DETAILED ACTION
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Claim Objections
Claims 4 and 8 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In line 4 of claim 4, “the plurality of subset” should be changed to “the plurality of subsets”.
The equation in line 4 of claim 8 is blurry and should be replaced with a more readable copy. It appears that this equation is a combination of the more legible equations 9 and 10 from pages 28-29 of the specification.
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 3-6 and 9-11 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 3: the limitation “the one subset” in lines 7-8 has insufficient antecedent basis in the claim. This can be corrected by amending “one sequence” in line 6 to “one subset”.
Regarding claim 4: the scope of the phrase “the plurality of sequences included in the plurality of subsets correspond to a sequence with higher reliability” in lines 2-3 is unclear for at least the following reasons.
First, the above phrase appears to suggest that not all of the sequences in the sequence pool belong to a subset. However, based on the specification (see Figure 11, for example) it appears that each sequence belongs to one of the subsets. Further, it is unclear how the selection of the sequence described in lines 6-8 of claim 3 utilizes any sequences that are not part of a subset. (That is, claim 3 indicates that a sequence is selected by first selecting a subset (according to the number of information bits) and then selects a sequence from this subset (according to the value of the information bits).
Second, the scope of the phrase “with higher reliability” is unclear. The term “higher” is comparative. However, it is not clear what this reliability is higher than. This phrase should be amended to clarify how one can determine whether the reliability of a particular sequence is “higher”.
Regarding claim 9: the limitation “each of the 2n sequences” in line 3 has insufficient antecedent basis in the claim. This can be corrected by amending “each of the 2n sequences” to “each of the 2n combinations of sequences” or something similar.
Claims 5, 6, 10, and 11 depend from one of the above claims and are thus similarly rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for the reasons stated above.
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 and 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Yang et al (US 2021/0092734).
Regarding claim 1: Yang discloses a terminal, comprising:
control circuitry (see communications manager 515 of Figure 5, for example), which, in operation, determines one sequence or one combination from a plurality of sequences or a plurality of combinations of sequences according to information on a number of information bits (disclosed throughout; see [0073]-[0074], for example, which discloses that the UE may “generate a sequence based on the UCI payload” when the “payload size satisfies a threshold”; thus, the sequence of a plurality of sequences is determined according to a number of information bits (the payload size)) in an uplink transmission without using a reference signal (disclosed throughout; see [0071], for example, which discloses using “sequence-based transmission without the generation or transmission of a DMRS”); and
transmission circuitry (see transmitter 520 of Figure 5, for example), which, in operation, transmits the one sequence or a sequence included in the one combination in the uplink transmission without using the reference signal (disclosed throughout; see [0071], for example, which discloses using “sequence-based transmission without the generation or transmission of a DMRS”).
Regarding claim 12: Yang discloses a base station, comprising:
reception circuitry, which, in operation, receives a signal (see receiver 910 of Figure 9, for example, which as indicated in [0171], receives a signal); and
control circuitry (see communications manager 915 of Figure 9, for example), which, in operation, identifies, based on an association of information on a number of information bits with a sequence or a combination of sequences in an uplink transmission without using a reference signal, the number of the information bits corresponding to a sequence included in the signal (disclosed throughout; see [0071], for example, which discloses using “sequence-based transmission without the generation or transmission of a DMRS”; further, see [0073]-[0074], for example, which discloses that the UE may “generate a sequence based on the UCI payload” when the “payload size satisfies a threshold”; thus, the sequence of a plurality of sequences is determined according to a number of information bits (the payload size); as indicated in [0072], this sequence-based transmission increases the decoding and detection performance at the receiver; the receiver clearly detects and decodes the information bits and thus identifies the number of information bits).
Regarding claim 13: Yang discloses a communication method, comprising:
determining, by a terminal, one sequence or one combination from a plurality of sequences or a plurality of combinations of sequences according to information on a number of information bits (disclosed throughout; see [0073]-[0074], for example, which discloses that the UE may “generate a sequence based on the UCI payload” when the “payload size satisfies a threshold”; thus, the sequence of a plurality of sequences is determined according to a number of information bits (the payload size)) in an uplink transmission without using a reference signal (disclosed throughout; see [0071], for example, which discloses using “sequence-based transmission without the generation or transmission of a DMRS”); and
transmitting, by the terminal, the one sequence or a sequence included in the one combination, in the uplink transmission without using the reference signal (disclosed throughout; see [0071], for example, which discloses using “sequence-based transmission without the generation or transmission of a DMRS”).
Regarding claim 14: Yang discloses a communication method, comprising:
receiving, by a base station, a signal (see receiver 910 of Figure 9, for example, which as indicated in [0171], receives a signal); and
identifying, by the base station, based on an association of information on a number of information bits with a sequence or a combination of sequences in an uplink transmission without using a reference signal, the number of the information bits corresponding to a sequence included in the signal (disclosed throughout; see [0071], for example, which discloses using “sequence-based transmission without the generation or transmission of a DMRS”; further, see [0073]-[0074], for example, which discloses that the UE may “generate a sequence based on the UCI payload” when the “payload size satisfies a threshold”; thus, the sequence of a plurality of sequences is determined according to a number of information bits (the payload size); as indicated in [0072], this sequence-based transmission increases the decoding and detection performance at the receiver; the receiver clearly detects and decodes the information bits and thus identifies the number of information bits).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 7, and 8 are 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.
Claims 3-6 and 9-11 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include 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.
Bae et al (US 2023/0129484) discloses a method for utilizing sequence-based PUCCH.
Elshafie et al (US 2022/0286341) discloses a method for encoding uplink transmissions.
Huang et al (US 2021/0320762) discloses a method for orthogonal sequence generation for multi-bit payloads.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Robert C Scheibel whose telephone number is (571)272-3169. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 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, Hassan A Phillips can be reached at 571-272-3940. 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.
Robert C. Scheibel
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2467
/Robert C Scheibel/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2467 October 6, 2026
Prosecution Insights