CTNF 18/838,777 CTNF 90519 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 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 The information disclosure statements (IDSs), submitted on 13 November 2024 and 27 February 2026, were filed after the mailing date of the patent application on 13 November 2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Drawings The drawings, received on 13 November 2024, are acceptable for examination. Specification 06-31 AIA The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification. Claim Objections 07-29-01 AIA Claim s 1, 7, 13, and 14 are objected to because of the following informalities: Said claims recite “wherein each of the first and second CGs comprises periodic CG resources”. Here, the recitation, “the first and second CGs”, is not supported by antecedent basis. In order to improve claim clarity, Examiner respectfully suggests amending to “the first CG and the second CG CGs ” . Appropriate correction is required. 07-29-01 AIA Claim s 1, 7, 13, and 14 are objected to because of the following informalities: Said claims recite “the selected periodic CG resource at the transmission opportunity to the network”. Here, the recitation, “the selected periodic CG resource”, is not supported by antecedent basis. In order to improve claim clarity, Examiner respectfully suggests amending to “the selected one periodic CG resource” . Appropriate correction is required. 07-29-01 AIA Claim s 2 and 8 are objected to because of the following informalities: Said claims recite “the priorities of the first and second CGs”. Here, the recitation, “the priorities of the first and second CGs”, is not supported by antecedent basis. In order to improve claim clarity, Examiner respectfully suggests amending to “the priority of the first CG and the priority of the second CG” . Appropriate correction is required. 07-29-01 AIA Claim s 3 and 9 are objected to because of the following informalities: Said claims recite “the CG resource sizes of the first and second CGs”. Here, the recitation, “the CG resource sizes of the first and second CGs”, is not supported by antecedent basis. In order to improve claim clarity, Examiner respectfully suggests amending to “the CG resource size of the first CG and the CG resource size of the second CG” . Appropriate correction is required. 07-29-01 AIA Claim s 5and 11 are objected to because of the following informalities: Said claims recite “the CG resource durations of the first and second CGs”. Here, the recitation, “the CG resource sizes of the first and second CGs”, is not supported by antecedent basis. In order to improve claim clarity, Examiner respectfully suggests amending to “the CG resource size of the first CG and the CG resource size of the second CG” . Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-12-aia AIA (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. 07-15-03-aia AIA Claim s 1-2, 7-8, and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Zhang et al. (US 20230128596 A1; hereinafter referred to as “Zhang”) . Regarding Claim 1, Claim 1 is rejected on the same basis as Claim 7. Regarding Claim 2, Claim 2 is rejected on the same basis as Claim 8. Regarding Claim 7, Zhang discloses a user equipment (UE) in a wireless communication system, the UE comprising: at least one transceiver ( ¶49-55 & Fig. 2, Zhang discloses a user equipment (UE) 120 comprising a transmit processor 264 and a receive processor 258 coupled to at least one antenna 252 ); at least one processor ( ¶49-55 & Fig. 2, Zhang discloses the UE 120 further comprising a controller/processor 280 ); and at least one computer memory operably connectable to the at least one processor and storing instructions that, when executed, cause the at least one processor to perform operations ( ¶49-55 & Fig. 2, Zhang discloses the UE 120 further comprising a memory 282 coupled to the controller/processor 280. ¶9, Zhang further discloses that the memory, or medium, stores computer program code for execution by the controller/processor ) comprising: receiving information related to a first configured grant (CG) and a second CG from a network ( ¶72-73 & Fig. 4 (402 & 404) & ¶58, Zhang discloses receiving, by the UE, a first configuration and a second configuration from a base station where the first configuration is a first configured grant (CG) and the second configuration is a second CG. Examiner correlates the first configuration to “a first configured grant” and correlates the second configuration to “a second configured grant”. Examiner correlates the BS to a node of the “network” ), wherein each of the first and second CGs comprises periodic CG resources ( ¶27-28, Zhang discloses that each of the first configuration comprises uplink resources having a first periodicity and the second configuration comprises uplink resources with a second periodicity ); generating uplink (UL) data ( ¶72 & Fig. 4 (404->406) & ¶58, Zhang discloses generating a first uplink (UL) transmission corresponding to the first configuration and generating a second UL transmission corresponding to the second configuration ); based on a periodic CG resource of the first CG being overlapped with a periodic CG resource of the second CG at a transmission opportunity, selecting one periodic CG resource among the periodic CG resource of the first CG and the periodic CG resource of the second CG ( ¶74 & Fig. 4 (406) & ¶56, Zhang discloses determining that the first UL transmission is higher in hierarchy than the second UL transmission based upon the periodic resource of the first UL transmission overlapping the periodic resource of the second UL transmission ); and transmitting the UL data based on the selected periodic CG resource at the transmission opportunity to the network ( ¶75 & Fig. 4 (408) & ¶58, Zhang discloses transmitting at the first UL transmission based upon the selected UL transmission to the BS ). Regarding Claim 8, Zhang discloses the UE of claim 7. Zhang further discloses: wherein the information related to the first CG and the second CG comprises a priority of the first CG and a priority of the second CG ( ¶72 & Fig. 4 (402) & ¶58, Zhang discloses that the first configuration comprises a first identifier (ID) and the second configuration comprises a second ID. Examiner correlates each ID to a priority because the ID allows for the selection of the first UL transmission or the second UL transmission ); and wherein the one periodic CG resource is selected based on the priorities of the first and second CGs ( ¶74 & Fig. 4 (406), Zhang discloses that a first periodic resource corresponding to the first UL transmission is selected based upon the first ID having a higher hierarchy than the second ID ) Regarding Claim 13, Claim 13 is rejected on the same basis as Claim 7. Regarding Claim 14, Claim 14 is rejected on the same basis as Claim 7 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 3-5 and 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang in view of Yang et al. (US 20220046671 A1; hereinafter referred to as “Yang”) . Regarding Claim 3, Claim 3 is rejected on the same basis as Claim 9. Regarding Claim 4, Claim 4 is rejected on the same basis as Claim 10. Regarding Claim 5, Claim 5 is rejected on the same basis as Claim 11. Regarding Claim 9, Zhang discloses the UE of claim 7. However, Zhang does not disclose wherein the information related to the first CG and the second CG comprises a CG resource size of the first CG and a CG resource size of the second CG; and wherein the one periodic CG resource is selected based on the CG resource sizes of the first and second CGs. Yang, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, teaches: wherein the information related to the first CG and the second CG comprises a CG resource size of the first CG and a CG resource size of the second CG ( ¶76 & Fig. 8A (804), Yang discloses that at least two configured grants comprises a first transport block size (TBS 1 ) and a second transport block size (TBS 2 ) ); and wherein the one periodic CG resource is selected based on the CG resource sizes of the first and second CGs ( ¶76-77 & Fig. 8A (808->810 OR 812), Yang discloses selecting or not selecting each configured grant based on transport block size of each configured grant ). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Zhang by requiring that the information related to the first CG and the second CG comprises a CG resource size of the first CG and a CG resource size of the second CG and requiring that the one periodic CG resource is selected based on the CG resource sizes of the first and second CGs as taught by Yang because resource selection from a plurality of configured grants is improved by enabling the UE to intelligently choose the best configuration without resorting to any random-selection and enabling the base station to identify a subset of all configured-grants that are best-suited for an uplink transmission for the UE ( Yang, ¶15 ). Regarding Claim 10, Zhang discloses the UE of claim 7. However, Zhang does not disclose wherein the one periodic CG resource is selected based on a start time of periodic CG resource with regard to a time point when the UL data is generated. Yang, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, teaches: wherein the one periodic CG resource is selected based on a start time of periodic CG resource with regard to a time point when the UL data is generated ( ¶76-77 & Fig. 8A (810->814 OR 816), Yang discloses selecting or not selecting each configured grant based on a time offset, T offset ). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Zhang by requiring that the one periodic CG resource is selected based on a start time of periodic CG resource with regard to a time point when the UL data is generated as taught by Yang because resource selection from a plurality of configured grants is improved by enabling the UE to intelligently choose the best configuration without resorting to any random-selection and enabling the base station to identify a subset of all configured-grants that are best-suited for an uplink transmission for the UE ( Yang, ¶15 ). Regarding Claim 11, Zhang discloses the UE of claim 7. However, Zhang does not disclose wherein the information related to the first CG and the second CG comprises a CG resource duration of the first CG and a CG resource duration of the second CG; and wherein the one periodic CG resource is selected based on the CG resource durations of the first and second CGs. Yang, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, teaches: wherein the information related to the first CG and the second CG comprises a CG resource duration of the first CG and a CG resource duration of the second CG ( ¶62, Yang discloses that each configured grant indicates a number of uplink symbols, or time duration, for the uplink transmission ); and wherein the one periodic CG resource is selected based on the CG resource durations of the first and second CGs ( ¶76-77 & Fig. 8A (810->814 OR 816), Yang discloses selecting or not selecting each configured grant based on a time duration ). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Zhang by requiring that the information related to the first CG and the second CG comprises a CG resource duration of the first CG and a CG resource duration of the second CG and requiring that the one periodic CG resource is selected based on the CG resource durations of the first and second CGs as taught by Yang because resource selection from a plurality of configured grants is improved by enabling the UE to intelligently choose the best configuration without resorting to any random-selection and enabling the base station to identify a subset of all configured-grants that are best-suited for an uplink transmission for the UE ( Yang, ¶15 ) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 6 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang in view of Rossbach et al. (US 20230269814 A1; hereinafter referred to as “Rossbach”) . Regarding Claim 6, Claim 6 is rejected on the same basis as Claim 12. Regarding Claim 12, Zhang discloses the UE of claim 7. However, Zhang does not disclose wherein the first CG and the second CG are related to a same logical channel. Rossbach, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, teaches: wherein the first CG and the second CG are related to a same logical channel ( ¶156, Rossbach discloses that the first CG and the second CG are linked to a same logical channel (LCH) ). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Zhang by requiring that the first CG and the second CG are related to a same logical channel as taught by Yang because operation of an application following a communication failure is enhanced by adjusting the transmission power or timer duration ( Rossback, Abstract ). Internet Communications Applicant is encouraged to submit a written authorization for Internet communications (PTO/SB/439, http://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/sb0439.pdf) in the instant patent application to authorize the examiner to communicate with the applicant via email. The authorization will allow the examiner to better practice compact prosecution. The written authorization can be submitted via one of the following methods only : (1) Central Fax which can be found in the Conclusion section of this Office action; (2) regular postal mail; (3) EFS WEB; or (4) the service window on the Alexandria campus. EFS web is the recommended way to submit the form since this allows the form to be entered into the file wrapper within the same day (system dependent). Written authorization submitted via other methods, such as direct fax to the examiner or email, will not be accepted. See MPEP § 502.03. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIC NOWLIN whose telephone number is (313)446-6544. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 12:00PM-10:00PM. 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, Michael Thier can be reached at (571) 272-2832. 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. /ERIC NOWLIN/Examiner, Art Unit 2474 Application/Control Number: 18/838,777 Page 2 Art Unit: 2474 Application/Control Number: 18/838,777 Page 3 Art Unit: 2474 Application/Control Number: 18/838,777 Page 4 Art Unit: 2474 Application/Control Number: 18/838,777 Page 5 Art Unit: 2474 Application/Control Number: 18/838,777 Page 6 Art Unit: 2474 Application/Control Number: 18/838,777 Page 7 Art Unit: 2474 Application/Control Number: 18/838,777 Page 8 Art Unit: 2474 Application/Control Number: 18/838,777 Page 9 Art Unit: 2474 Application/Control Number: 18/838,777 Page 10 Art Unit: 2474 Application/Control Number: 18/838,777 Page 11 Art Unit: 2474
Prosecution Insights