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 .
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claim Objections
Claims 6 and 18 are objected to because of the following informalities: There is a typographical error in the claim.
The examiner has interpreted the claim to read “…wherein adjacent transmissions overlap in a frequency domain”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 5 and 17 are 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
As per claims 5 and 17, the limitation “…wherein the SRS configuration includes one or more SRS elements comprising a transmission bandwidth of the SRS, a lowest resource block (RB) location for the SRS transmission, a number of SRS symbols, a relative resource element (RE) offset configuration for corresponding SRS symbols, a number of transmissions within the SRS duration, and a starting OFDM symbol index for corresponding transmission”, raises an indefiniteness issue, as it is not clear if the limitation requires including one or more of each SRS element listed, or if the claim only requires one or more SRS elements from the list of SRS elements to be included in the SRS configuration. For the purpose of this office action the Examiner is interpreting the claim using the later, i.e., “…wherein the SRS configuration includes one or more SRS elements from a group of SRS elements comprising: a transmission bandwidth of the SRS, a lowest resource block (RB) location for the SRS transmission…”, etc.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 5-7, 9-13, 15 and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu et al. (US 2020/0350970)(“Liu”) in further view of Meng et al. (US 2023/0094748)(“Meng”).
As per claim 1, Liu teaches a method of a user equipment (UE), comprising:
…
reporting a UE radio frequency (RF) retuning time in a UE capability message to a network entity (i.e., “transient time to transmit SRSs when performing antenna switching, frequency hopping, …”, see ¶0118 and ¶0137, read as reporting an RF retuning time);
receiving a sounding reference signal (SRS) configuration with multiple transmissions within an SRS duration from the wireless network, wherein the SRS duration is based on the UE RF retuning time (see ¶0138, where receiving an SRS transmission pattern, i.e., multiple SRS transmissions, is based on the UE capability information, also see Fig. 15, which illustrates the different SRS patterns having different durations); and
performing an uplink (UL) SRS transmission based on the SRS configuration (see ¶0138, i.e., “the UE may then transmit (and the BS receive) at least one SRS in accordance with the SRS configuration information”).
As per claim 1, Liu fails to teach the UE capability message, being in response to receiving, by the UE, a capability request from the network entity in a wireless network.
Nevertheless, soliciting UE capabilities by a network entity (e.g., gNB) was well known in the art, prior to the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention (see for example, Meng, ¶0076, i.e., “to determine the SRS resource and beam sweeping rule, the gNB would request the UE to report the UE capability”)
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, prior to the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention, to similarly receive, by the UE, a capability request from the network entity in a wireless network. The obvious motivation for doing so would have been to enable on-demand collection of the UE capability information in Liu.
As per claim 2, Liu further teaches wherein the network entity is a base station in the wireless network (see abstract).
As per claim 5, Liu further teaches wherein the SRS configuration includes one or more SRS elements (i.e., SRS transmission patterns, see Fig 15 and ¶0138) comprising … a number of SRS symbols (e.g., 4 symbols, see Fig. 15).
As per claim 6, Liu further teaches wherein adjacent transmissions have overlapping in a frequency domain (see for example, Fig. 11 and ¶0110, where adjacent transmissions (e.g., {0,1}) are in the same subband).
As per claim 7, Liu further teaches wherein an SRS resource set is configured including all transmissions within the SRS duration (see Fig. 15, i.e., SRS#1-SRS#4, read as all transmissions within the SRS duration/pattern).
As per claim 9, Liu further teaches wherein the SRS resource set is configured to be periodic, semi- persistent or aperiodic transmission for the one or more SRS resources (see ¶0086).
As per claim 10, Liu further teaches wherein each time gap between adjacent transmissions is greater than or equal to the UE RF retuning time reported in the UE capability response (see ¶0147, where the second pattern takes into account the transient time (i.e., UE RF retuning), which implies the one-symbol gap 1510 between adjacent transmissions (e.g., SRS#1 and SRS#2) being greater than or equal to the transient time).
As per claim 11, Liu further teaches stopping the UL SRS transmission on one or more SRS resources to avoid one or more qualified colliding transmissions based on one or more predefined rules (see ¶0086, i.e., when SRS resource sets have overlapping symbols, priority is given to the first SRS resource set).
As per claim 12, Liu further teaches wherein the one or more predefined rules comprise dropping the UL SRS transmission within an SRS duration when detecting one or more qualified colliding transmission including data transmission or RS transmission of higher priority within the SRS duration (see ¶0086, i.e., when SRS resource sets have overlapping symbols [impliedly within the SRS duration], priority is given to the first SRS resource set, or in other words, dropping the UL SRS transmission associated with the second SRS resource set).
As per claim 13, Liu further teaches wherein the one or more predefined rules comprise the UL SRS transmission with multiple consecutive slots (see ¶0104, “In some cases, the third pattern may include transmitting one or two SRSs in the last one or two symbols of subframe n and transmitting 3 or 2 (respectively) SRSs in the first three or two symbols of subframe n+1”, which anticipates an SRS transmission spanning consecutive slots) drops only one or more slots with collision (see ¶0086, i.e., “UE may follow the configuration of the prioritized SRS resource set in any overlapped symbols”, thus impliedly, in the multi-slot transmission scenario anticipated in Liu, assuming the overlapped symbols correspond to the last two symbols of the last slot of subframe n, but not the first three or two symbols of subframe n+1, the last slot of subframe n will not be available/dropped from sending the UL SRS transmission for the second SRS resource set, while transmitting the non-overlapped symbols of the second SRS resource set in the first slot of subframe n+1).
As per claim 15, Liu teaches …
receiving a UE radio frequency (RF) retuning time in a UE capability response from the UE (i.e., “transient time to transmit SRSs when performing antenna switching, frequency hopping, …”, see ¶0118 and ¶0137, read as reporting an RF retuning time);
transmitting a sounding reference signal (SRS) configuration with multiple transmissions within an SRS duration to the UE, wherein the SRS duration is based on the UE RF retuning time (see ¶0138, where receiving an SRS transmission pattern, i.e., multiple SRS transmissions, is based on the UE capability information, also see Fig. 15, which illustrates the different SRS patterns having different durations); and
receiving an uplink (UL) SRS transmission with frequency hopping from the UE based on the SRS configuration (see ¶0138, i.e., “the UE may then transmit (and the BS receive) at least one SRS in accordance with the SRS configuration information”, see also Fig. 10, and ¶0107-0108, i.e., “…the UE may transmit a first SRS on a first subband 1004 using a first antenna and transmit a second SRS on a second subband 1006 using a second antenna”, in other words using frequency hopping).
As per claim 15, Liu does not expressly teach transmitting, by the base station, a capability request to a user equipment (UE) in a wireless network.
Nevertheless, soliciting UE capabilities by a network entity (e.g., gNB) was well known in the art, prior to the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention (see for example, Meng, ¶0076, i.e., “to determine the SRS resource and beam sweeping rule, the gNB would request the UE to report the UE capability”)
The same motivation that was utilized for combining Liu and Meng in claim 1 applies equally well to claim 15.
Claims 17-19 are rejected under the same rationale as claims 5-7, respectively, since they recite substantially identical subject matter. Any differences between the claims do not result in patentably distinct claims and all of the limitations are taught by the above cited art.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu and Meng, in further view of Alawieh et al. (US 2022/0271982)(“Alawieh”).
As per claim 3, Liu in view of Meng does not expressly teach wherein the network entity is a location management (LMF) at core network of the wireless network.
Nevertheless, in the same art of SRS capability collection, Alawieh describe collecting by an LMF SRS capabilities from a UE (see ¶0236).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, prior to the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention, to request, from an LMF at a core network, UE capabilities regarding SRS configuration. The obvious motivation for doing so would have been to configure SRS to assist with UE positioning.
Claims 4 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu and Meng, in further view of Choi et al. (US 2021/0250145)(“Choi”).
As per claims 4 and 16, Liu further teaches wherein each transmission includes SRS in consecutive symbols (see Figs 11 and 15).
However, Liu does not expressly teach each transmission is associated with a lowest resource block (RB) index.
Nevertheless, in the same art of SRS transmission, Choi describes associating each SRS transmission with a lowest resource block (RB) index (i.e., depending on SRS BW, see Fig. 15 and ¶0195, SRS occupies a lowest resource (RB) index, e.g., RB index=1, RB index = 17, etc.).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, prior to the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Liu with the teachings of Choi for associating each SRS transmission with a lowest RB index. The obvious motivation for doing so would have been to make explicit the SRS RB position for each symbol transmitted in Liu, thus ensuring predictable transmission/reception of SRS symbols during intra-slot or inter-slot frequency hopping.
Claims 8 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu and Meng, in further view of Kang et al. (US 2020/0127723)(“Kang”).
As per claims 8 and 20, Liu in view of Meng, does not expressly teach wherein one or more SRS resources in the SRS resource set are associated with a same downlink spatial relation reference signal (RS).
Nevertheless, in the same art of SRS configuring, Kang teaches wherein one or more SRS resources in the SRS resource set are associated with a same downlink spatial relation reference signal (RS) (see ¶0332, i.e., “when Spatial_Relation_Info is configured for all SRS resources in an SRS resource set, the UE transmits an SRS via a beam indicated by the base station”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, prior to the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention, to configure a downlink spatial relation signal (RS) for one or more SRS resources in the SRS resource set. The obvious motivation for doing so would have been to maintain the Tx beam for the one or more SRS resources in the SRS resource set in Liu.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 14 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure (see PTO 892).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Brendan Higa whose telephone number is (571)272-5823. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 AM - 5:00 PM.
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, James Hwang can be reached at (571) 272-4036. 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.
/BRENDAN Y HIGA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2447
Prosecution Insights