DETAILED ACTION
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 .
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, 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.
Claim(s) 1-4 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ma et al. (US 2025/0055747, “Ma”) in view of Nimbalker et al. (US 2017/0019883, “Nimbalker”).
Examiner’s note: in what follows, references are drawn to Ma unless otherwise mentioned.
Ma comprises the following features:
With respect to independent claims:
Regarding claim 1, a method of a user equipment (UE) of a non-terrestrial network (NTN) that communicates with a base station over a service link of the NTN, comprising:
receiving, from the base station, a downlink control information (DCI) that indicates a dynamic uplink grant for a first physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) (This will be discussed in view of Nimbalker.),
wherein the DCI comprises an orthogonal cover code (OCC) sequence index (This will be discussed in view of Nimbalker.);
identifying, using the OCC sequence index, a first OCC sequence for the first PUSCH ([0084] “The network node may transmit, to the UE, an indication that indicates which OCC sequence the UE should use for the frequency domain OCC-based PUSCH multiplexing.”) from a set of OCC sequences of an OCC size ([0083] “In some aspects, the OCC sequence may be selected from Hadamard sequences. For example, a Hadamard sequence may be [1 1], [1 −1] for a spreading factor of 2, or the Hadamard sequence may be [1 1 1 1], [1 1 −1 −1], [1 −1 1−1], [−1 1 1−1] for a spreading sequence of 4. In some aspects, the OCC sequence may be selected from vectors of DFT matrixes [1 e.sup.j2πk/N e.sup.j2π.Math.2k/N . . . e.sup.j2π(N−1)k/N], k=0, 1, . . . , N−1. For example, a vector of a DFT matrix may be [1 1 1]. [1 e.sup.j2π/3 e.sup.j4π/3], [1 e.sup.j4π/3 e.sup.j2π/3] for a spreading factor of 3, or the vector of the DFT matrix may be [1 1 1 1], [1 −j −1j], [1 −1 1 −1], [1 j −1 −j] for a spreading factor of 4.”) corresponding to the OCC sequence index ([0084] “The indication may include a row index of the table to indicate the OCC sequence.”);
spreading first data for the first PUSCH into the first PUSCH using the first OCC sequence ([0097] “the UE may transmit, to the network node, the PUSCH transmission based at least in part on the configuration. The OCC sequence may be applied to one or more symbols associated with the PUSCH transmission. The UE may use the OCC sequence, indicated by the configuration, for the PUSCH transmission.”); and
sending, to the base station, over the service link, the first PUSCH according to the dynamic uplink grant (See aforesaid [0097], [0098] “The PUSCH transmission may be an initial message 3 (Msg3) transmission or a Msg3 retransmission.”, and [0099] “The Msg3 repetition signaling may be based at least in part on the network node indicating a repetition number. The network node may indicate the repetition number by re-interpreting MCS bits in a random access response (RAR) uplink grant or DCI (e.g., DCI 0_0).”).
It is noted that while disclosing an OCC sequence for PUSCH transmission, Ma does not specifically teach about DCI indicating resource assignments. It, however, had been known in the art before the effective date of the instant application as shown by Nimbalker as follows;
receiving, from the base station, a downlink control information (DCI) that indicates a dynamic uplink grant for a first physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) ([Nimbalker, 0018] “a DCI message can be received in a first subframe. The DCI message can indicate a resource assignment and a modulation and coding scheme and can indicate a plurality of cyclic shifts … A data packet can be transmitted on a PUSCH in a resource indicated by the resource assignment and modulation and coding scheme”),
wherein the DCI comprises an orthogonal cover code (OCC) sequence index ([Nimbalker, 0032] “The CB-grant fields can include fields for a second resource assignment including a frequency hopping flag, a RB assignment, MCS, TPC for PUSCH, and cyclic shift for DMRS and OCC index. The CB-grant fields can also include a resource Allocation (RA) type. These fields can be part of a DCI message.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA at the time of the invention to modify Ma’s NTN frequency domain OCC based PUSCH multiplexing procedure to include the OCC index in a DCI uplink grant, as taught by Nimbalker. Ma expressly teaches that OCC configuration for its OCC multiplexed PUSCH may be conveyed through DCI and that an index, such as a table row index, may identify the OCC sequence to be used. Nimbalker teaches incorporating a “cyclic shift for DMRS and OCC index” in a DCI grant for PUSCH resources. The combination would have provide a known, compact, scheduler-controlled signaling mechanism for information a UE of the OCC to apply to a dynamically granted PUSCH, thereby enabling the network to assign different OCCs to UEs sharing PUSCH time-frequency resources and achieving Ma’s stated multiplexing / capacity objective.
With respect to dependent claims:
Regarding claim 2, the method of claim 1, further comprising sending, to the base station, a capability message indicating that the UE is capable of performing OCC spreading for uplink transmissions on the service link ([0098] “the UE may transmit, to the network node, a PRACH transmission that indicates an OCC capability of the UE. The UE may receive the configuration via a message 2 (Msg2) based at least in part on the OCC capability. The PUSCH transmission may be an initial message 3 (Msg3) transmission or a Msg3 retransmission.”).
Regarding claim 3, the method of claim 1, wherein the DCI further comprises an indication of the OCC size corresponding to the first OCC sequence ([0100] “the configuration may be indicated in the Msg2 or in the DCI based at least in part on a link of a Msg3 repetition factor (e.g., 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 12, or 16) to the OCC length.”).
Regarding claim 4, the method of claim 1, further comprising receiving, from the base station, radio resource configuration (RRC) signaling indicating the OCC size corresponding to the first OCC sequence index ([0080] “The UE may receive, from the network node, the configuration via a MAC control element (MAC-CE), RRC signaling, or downlink control information (DCI).”).
Claim(s) 5 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ma et al. (US 2025/0055747, “Ma”) in view of Nimbalker et al. (US 2017/0019883, “Nimbalker”) and further in view of Ying et al. (US 2018/0368117, “Ying”).
Examiner’s note: in what follows, references are drawn to Ma unless otherwise mentioned.
Regarding claim 5, it is noted that while disclosing an OCC sequence for PUSCH transmission, Ma does not specifically teach about a subsequent PUSCH. It, however, had been known in the art before the effective date of the instant application as shown by Ying as follows;
the method of claim 1,
wherein the dynamic uplink grant is further for a second PUSCH ([Ying, 0056] “For an UL transmission scheme with grant, K repetitions including initial transmission (K>=1) for the same transport block may be supported. The repetition number K may be semi-statically (re-) configured or dynamically indicated by the UL grant.”), and further comprising:
spreading second data for the second PUSCH into the second PUSCH using the first OCC sequence ([Ying, 0095] “the gNB may transmit, (by using the RRC message and/or the DCI (e.g., the DCI for activating the SPS)), information used for configuring the orthogonal (e.g., OCC (orthogonal cover code) for the PUSCH(s) (e.g., the fourth PUSCH and/or the second PUSCH))”); and
sending, to the base station, over the service link, the second PUSCH ([Ying, 0097] “grant-free initial transmission (e.g., the second UL data transmission (i.e., the second PUSCH)”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA to apply Ma’s selected OCC sequence to the grant-triggered repeated PUSCH transmissions of Ying, including the first PUSCH and a subsequent second PUSCH. Such use would apply a single OCC configuration across the multiple PUSCH transmissions already triggered by Ying’s UL grant, avoiding redundant OCC signaling while retaining Ma’s frequency domain OCC multiplexing operation and its associated uplink capacity benefit.
Claim(s) 6-12 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ma et al. (US 2025/0055747, “Ma”) in view of Nimbalker et al. (US 2017/0019883, “Nimbalker”) and further in view of Yang et al. (US 2020/0220681, “Yang”).
Examiner’s note: in what follows, references are drawn to Ma unless otherwise mentioned.
Regarding claim 6, it is noted that while disclosing an OCC sequence for PUSCH transmission, Ma does not specifically teach about a second OCC. It, however, had been known in the art before the effective date of the instant application as shown by Yang as follows;
the method of claim 1, wherein the dynamic uplink grant is further for a second PUSCH, and further comprising:
identifying a second OCC sequence for the second PUSCH from the set of OCC sequences of the OCC size; spreading second data for the second PUSCH into the second PUSCH using the second OCC sequence; and sending, to the base station, over the service link, the second PUSCH ([Yang, 0147] “UE 115-f may transmit the first PUSCH or PUCCH transmission 605-a and a second PUSCH or PUCCH transmission 605-b to base station 105-c. The second transmission 605-b may be a repetition of the first transmission 605-a (e.g., for bundling)… When the base station 105-c configures UE 115-f to use PUSCH or PUCCH bundling, the UE 115-f may use a hopping pattern (e.g., different TD-OCCs) across different bundles (e.g., copies) of the PUSCH/PUCCH transmission. That is, the UE 115-f may use the TD-OCC DMRS multiplexing scheme with a first TD-OCC for the first transmission 605-a and use a second TD-OCC for the second transmission 605-b.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to apply Yang’s known PUSCH-bundling TD-OCC hopping procedure to Ma’s NTN frequency domain OCC based PUSCH multiplexing procedure. The modification would allow Ma’s UE to use respective OCC sequences for respective first and second PUSCH transmissions, including a repeated second PUSCH transmission, while retaining the dynamic DCI/OCC index signaling of the Ma-Nimbalker combination. The resulting procedure teaches identifying and using a second OCC sequence for the second PUSCH as directed.
Regarding claim 7, the method of claim 6, wherein the second OCC sequence is a next OCC sequence after the first OCC sequence in the set of OCC sequences of the OCC size ([Yang, 0147] “the UE 115-f may use a hopping pattern (e.g., different TD-OCCs) across different bundles (e.g., copies) of the PUSCH/PUCCH transmission. That is, the UE 115-f may use the TD-OCC DMRS multiplexing scheme with a first TD-OCC for the first transmission 605-a and use a second TD-OCC for the second transmission 605-b.”, and [Yang, 0141] “The TD-OCC index may be defined according to the following equation: TD-OCC Index=(DMRS index+Δ.sub.offset) mod 4”).
Regarding claim 8, the method of claim 6, wherein the second OCC sequence is identified from the set of OCC sequences of the OCC size by applying an offset with respect to the first OCC sequence in the set of OCC sequences of the OCC size (See aforesaid [Yang, 0141] the equation for TD-OCC index with the offset.).
Regarding claim 9, the method of claim 1, wherein the UE is configured for PUSCH repetition, and further comprising: spreading the first data into a repetition of the first PUSCH using the first OCC sequence (See aforesaid [0084 and 0097]; and sending, to the base station, over the service link, the repetition of the first PUSCH (See aforesaid [Yang, 0147]).
Regarding claim 10, the method of claim 1, wherein the UE is configured for PUSCH repetition, and further comprising:
identifying a second OCC sequence for a repetition of the first PUSCH from the set of OCC sequences of the OCC size; spreading the first data into the repetition of the first PUSCH using the second OCC sequence; and sending, to the base station, over the service link, the repetition of the first PUSCH (See aforesaid [Yang, 0147]).
Regarding claim 11, the method of claim 10, wherein the second OCC sequence is a next OCC sequence after the first OCC sequence in the set of OCC sequences of the OCC size ([Yang, 0141] “The TD-OCC index may be defined according to the following equation: TD-OCC Index=(DMRS index+Δ.sub.offset) mod 4”. Note that when Δ.sub.offset=1, the equation yields the conventional cyclic next-index pattern 0[Wingdings font/0xE0]1, 1[Wingdings font/0xE0]2, 2[Wingdings font/0xE0]3 and 3[Wingdings font/0xE0]0.).
Regarding claim 12, the method of claim 10, wherein the second OCC sequence is identified from the set of OCC sequences of the OCC size by applying an offset with respect to the first OCC sequence in the set of OCC sequences of the OCC size (See aforesaid Yang’s equation.).
Claim(s) 13-16 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ma et al. (US 2025/0055747, “Ma”) in view of Nimbalker et al. (US 2017/0019883, “Nimbalker”) and further in view of Yang et al. (US 2016/0302183, “Yang183”).
Examiner’s note: in what follows, references are drawn to Ma unless otherwise mentioned.
Regarding claim 13, it is noted that while disclosing an OCC sequence for PUSCH transmission, Ma does not specifically teach about a common OCC for multiple PRBs. It, however, had been known in the art before the effective date of the instant application as shown by Yang183 as follows;
the method of claim 1, wherein: a plurality of physical resource blocks (PRBs) is used for the first PUSCH, and the first data for the first PUSCH is spread into a first PRB of the plurality of PRBs using the first OCC sequence; and further comprising spreading second data for the first PUSCH into a second PRB of the plurality of PRBs using the first OCC sequence ([Yang183, 0092] “the same OCC applies for multiple PRBs.”).
It would have been obvious to modify Ma’s OCC based PUSCH transmission to apply the same selected OCC sequence across multiple PRBs, as taught by Yang183. Ma teaches applying an OCC sequence to PUSCH symbols, while Yang183 expressly teaches an uplink multi-PRB allocation in which “the same OCC applies for multiple PRBs”. Applying Yang183’s common-OCC multi-PRB rule to Ma’s PUSCH would have been a predictable implementation that permits a UE to extend its OCC-configured uplink transmission over multiple allocated PRBs without separately selecting an OCC for each PRB.
Regarding claim 14, the method of claim 1, wherein: a plurality of physical resource blocks (PRBs) is used for the first PUSCH, and the first data for the first PUSCH is spread into a first PRB of the plurality of PRBs using the first OCC sequence; and further comprising: identifying a second OCC sequence for a second PRB of the plurality of PRBs from the set of OCC sequences of the OCC size; and spreading second data for the first PUSCH into the second PRB using the second OCC sequence ([Yang183, 0085] “Option 3: PUCCH format 3 (legacy or modified) with both multiple PRBs and multiple OCCs”, [Yang183, 0086] “Option 4: PUCCH format having a Physical Uplink Shared Channel (PUSCH)-like structure”, and [Yang183, 0092] “different OCCs apply for different PRBs following a predefined rule.”).
The rational and motivation for adding this teaching of Yang183 are the same as for claim 13.
Regarding claim 15, the method of claim 14, wherein the second OCC sequence is a next OCC sequence after the first OCC sequence in the set of OCC sequences of the OCC size ([Yang183, 0100] “The orthogonal sequences applied for the two slots are defined, with respect to a predefined base sequence, by cyclic shifts n.sub.oc,0, n.sub.oc,0+1, . . . , n.sub.oc,0+C.sub.PUCCH4−1 and n.sub.oc,1, n.sub.oc,1+1, . . . , n.sub.oc10+C.sub.PUCCH4−1”).
Regarding claim 16, the method of claim 14, wherein the second OCC sequence is identified from the set of OCC sequences of the OCC size by applying an offset with respect to the first OCC sequence in the set of OCC sequences of the OCC size (See aforesaid [Yang183, 0100]. The same consecutive index arrangement is repeated in the aforesaid Yang183’s modified PUCCH format 3 implementation. The “+1” and other incremented values are explicit index offsets from the initial OCC index.).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 17 and 18 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 19-20 depend from claim 18 above, and thus are objected.
The claims contain the following underlined features which, when combined with other features of the claim, prior art of record failed to anticipate or render obvious before the effective filing date of the instant application was filed:
17. The method of claim 1, wherein: the UE is configured for to use a frequency hopping for the first PUSCH, and the first data for the first PUSCH is spread into a no-hop of the frequency hopping using the first OCC sequence; and further comprising: spreading second data for the first PUSCH into a first hop of the frequency hopping using the first OCC sequence; and spreading third data for the first PUSCH into a second hop of the frequency hopping using the first OCC sequence.
18. The method of claim 1, wherein:
the UE is configured for to use a frequency hopping for the first PUSCH, and the first data for the first PUSCH is spread into a no-hop of the frequency hopping using the first OCC sequence; and
further comprising: identifying a second OCC sequence for a first hop of the frequency hopping from the set of OCC sequences of the OCC size; spreading second data for the first PUSCH into the first hop using the second OCC sequence; identifying a third OCC sequence for a second hop of the frequency hopping from the set of OCC sequences of the OCC size; spreading third data for the first PUSCH into the second hop using the third OCC sequence.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Harry H. Kim whose telephone number and email address are as follows; 571-272-5009, harry.kim2@uspto.gov.
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, Derrick Ferris can be reached at 571-272-3123.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from www.uspto.gov. For questions or assistance, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (in USA or Canada) or 571-272-1000.
/HARRY H KIM/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2411
Prosecution Insights