DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to the pending claims, 1-20, received 30 August 2024. Accordingly, the detailed action of claims 1-20 is as follows:
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
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 08/30/2024, 02/06/2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 1-3, 7-8, 10-11, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim et al (US 20220095313 A1, hereafter referred to as Kim).
Regarding claim 1, Kim teaches a
method implementable in a user equipment (UE), comprising:
receiving pose or control information (Kim [0111] teaches obtaining pose information, control [0088] and scene information [0088] by sampling [0087-0088 and 0106]); and
performing a selective uplink (UL) retransmission of the pose or control information (Kim [0112] teaches a UE performing retransmission of the pose information).
Regarding claim 2, Kim teaches the limitations of claim 1, as rejected above.
Additionally, Kim teaches the method wherein the performing of the selective UL retransmission comprises:
transmitting a packet of the pose or control information (Kim [0101] teaches the transmission of the uplink communication, including the sampled pose, control and scene data to the server [0089]); and
entering a sleep mode to refrain from monitoring a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) for retransmission (Kim [0101] teaches powering down radio components subsequent to the uplink transmission so as not to monitor for feedback or retransmission).
Regarding claim 3, Kim teaches the limitations of claim 1, as rejected above.
Additionally, Kim teaches the method wherein the performing of the selective UL retransmission comprises:
transmitting a packet of the pose or control information (Kim [Fig 6-610]); and
retransmitting the packet at a next transmission occasion (Kim [Fig 6-620] teaches retransmitting the pose and control information according to a shorter transmission timer for faster retransmission [0092]).
Regarding claim 7, Kim teaches the limitations of claim 1, as rejected above.
Additionally, Kim teaches the method wherein the performing of the selective UL retransmission comprises receiving a signaling from a network that configures the UE with UL retransmissions disabled for at least one of a configured grant (CG) occasion or resource, a type of UL traffic or a low-priority traffic (Kim [0109, 0112] teaches transmitting configuration information (applicant’s signaling from a network”) that configures a UE to skip setting retransmission timers for pose information (applicant’s type of UL traffic) such that the retransmission parameter disables retransmissions for low latency uplink communications [0112].
Regarding claim 8, Kim teaches the limitations of claim 7, as rejected above.
Additionally, Kim teaches the method wherein the signaling comprises a radio resource control (RRC) signaling (Kim [0109 and 0040]).
Regarding claim 10, Kim teaches the limitations of claim 1, as rejected above.
Additionally, Kim teaches the method wherein the performing of the selective UL retransmission comprises receiving a signaling from a network that configures the UE with delayed retransmissions for at least one of a configured grant (CG) occasion or resource, a type of UL traffic or a low-priority traffic, or based on a packet delay budget (PDB) (Kim [0040] teaches receiving retransmission parameters for pose information (“type of UL traffic”) that are different from other uplink communications of the UE, whereby a shorter retransmission time is used [0100]).
Regarding claim 11, Kim teaches the limitations of claim 10, as rejected above.
Additionally, Kim teaches the method wherein the signaling comprises a radio resource control(RRC) signaling (Kim [0040, 0109]).
Regarding claim 19, Kim teaches the limitations of claim 1, as rejected above.
Additionally, Kim teaches the method wherein the pose or control information comprises pose or control information from an extended reality (XR) application (Kim [0087] teaches generation and transmission of pose and other control information corresponding to a XR application).
Regarding claim 20, Kim teaches an apparatus implementable in a user equipment (UE), comprising:
a transceiver configured to communicate wirelessly (Kim [0136, 0139]); and
a processor coupled to the transceiver and configured to perform, via the transceiver, operations (Kim [0142 and 0137]) comprising:
receiving pose or control information (Kim [0111] teaches obtaining pose information, control [0088] and scene information [0088] by sampling [0087-0088 and 0106]); and
performing a selective uplink (UL) retransmission of the pose or control information (Kim [0112] teaches a UE performing retransmission of the pose information).
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.
Claim 4-6 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al (US 20220095313 A1, hereafter referred to as Kim) as applied above regarding claim 1, further in view of Cedergren et al (US 20240292486 A1, hereafter referred to as Cedergren).
Regarding claim 4, Kim teaches the limitations of claim 1, as rejected above.
However, Kim does not explicitly teach the method wherein the performing of the selective UL retransmission comprises informing a network whether the UE is to monitor a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) for retransmission or whether the UE is to enter a sleep mode and stop monitoring the PDCCH.
Cedergren, in an analogous art, teaches the method wherein the performing of the selective UL retransmission comprises informing a network whether the UE is to monitor a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) for retransmission or whether the UE is to enter a sleep mode and stop monitoring the PDCCH (Cedergren [0191 and 0184] teaches the UE indicating whether it will monitor the PDCCH for retransmission or “no monitor” and sleep [0191]).
It would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Kim in view of Cedergren in order to configure the performing of the selective UL retransmission, as taught by Kim, comprise informing a network whether the UE is to monitor a physical downlink control channel, as taught by Cedergren.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated in order to reduce network usage, resources and signaling by informing the network, which lacks information regarding processing at the UE and therefore cannot accurately estimate whether retransmission is desirable, for uplink transmissions whether the UE will monitor for a PDCCH for retransmission (Cedergren [0183]) in this way the network can quickly learn whether the UE will monitor for PDCCH for retransmission and schedule the PDCCH early to indicate retransmission (Cedergren [0187]).
Regarding claim 5, Kim teaches the limitations of claim 1, as rejected above.
Additionally, Kim teaches the method wherein the performing of the selective UL retransmission comprises:
transmitting a periodic UL traffic of the pose or control information (Kim [0091] teaches the transmission of the pose and control information by the UE at a periodicity).
However, Kim does not explicitly teach indicating to a network in uplink control information (UCI) an importance of the pose or control information.
Cedergren, in an analogous art, teaches indicating to a network in uplink control information (UCI) an importance of the pose or control information (Cedergren [0182] teaches upon a determination a second ADU outdates the information in the first, choosing not to monitor for the PDCCH for retransmission and notifying the network node [0184] via UCI [0191]).
It would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Kim in view of Cedergren in order to configure the UE, as taught by Kim, to indicate to a network in uplink control information (UCI) an importance of the pose or control information, as taught by Cedergren.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated in order to reduce network usage, resources and signaling by informing the network, which lacks information regarding processing at the UE and therefore cannot accurately estimate whether retransmission is desirable, for uplink transmissions whether the UE will monitor for a PDCCH for retransmission (Cedergren [0183]) in this way the network can quickly learn whether the UE will monitor for PDCCH for retransmission and schedule the PDCCH early to indicate retransmission (Cedergren [0187]).
Regarding claim 6, Kim teaches the limitations of claim 1, as rejected above.
Additionally, Kim teaches the method wherein the performing of the selective UL retransmission comprises:
transmitting a periodic UL traffic of the pose or control information (Kim [0091] teaches the transmission of the pose and control information by the UE at a periodicity).
However, Kim does not explicitly teach indicating to a network in uplink control information (UCI) whether UL retransmission is enabled or disabled.
Cedergren, in an analogous art, teaches indicating to a network in uplink control information (UCI) whether UL retransmission is enabled or disabled (Cedergren [0191-0192] teaches the UE notifying the network node of “no monitor” in the UCI).
It would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Kim in view of Cedergren in order to configure the UE, as taught by Kim, to indicate to a network in uplink control information (UCI) whether UL retransmission is enabled or disabled, as taught by Cedergren.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated in order to reduce network usage, resources and signaling by informing the network, which lacks information regarding processing at the UE and therefore cannot accurately estimate whether retransmission is desirable, for uplink transmissions whether the UE will monitor for a PDCCH for retransmission (Cedergren [0183]) in this way the network can quickly learn whether the UE will monitor for PDCCH for retransmission and schedule the PDCCH early to indicate retransmission (Cedergren [0187]).
Claim 17 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al (US 20220095313 A1, hereafter referred to as Kim) as applied above regarding claim 1, further in view of Rao et al (US 20250119785 A1, hereafter referred to as Rao).
Regarding claim 17, Kim teaches the limitations of claim 1, as rejected above.
However, Kim does not explicitly teach the method wherein a priority of UL data corresponds to a logical control channel (LCH) to which the UL data is mapped.
Rao, in an analogous art, teaches the method wherein a priority of UL data corresponds to a logical control channel (LCH) to which the UL data is mapped (Rao [019-01962] teaches selection of a second Logical Channel Prioritization mapping responsive to the importance of PDUs for uplink wherein the PDUs, mapped to the forwarding configuration using LCP, are transmitted [0197]).
It would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Kim in view of Rao in order to configure the priority of UL data to correspond to a LCH to which the data is mapped, as taught by Rao.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated in order to enable a change to the priority handling configuration for a QoS event including changing to an alternative logical channel prioritization to mitigate an inability to meet ADU-level QoS (Rao [0205]) .
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 9, 12-18 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.
Fu (US 20240381338 A1);
Yang et al (US 20240224376 A1);
Lohr et al (US 20240380525 A1);
Cho et al (US 20230063556 A1);
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHEAN TOKUTA whose telephone number is (571)272-5145. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH 630-430.
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, Brian Gillis can be reached at 5712727952. 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.
SHEAN TOKUTA
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2446
/SHEAN TOKUTA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2446
Prosecution Insights