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 § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim(s) 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
The disclosure does not teach either of “wherein indication specifies that the condition is TRUE or FALSE” as discussed in claims 6-7.
At best PG PUB (US 2025/0063602 A1), the disclosure teaches the conditions are RRC-configured, and if the condition is true or an indication that condition is TRUE or FALSE, then the configured grant may be used. Par.[0137] of the PG PUB.
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.
Claim(s) 6 and 7 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.
Further recited “the indication” as discussed in claims 6 and 7 does not correspond to “the indication” as discussed in independent claim. For example, claim 1 recites “receive an indication of a condition that controls use of the plurality of periodic resources”. This appears to teach that the indication is a one or more conditions for using resources, and not whether the condition is TRUE or FALSE as claimed.
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)(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) 1-4, 6-7, and 13-17, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kim et al. (US 2023/0102937 A1).
Regarding claims 1 and 14, Kim discloses:
a user equipment (fig.15 element 1502 depicts a wireless device), comprising: one or more memories (fig.15 element 1524 depicts a memory) storing processor (fig.15 element 1518 depicts a processor) executable code (par.[0206] describes computer program instructions which may be executed by the processing system); and
one or more processors (fig.15 the aforecited processors) configured to execute the processor-executable code (fig.15 and par.[0206] as described above) and cause the user equipment to (fig.15 the aforecited wireless device):
receive scheduling information allocating a plurality of periodic resources for the user equipment (fig.21 the UE receives in an RRC_RELEASE message a configured grant configuration which comprises a plurality of resource for the Wireless Device (UE). Also par.[0294] which teaches that the wireless device requires a grant to transmit data (e.g. uplink data), wherein the grant is a grant of one or more uplink resources);
receive an indication of a condition that controls use of the plurality of periodic resources (See par.[0260] which recites, in part, “the UE is initiating (UP) small data transmission (SDT) procedure using a configured grant (CG) (e.g., a preconfigured uplink resource/grant, PUR) based on the UP CG conditions being met;”. As can be seen, when the condition of performing SDT/EDT is met, the UE may use the configured grant to perform EDT/SDT); and
selectively transmit data on at least one first resource of the plurality of periodic resources based on whether the condition is met (par.[0260] as discussed above, the UE can utilize the CG when the conditions for utilizing the CG, par.[0300] describe the conditions for utilizing the configured grant. Thus, when the conditions are not met, the UE will not use the configured grant).
Regarding claim 2, Kim discloses:
transmit the data on the at least one first resource when the condition is met (See par.[0260] which recites, in part, “the UE is initiating (UP) small data transmission (SDT) procedure using a configured grant (CG) (e.g., a preconfigured uplink resource/grant, PUR) based on the UP CG conditions being met;”.).
Regarding claim 3, Kim discloses:
abstain from transmitting the data on the at least one first resource when the condition is not met (par.[0260] which teaches that in order to use the preconfigured uplink grant/configured-grant, the condition must be met. That is, the UE cannot use the CG if the conditions for using the CG are not met).
Regarding claim 4, Kim discloses:
receive a radio resource control (RRC) message that includes the indication of the condition (par.[0298 – 0299] wherein the RRC signaling carries the CG configuration parameters, and the parameters comprise the condition for using the CG configuration, as discussed in par.[0300]).
Regarding claim 6, Kim discloses:
wherein the indication specifies that the condition is TRUE (par.[0300] when the UE identifies/indicates that the conditions for utilizing the CGConfiguration are TRUE, then the UE may use the CGConfiguration, fig.20).
Regarding claim 7, Kim discloses:
wherein the indication specifies that the condition is FALSE (par.[0300] conversely, when the conditions are not met (e.g. FALSE) then the UE is unable to utilize the CGConfiguration, fig.20).
Regarding claim 13, the disclosure of Kim teaches:
the one or more processors are further configured to execute the processor-executable code and cause the user equipment to receive group downlink control information specifying that the user equipment is to use the at least one first resource (fig.21 the UE receives in an RRC_RELEASE message a configured grant configuration which comprises a plurality of resource for the Wireless Device (UE). Also par.[0294] which teaches that the wireless device requires a grant to transmit data (e.g. uplink data), wherein the grant is a grant of one or more uplink resources. Par.[0187] describes the transmission of uplink resource allocation to a group of UEs utilizing a Group PDCCH); and
to selectively transmit the data, the one or more processors are further configured to execute the processor-executable code and cause the user equipment to transmit the data on the at least one first resource (par.[0260] as discussed above, the UE can utilize the CG when the conditions for utilizing the CG, par.[0300] describe the conditions for utilizing the configured grant. Thus, when the conditions are not met, the UE will not use the configured grant).
Regarding claim 15, Kim discloses:
a network entity (fig.15 element 1504 depicts a base station), comprising:
one or more memories (fig.15 element 1514 depicts a memory) storing processor-executable code (fig.15 the memory which comprises code, par.[0206]); and
one or more processors (fig.15 element 1508) configured to execute the processor-executable code (par.[0206] the aforecited code) and cause the network entity to:
transmit scheduling information allocating a plurality of periodic resources for a user equipment (fig.21 the UE receives in an RRC_RELEASE message a configured grant configuration which comprises a plurality of resource for the Wireless Device (UE). Also par.[0294] which teaches that the wireless device requires a grant to transmit data (e.g. uplink data), wherein the grant is a grant of one or more uplink resources);
transmit an indication of a condition that controls use of the plurality of periodic resources (See par.[0260] which recites, in part, “the UE is initiating (UP) small data transmission (SDT) procedure using a configured grant (CG) (e.g., a preconfigured uplink resource/grant, PUR) based on the UP CG conditions being met;”. As can be seen, when the condition of performing SDT/EDT is met, the UE may use the configured grant to perform EDT/SDT); and
selectively receive data on at least one first resource of the plurality of periodic resources based on whether the condition is met (par.[0260] as discussed above, the UE can utilize the CG when the conditions for utilizing the CG, par.[0300] describe the conditions for utilizing the configured grant. Thus, when the conditions are not met, the UE will not use the configured grant).
Regarding claim 16, Kim discloses:
receive the data on the at least one first resource when the condition is met (See par.[0260] which recites, in part, “the UE is initiating (UP) small data transmission (SDT) procedure using a configured grant (CG) (e.g., a preconfigured uplink resource/grant, PUR) based on the UP CG conditions being met;”. Also, fig.20).
abstain from receiving the data on the at least one first resource when the condition is not met (par.[0260] which teaches that in order to use the preconfigured uplink grant/configured-grant, the condition must be met. That is, the UE cannot use the CG if the conditions for using the CG are not met. Also fig.20).
Regarding claim 17, the disclosure of Kim teaches:
wherein the indication specifies that the condition is TRUE or FALSE (par.[0300] conversely, when the conditions are not met (e.g. FALSE) then the UE is unable to utilize the CGConfiguration, fig.20).
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.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim as applied to the independent claims, in view of Takeda et al. (US 2022/0116985 A1).
Regarding claim 5, the disclosure of Kim teaches:
receive a radio resource control (RRC) configured grant that includes the indication of the condition (that is, the disclosure of Kim teaches reception of configured grant parameters including the conditions for utilizing the configured grant via an RRC message as discussed above), but may not disclose:
receive configured grant (CG) information element (IE) via RRC signaling.
In an analogous art, the disclosure of Takeda teaches:
receive configured grant (CG) information element (IE) via RRC signaling (par.[0028 and 0032] describes a UE receiving CG configuration parameters via RRC signaling wherein the RRC signaling comprises a one or more ConfiguredGrantConfig Information Elements).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the instant application to combine the teachings of Kim for providing a configured grant configuration via RRC signaling with the disclosure of Takeda for using an information to convey configuration information in an RRC signaling. The motivation/suggestion would have been that information elements allow for quick adoption and change of configuration information at the UE and are widely used in the art.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-12 and 18-20 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Cao et al. (US 2018/0176945 A1) “Systems and Method for Mixed Grant-Free and Grant-Based Uplink Transmissions”
Alfarhan et al. (US 2021/0274555 A1) “Methods, Apparatus and Systems for System Access in Unlicensed Spectrum”
Sun et al. (US 2019/0268933 A1) “OTA Dynamic TDD with CUI-R Multiplexed in UL”
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMAAL HENSON whose telephone number is (571)272-5339. The examiner can normally be reached M-Thu: 7:30 am - 6:30 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, Derrick Ferris can be reached at (571)272-3123. 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.
JAMAAL HENSON
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2411
/JAMAAL HENSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2411
Prosecution Insights