DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-20 are pending in this application.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Oath/Declaration
The applicant’s oath/declaration has been reviewed by the examiner and is found to conform to the requirements prescribed in 37 C.F.R. 1.63.
Priority
As required by M.P.E.P. 201.14(c), acknowledgement is made of applicant’s claim for priority based on applications filed on 04/03/2009 (EP 09005010.5).
Drawings
The applicant’s drawings submitted are acceptable for examination purposes.
Information Disclosure Statement
As required by M.P.E.P. 609(C), the applicant’s submissions of the Information Disclosure Statements dated 10/29/2024 is acknowledged by the examiner and the cited references have been considered in the examination of the claims now pending. As required by M.P.E.P 609 C(2), a copy of the PTOL-1449 initialed.
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 1-20 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.
Claim 1 line 2 recites “when semi-persistent scheduling is not activated” is lack of antecedent basis issue because there is no preceding limitation of “semi-persistent scheduling”. Similar issue exists in claim 11 line 4. Since dependent claims 2-10 and 12-20 depend on the corresponding claim 1 or 11, they are rejected for the same reason as described hereinabove.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the conflicting application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement.
Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b).
Claims 1 and 12 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S Patent No. 12,160,770; claim 1 of U.S Patent No. 11,785,500; claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 9,843,960; claims 1 and 11 of U.S. Patent No. 9,084,137; claims 1 and 5 of US. Patent #8,792,440; claims 1 and 6 of US Patent No. 9,439,211; claims 1 and 7 of US. Patent #10,405,226 and claims 1 and 6 of US. Patent #11,330,463. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because
Instant Application US Application #18/930829 (829’)
US Patent #: 11,785,500 (500’)
US Patent #: 9,843,960 (960’)
US Patent # 9,084,137 (137’)
1. A method implemented in a user equipment, the method comprising:
1. A method implemented in a user equipment, the method comprising:
1. A method implemented in a mobile communication system including a mobile terminal and a base station, the method comprising:
1. An integrated circuit structured to control operation of a mobile terminal, the integrated circuit comprising one or more processing devices configured to:
when semi-persistent scheduling is not activated, transmitting to a base station a scheduling request to request uplink resources for uplink transmission including uplink transmission of a buffer status report;
when semi-persistent scheduling is activated, checking a setup information element of a logical channel as part of a buffer status reporting procedure to determine whether to trigger a scheduling request for the logical channel;
responsive to a determination to trigger the scheduling request, transmitting the scheduling request to the base station;
and
responsive to a determination not to trigger the scheduling request, not transmitting the scheduling request to the base station,
wherein the user equipment is configured to selectively operate in one of at least a dynamic scheduling mode, in which radio resources are dynamically allocated by dynamic grants, and a semi-persistent scheduling mode, in which radio resources are allocated on a semi-persistent basis by semi-persistent scheduling grants.
receiving from a base station a semi-persistent scheduling configuration via Physical Downlink Control Channel (PDCCH) signaling;
when semi-persistent scheduling is not activated, transmitting to the base station a scheduling request to request uplink resources for uplink transmission including uplink transmission of a buffer status report;
when semi-persistent scheduling is activated, checking a setup information element of a logical channel as part of a buffer status reporting procedure to determine whether to trigger a scheduling request for the logical channel;
responsive to a determination to trigger the scheduling request, transmitting the scheduling request to the base station; and
responsive to a determination not to trigger the scheduling request, not transmitting the scheduling request to the base station;
wherein the user equipment is selectively operate in one of at least a dynamic scheduling mode, in which radio resources are dynamically allocated by dynamic grants, and a semi-persistent scheduling mode, in which radio resources are allocated on a semi-persistent basis by semi-persistent scheduling grants.
the base station transmitting to the mobile station a semi-persistent scheduling configuration via physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) signaling;
the mobile terminal receiving from the base station the semi-persistent scheduling configuration via the PDCCH signaling;
when semi-persistent scheduling is not activated, the mobile terminal transmitting to the base station a scheduling request to request uplink resources for uplink transmission including uplink transmission of a buffer status report;
when semi-persistent scheduling is activated, the mobile terminal checking a setup information element of a logical channel as part of a buffer status reporting procedure to determine whether to trigger a scheduling request for the logical channel;
when the mobile terminal determines to trigger the scheduling request, the mobile terminal transmitting the scheduling request to the base station for the logical channel; and
when the mobile terminal determines not to trigger the scheduling request, the mobile terminal not transmitting the scheduling request to the base station;
wherein the mobile communication system is selectively operable in one of at least a dynamic scheduling mode, in which radio resources are dynamically allocated by dynamic grants, and a semi-persistent scheduling mode, in which radio resources are allocated on a semi-persistent basis by semi-persistent scheduling grants.
receive a semi-persistent scheduling activation transmitted from a base station to the mobile terminal via a physical downlink control channel signaling;
when semi-persistent scheduling is not activated, cause the mobile terminal to transmit a scheduling request to the base station in order to request uplink resources for uplink transmission including transmission of a buffer status report;
and when semi-persistent scheduling is activated, check a setup information element of a respective logical channel to determine whether to trigger a scheduling request or not,
wherein, when a determination is made to trigger the scheduling request, the step of transmitting the scheduling request to the base station is performed by the mobile terminal for the logical channel,
when a determination is made not to trigger the scheduling request, the step of transmitting the scheduling request to the base station is not performed by the mobile terminal,
the physical downlink control channel signaling is received by the mobile terminal from the base station for activation of a scheduling mode, including a dynamic scheduling mode in which radio resources are dynamically allocated by dynamic grants and a semi-persistent scheduling mode in which radio resources are allocated on a semi-persistent basis by semi-persistent scheduling grants, and
the setup information element is considered in the transmission of the buffer status report.
Although the conflict claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because 829’ discloses a method implemented in a user equipment: comprising: when semi-persistent scheduling is not activated, transmitting to the base station a scheduling request to request uplink resources for uplink transmission including uplink transmission of a buffer status report; when semi-persistent scheduling is activated, checking a setup information element of a logical channel as part of a buffer status reporting procedure to determine whether to trigger a scheduling request for the logical channel…; wherein the user equipment is configured to selectively operate in one of at least a dynamic scheduling mode, in which radio resources are dynamically allocated by dynamic grants, and a semi-persistent scheduling mode, in which radio resources are allocated on a semi-persistent basis by semi-persistent scheduling grants.
829’ does not discloses “receiving from a base station a semi-persistent scheduling configuration via Physical Downlink Control Channel (PDCCH) signaling” that perform the same functionalities as the method implemented claims as disclosed is US Patent #11,785,500 in the instant application. 829 is a boarder claim of U.S. Patent 11,785,500. Therefore, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they are disclose the similar invention.
Therefore, this is Non-Provisional nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting rejection because the conflicting claims in the patent application. Since dependent claims 2-10 and 12-20 depend on the corresponding independent claim 1 or 11, they are also not patentable based on the reasons above.
Although the demonstration above compare Instant application claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,785,500 and the claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 9,843,960; and the U.S. Patent No. 9,084,137, they are not patentably distinct over claims 1 and 5 of US. Patent #8,792,440; and claims 1 and 6 of US Patent No. 9,439,211; claims 1 and 7 of US. Patent #10,405,226; claims 1 and 6 of US. Patent #11,330,463, claim 1 of U.S Patent No. 12,160,770 from each other for the same reason above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
(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.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Hsu et al. (US 2010/0077100 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Hsu teaches a method implemented in a user equipment, the method comprising:
when semi-persistent scheduling is not activated, transmitting to a base station a scheduling request to request uplink resources for uplink transmission including uplink transmission of a buffer status report (when SPS resources are not configured at step 504, determine a total available data in the transmission buffer at step 506 see Hsu: Fig.12; ¶[0076]; ¶[0078]);
when semi-persistent scheduling is activated, checking a setup information element of a logical channel as part of a buffer status reporting procedure to determine whether to trigger a scheduling request for the logical channel (when SPS resource are configured at step 504, identify whether a type of data is SPS data at step 506 see Hsu: Fig.12; ¶[0077-0078]);
responsive to a determination to trigger the scheduling request, transmitting the scheduling request to the base station (Trigger a BSR -SR at step 514 when response to SPS resources are configured at step 504 see Fig.12 step 504; step 514; Fig.13 step 604); and
responsive to a determination not to trigger the scheduling request, not transmitting the scheduling request to the base station (Do Not Trigger a BSR -SR at step 516 when response to SPS resources are configured at step 504 via step 506 see Fig.12 step 504; step 514);
wherein the user equipment is configured to selectively operate in one of at least a dynamic scheduling mode, in which radio resources are dynamically allocated by dynamic grants, and a semi-persistent scheduling mode, in which radio resources are allocated on a semi-persistent basis by semi-persistent scheduling grants (A branch formed by Step 504, 508, 512 and 514 solves the third issue, as the process 40 does. In the process 50, the first threshold used in Step 506 is set according to an allocated PDCCH UL grant, and the second threshold used in Step 510 is set according to an allocated SPS UL grant see Hsu: ¶[0085]; Fig.12; ¶[0050]; ¶[0060]).
Regarding claim 2, Hsu taught the method according to claim 1 as described hereinabove. Hsu further teaches wherein the setup information element of the logical channel indicates that a buffer status report is not triggered (Step 512: If the data belongs to a logical channel with higher priority than those, except SPS logical channels, for which data already existed in the transmission buffer, perform Step 514; else, perform Step 516 see Hsu: Fig.12; ¶[0081]; ¶[0083]).
Regarding claim 3, Hsu taught the method according to claim 2 as described hereinabove. Hsu further teaches wherein the setup information element of the logical channel indicates that the buffer status report is not triggered despite that data has become available for the logical channel (Step 512: If the data belongs to a logical channel with higher priority than those, except SPS logical channels, for which data already existed in the transmission buffer, perform Step 514; else, perform Step 516 see Hsu: Fig.12; ¶[0081]; ¶[0083]).
Regarding claim 4, Hsu taught the method according to claim 2 as described hereinabove. Hsu further teaches wherein the setup information element of the logical channel indicates that the buffer status report is not triggered due to activation of the semi-persistent scheduling (Do not trigger a BSR-SR at step 516 due to SPS resources are configured at 504 see Hsu: Fig.12; ¶[0077]; ¶[0083]).
Regarding claim 5, Hsu taught the method according to claim 1 as described hereinabove. Hsu further teaches wherein the user equipment determines to trigger the scheduling request when the setup information element of the logical channel indicates activation of the semi-persistent scheduling (trigger a BSR-SR at step 514 response to Step 508: Identify whether a type of the data is SPS data. If the type of the data is SPS data see Hsu: Fig.12; ¶[0079]; ¶[0083]).
Regarding claim 6, Hsu taught the method according to claim 1 as described hereinabove. Hsu further teaches wherein the user equipment determines to trigger the scheduling request when the setup information element of the logical channel indicates that data has become available for the logical channel (trigger a BSR-SR at step 514 response to Step 508: Identify whether a type of the data is SPS data. If the type of the data is SPS data via steps 508 and 510 see Hsu: Fig.12; ¶[0079]; ¶[0083]).
Regarding claim 7, Hsu taught the method according to claim 1 as described hereinabove. Hsu further comprising: transmitting to the base station the scheduling request to request uplink resources for the uplink transmission of the buffer status report when: the semi-persistent scheduling is not activated, no uplink resources are allocated for a transmission time interval, and a buffer status report has not been triggered (When SPS resource are not configured at step 504, size of available data not larger than a first threshold at step 506, then do not trigger BSR-SR at step 516 see Hsu: Fig.12; ¶[0077]; ¶[0079]; ¶[0083]).
Regarding claim 8, Hsu taught the method according to claim 1 as described hereinabove. Hsu further comprising: considering an activation status of semi-persistent resource allocation to determine whether to trigger the buffer status report (Step 504: When the data arrives at a transmission buffer, identify whether SPS resources are configured and determine whether to trigger or not trigger BSR-SR at steps 514 and 516 see Hsu: Fig.12; ¶[0077-0083]).
Regarding claim 9, Hsu taught the method according to claim 1 as described hereinabove. Hsu further comprising: considering a scheduling mode status to determine on which logical channel to report in the buffer status report (SPS resource are configured at step 504 determine whether available data in the transmission buffer larger than first at step 506 and second threshold at step 510 see Hsu: Fig.12; ¶[0077-0083]).
Regarding claim 10, Hsu taught the method according to claim 9 as described hereinabove. Hsu further teaches wherein the scheduling mode status is an activation of the semi-persistent scheduling or a deactivation of the semi-persistent scheduling (Step 504: When the data arrives at a transmission buffer, identify whether SPS resources are configured. If the SPS resources are not configured at step 504 see Hsu: Fig.12; ¶[0077]).
Regarding claim 11. Hsu: teaches a user equipment (communication device 20 see Hsu: Fig.7) comprising:
a transmitter which, in operation, transmits a scheduling request to a base station to request uplink resources for uplink transmission including uplink transmission of a buffer status report (transmitting resources to eNB see Hsu: ¶[0060]; ¶[0101]), when semi-persistent scheduling is not activated (SPS resources are not configured at step 504 see Hsu: Fig.12; ¶[0077]), wherein
when semi-persistent scheduling is activated, the user equipment checks a setup information element of a logical channel as part of a buffer status reporting procedure to determine whether to trigger a scheduling request for the logical channel (when SPS resource are configured at step 504, identify whether a type of data is SPS data at step 506 see Hsu: Fig.12; ¶[0077-0078]);
when the user equipment determines to trigger the scheduling request, the user equipment transmits the scheduling request to the base station for the logical channel (Trigger a BSR -SR at step 514 when response to SPS resources are configured at step 504 see Fig.12 step 504; step 514; Fig.13 step 604); and
when the user equipment determines not to trigger the scheduling request, the user equipment does not transmit the scheduling request to the base station (Do Not Trigger a BSR -SR at step 516 when response to SPS resources are configured at step 504 via step 506 see Fig.12 step 504; step 514); and
a receiver which, in operation, receives a Physical Downlink Control Channel (PDCCH) signaling (a size of a UL grant (whether it is a PDCCH UL grant or an SPS UL grant) or more than one UL grant, or combination of different kinds of UL grants, e.g. combination of SPS UL grants and PDCCH UL grants see ¶[0064]) to selectively operate in one of at least a dynamic scheduling mode, in which radio resources are dynamically allocated by dynamic grants, and a semi-persistent scheduling mode, in which radio resources are allocated on a semi-persistent basis by semi-persistent scheduling grants (A branch formed by Step 504, 508, 512 and 514 solves the third issue, as the process 40 does. In the process 50, the first threshold used in Step 506 is set according to an allocated PDCCH UL grant, and the second threshold used in Step 510 is set according to an allocated SPS UL grant see Hsu: ¶[0085]; Fig.12; ¶[0050]; ¶[0060]).
Regarding claim 12, claim 12 is rejected for the same reason as the method of claim 2 as described hereinabove.
Regarding claim 13, claim 13 is rejected for the same reason as the method of claim 3 as described hereinabove.
Regarding claim 14, claim 14 is rejected for the same reason as the method of claim 4 as described hereinabove.
Regarding claim 15, claim 15 is rejected for the same reason as the method of claim 5 as described hereinabove.
Regarding claim 16, claim 16 is rejected for the same reason as the method of claim 6 as described hereinabove.
Regarding claim 17, claim 17 is rejected for the same reason as the method of claim 7 as described hereinabove.
Regarding claim 18, claim 18 is rejected for the same reason as the method of claim 8 as described hereinabove.
Regarding claim 19, claim 19 is rejected for the same reason as the method of claim 9 as described hereinabove.
Regarding claim 20, claim 20 is rejected for the same reason as the method of claim 10 as described hereinabove.
Conclusion
Prior art made of record, but not relied upon includes:
Hsu et al. (US 2010/0077100 A1);
Hu et al. (US 2011/0292845 A1).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GUANG W LI whose telephone number is (571)270-1897. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Thursday 7AM-5PMET.
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, Joseph Avellino can be reached on (571) 272-3905. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, 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.
GUANG W. LI
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2478
September 28, 2026
/GUANG W LI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2478
Prosecution Insights