency resource comprises: selectively transmitting in the at least one portion of the configured time and frequency resource in accordance with an uplink shared channel priority level or as a response to a received indication (Gao teaches, in ¶ 0074, that In step S3, the eNB #1 sends configuration information, which include information about the REs to be muted, to the UE. Gao teaches, in ¶ 0094, that For example, the rules can be: [0094] I. Muting REs should avoid the UCI to be transmitted in PUSCH).
For Claim 14, Gao discloses a method, wherein the rule is a time domain resource allocation rule, and wherein selectively transmitting in the at least one portion of the configured time and frequency resource comprises: skipping the uplink shared channel transmission in accordance with the time domain resource allocation rule (Gao teaches, in ¶ 0074, that In step S3, the eNB #1 sends configuration information, which include information about the REs to be muted, to the UE. Gao teaches, in ¶ 0094, that For example, the rules can be: [0094] I. Muting REs should avoid the UCI to be transmitted in PUSCH).
For Claim 15, Gao discloses a method, wherein the uplink shared channel transmission is skipped (Gao teaches, in ¶ 0094, that For example, the rules can be: [0094] I. Muting REs should avoid the UCI to be transmitted in PUSCH).
Gao fails to expressly disclose based on the uplink shared channel transmission being allocated in less than a threshold quantity of resources and partially overlapping with one or more muted resources.
However, Rudolf, in the analogous art, discloses based on the uplink shared channel transmission being allocated in less than a threshold quantity of resources and partially overlapping with one or more muted resources (Rudolf teaches, in ¶ 0152, An UL frequency sub-band, in time-domain resources that also include DL frequency sub-bands, may be located in the center of a carrier, or at the edge of the carrier, or at a selected frequency-domain position of the carrier. The allocations of DL sub-bands and UL subbands may also partially or even fully overlap).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system in Gao with the Full-duplex (FD) communications taught in Rudolf. The motivation is to offer increased spectral efficiency, improved capacity, and reduced latency in wireless networks [Rudolf: ¶ 0125].
For Claim 16, Gao discloses all of the claimed subject matter with the exception of in accordance with a type of the configured time and frequency resource.
However, Rudolf, in the analogous art, discloses in accordance with a type of the configured time and frequency resource (Rudolf teaches, in ¶ 0155, that The UE may determine an SBFD configuration for a symbol or a slot or a set of symbols or a set of slots using higher layer parameters provided for an SBFD configuration and based on reception or transmission conditions such as for a slot or symbol type ‘D’, ‘U’, or ‘F or a slot or a symbol type ‘SBFD’ or ‘non-SBFD’ or for an SBFD subband type such as ‘SBFD DL subband’, ‘SBFD UL subband’, or ‘SBFD Flexible subband’).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system in Gao with the Full-duplex (FD) communications taught in Rudolf. The motivation is to offer increased spectral efficiency, improved capacity, and reduced latency in wireless networks [Rudolf: ¶ 0125].
For Claim 17, please refer to the rejection of Claim 1, above.
Claims 2, 4-7, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chunyan Gao et al (US 20140146719 A1) in view of Marian Rudolf et al (US 63645676 filed on May 10, 2024, represented herein by US 20250266947 A1) as applied to claim 1 or 17 above, and further in view of Qian Zhang et al (US 63660092 filed on June 14, 2024, represented herein by US 20250386350 A1).
For Claim 2, Gao and Rudolf disclose all of the claimed subject matter with the exception of in accordance with whether at least a threshold quantity of resource blocks is allocated in the configured time and frequency resource.
However, Zhang, in the analogous art, discloses in accordance with whether at least a threshold quantity of resource blocks is allocated in the configured time and frequency resource (Zhang teaches, in ¶ 0033, that transmitting the PUSCH message based on the PUSCH message being allocated with less than a threshold quantity of resource blocks).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system in Gao and Rudolf with the resource muting indication taught in Zhang. The motivation is to communicate in accordance with the resource muting pattern based on reception of the indication [Zhang: ¶ 0008].
For Claim 4, Gao and Rudolf disclose all of the claimed subject matter with the exception of in accordance with whether at least a threshold quantity of symbols is allocated in the configured time and frequency resource.
However, Zhang, in the analogous art, discloses in accordance with whether at least a threshold quantity of symbols is allocated in the configured time and frequency resource (Zhang teaches, in ¶ 0067, receiving the PUSCH message without the first set of muted resource elements being muted based on the PUSCH message being allocated with less than a threshold quantity of resource blocks, being allocated with less than a threshold quantity of symbols, or both).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system in Gao and Rudolf with the resource muting indication taught in Zhang. The motivation is to communicate in accordance with the resource muting pattern based on reception of the indication [Zhang: ¶ 0008].
For Claim 5, Gao and Rudolf disclose all of the claimed subject matter with the exception of in accordance with whether a quantity of allocated symbols in the configured time and frequency resource satisfies a threshold.
However, Zhang, in the analogous art, discloses in accordance with whether a quantity of allocated symbols in the configured time and frequency resource satisfies a threshold (Zhang teaches, in ¶ 0067, receiving the PUSCH message without the first set of muted resource elements being muted based on the PUSCH message being allocated with less than a threshold quantity of resource blocks, being allocated with less than a threshold quantity of symbols, or both).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system in Gao and Rudolf with the resource muting indication taught in Zhang. The motivation is to communicate in accordance with the resource muting pattern based on reception of the indication [Zhang: ¶ 0008].
For Claim 6, Gao and Rudolf disclose all of the claimed subject matter with the exception to receive activation signaling associated with activating selectively transmitting in the at least one portion of the configured time and frequency resource.
However, Zhang, in the analogous art, discloses to receive activation signaling associated with activating selectively transmitting in the at least one portion of the configured time and frequency resource (Zhang teaches, in ¶ 0034, receiving a first control message that configures the UE with the one or more resource muting patterns and receiving a second control message that includes one or more bits that indicates activation or deactivation of the resource muting pattern, where the indication to operate in accordance with the resource muting pattern may be based on the one or more bits).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system in Gao and Rudolf with the resource muting indication taught in Zhang. The motivation is to communicate in accordance with the resource muting pattern based on reception of the indication [Zhang: ¶ 0008].
For Claim 7, Gao and Rudolf disclose all of the claimed subject matter with the exception of transmit a capability indicator identifying whether the UE supports the activation signaling; and receive the activation signaling as a response to transmitting the capability indicator.
However, Zhang, in the analogous art, discloses transmit a capability indicator identifying whether the UE supports the activation signaling; and receive the activation signaling as a response to transmitting the capability indicator (Zhang teaches, in ¶ 0089, that the UE may transmit one or more muting capability messages to the network entity, where the one or more muting capability messages indicate UE support for uplink resource muting in accordance with one or more uplink resource muting patterns … the network entity may configure the UE with one or more uplink resource muting patterns and transmit a control message that may activate or deactivate respective uplink resource muting patterns for use at the UE).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system in Gao and Rudolf with the resource muting indication taught in Zhang. The motivation is to communicate in accordance with the resource muting pattern based on reception of the indication [Zhang: ¶ 0008].
For Claim 20, Gao and Rudolf disclose all of the claimed subject matter with the exception that activation signaling for the selective transmission is conveyed via scheduling downlink control information.
However, Zhang, in the analogous art, discloses that activation signaling for the selective transmission is conveyed via scheduling downlink control information (Zhang teaches, in ¶ 0145, that the network entity 105-a may transmit a muting pattern indication 235, which may be an example of a second control message (e.g., a medium access control-control element (MAC-CE) message, a group common (GC)-DCI message, or a dynamic DCI message). In some examples, the muting pattern indication 235 may activate or deactivate one or more uplink resource muting patterns at the UE 115-a).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system in Gao and Rudolf with the resource muting indication taught in Zhang. The motivation is to communicate in accordance with the resource muting pattern based on reception of the indication [Zhang: ¶ 0008].
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chunyan Gao et al (US 20140146719 A1) in view of Marian Rudolf et al (US 63645676 filed on May 10, 2024, represented herein by US 20250266947 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Qiaoyang Ye et al (US 20210226760 A1).
For Claim 3, Gao and Rudolf disclose all of the claimed subject matter with the exception of based on a location of the configured time and frequency resource including one or more resources within a threshold proximity of at least one of: an edge of an uplink subband an edge of a downlink subband, or a first or last downlink usable physical resource block in the downlink subband.
However, Ye, in the analogous art, discloses based on a location of the configured time and frequency resource including one or more resources within a threshold proximity of at least one of: an edge of an uplink subband an edge of a downlink subband, or a first or last downlink usable physical resource block in the downlink subband (Ye teaches, in ¶ 0103, that when the considered PRB(s)/NB(s)/WB(s) are at the system band edge, all the above examples can be extended to CRS muting outside the considered PRB(s)/NB(s)/WB(s) in addition to X PRBs at the side within the system bandwidth).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system in Gao and Rudolf with the CRS transmission in wider bandwidth taught in Ye. The motivation is to improve UE performance [Ye: ¶ 0020].
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chunyan Gao et al (US 20140146719 A1) in view of Marian Rudolf et al (US 63645676 filed on May 10, 2024, represented herein by US 20250266947 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Qian Zhang et al (US 63660092 filed on June 14, 2024, represented herein by US 20250386350 A1) & JIANXUN Ai et al (WO 2018202113 A1).
For Claim 8, Gao, Rudolf and Zhang disclose all of the claimed subject matter with the exception that the activation signaling is conveyed via a value in a field of non-scheduling downlink control information, and wherein the field is at least one of: a modulation and coding scheme field or a frequency domain resource allocation field.
However, Ai, in the analogous art, discloses that the activation signaling is conveyed via a value in a field of non-scheduling downlink control information, and wherein the field is at least one of: a modulation and coding scheme field or a frequency domain resource allocation field (Ai teaches, in summary of invention, that The uplink-assigned frequency domain information and the MCS information; if the unscheduled radio resource is a non-scheduled downlink assignment, the DCI carries downlink assignment information of the unscheduled radio resource, where the downlink … allocation information includes at least one of the following information: frequency domain information of the downlink assignment, and MCS information).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system in Gao and Rudolf with the CRS transmission in wider bandwidth allocation information taught in Ai. The motivation is to implement radio resource configuration for each UE when multiple UEs share the use of the unscheduled radio resource.
Claims 10, 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chunyan Gao et al (US 20140146719 A1) in view of Marian Rudolf et al (US 63645676 filed on May 10, 2024, represented herein by US 20250266947 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Seyed Fakoorian et al (US 20250184104 A1).
For Claim 10, Gao and Rudolf disclose all of the claimed subject matter with the exception of in accordance with a location of the configured time and frequency resource within an uplink sub-band.
However, Fakoorian, in the analogous art, discloses in accordance with a location of the configured time and frequency resource within an uplink sub-band (Fakoorian teaches, in ¶ 0075, that Slot N+2 may be an SBFD slot and may include DL sub-bands, guard bands, and a UL sub-band. Slot N, slot N+1, and slot N+2 may each include a PUSCH (PUSCH 1, PUSCH 2, and PUSCH 3). The PUSCH may correspond to the BWP of claims slot N and slot N+1. The PUSCH may correspond to a UL band in slot N+2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system in Gao and Rudolf with the multi-grant taught in Fakoorian. The motivation is so that the Base station may use a single instance or set of DCI to schedule multiple PDSCHs (or PUSCHs) [Fakoorian: ¶ 0077].
For Claim 13, Gao and Rudolf disclose all of the claimed subject matter with the exception of in accordance with whether the configured time and frequency resource is a slot or a mini-slot.
However, Fakoorian, in the analogous art, discloses in accordance with whether the configured time and frequency resource is a slot or a mini-slot (Fakoorian teaches, in ¶ 0075, that Slot N+2 may be an SBFD slot and may include DL sub-bands, guard bands, and a UL sub-band. Slot N, slot N+1, and slot N+2 may each include a PUSCH (PUSCH 1, PUSCH 2, and PUSCH 3). The PUSCH may correspond to the BWP of claims slot N and slot N+1. The PUSCH may correspond to a UL band in slot N+2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system in Gao and Rudolf with the multi-grant taught in Fakoorian. The motivation is so that the Base station may use a single instance or set of DCI to schedule multiple PDSCHs (or PUSCHs) [Fakoorian: ¶ 0077].
Claims 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chunyan Gao et al (US 20140146719 A1) in view of Marian Rudolf et al (US 63645676 filed on May 10, 2024, represented herein by US 20250266947 A1) as applied to claim 17 above, and further in view of FANG Yuan et al (CN 119111090 A).
For Claim 18, Gao and Rudolf disclose all of the claimed subject matter with the exception that activation signaling for the selective transmission is conveyed in connection with a codepoint associated with a downlink control information channel state information request field.
However, Yuan, in the analogous art, discloses that activation signaling for the selective transmission is conveyed in connection with a codepoint associated with a downlink control information channel state information request field (Yuan teaches, on Page 22, para 5, that The TCI code point field in the DCI indicates the TCI to be used for the new SpCell. The DL BWP field in DCI indicates the DL and UL BWP associated with the indicated TCI code point when the DL BWP field is activated for the cell, and the associated DL and UL BWP are used as the active BWP of the new SpCell).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system in Gao and Rudolf with the multi-grant taught in Yuan. The motivation is so that the additional DCI payload allows the DCI to schedule the DL/UL assignment to another cell (e.g., old SpCell or SCell), while indicating a new SpCell.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 19 is objected to as being dependent upon rejected base claims, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claims 1-8 are considered allowable because the prior art does not teach limitations including:
“wherein activation signaling for the selective transmission is conveyed via a value in a field of a particular format of downlink control information, wherein the particular format of downlink control information includes a reserved field for a transmission configuration indicator state update, and wherein one or more bits of the reserved field are interpretable as an indication to activate or deactivate selectively transmitting in the at least one portion of the configured time and frequency resource,” in addition to other claim limitations as recited in dependent claim 19.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Zhang et al (US 20230345467 A1) teaches Systems, methods, and apparatuses for muting resource elements used for wireless communications. In essence, the present disclose enables UE to mute certain resource elements transmitted in a particular direction (e.g., uplink) that would otherwise interfer with resource elements transmitted in the opposite direction (e.g., downlink).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMED A KAMARA whose telephone number is (571)2705629. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9AM-4PM.
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, CHARLES JIANG can be reached at (571)2707191. 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.
/MOHAMED A KAMARA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2412
Prosecution Insights