DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1 - 20 are presented for examination.
Specification
The title of the invention is objected for not being descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the Examiner.
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.
Claims 1, 11, 12, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ramirez et al. (US Pub. 20220376965 A1).
For claims 1 and 20, Ramirez discloses a terminal device, comprising a processor and a memory (UE 600 includes processing circuitry 630 and memory 640; Fig. 15.) [0111–0112], wherein the memory is configured to store a computer program, and the processor is configured to invoke and run the computer program stored in the memory to cause the terminal device to perform (Memory 640 holds program 650 executed by processing circuitry 630; Fig. 15.) [0105, 0112–0115]:
receiving first signalling sent by a network device (UE receives DCI from base station; Fig. 10, block 350.) [0013, 0019, 0100], wherein the first signalling is used to dynamically schedule first uplink data (The disclosed DCI is accompanied by an UL grant and cannot perform the disclosed BWP switch without resource allocation; Fig. 10.) [0065, 0100], and the first signalling is used to indicate a transmission waveform of the first uplink data (DCI identifies the BWP associated with the target DFT-s-OFDM or CP-OFDM waveform; Figs. 9–10, blocks 260/350–360.) [0012–0013, 0084, 0100].
Claim 20 differs from claim 1 only by the additional recitation of the following limitation, which is also taught by the cited prior art. The cited prior art further discloses a communication method [0105, 0112–0115], comprising: …
All other identical limitations are rejected based on the same rationale as shown above.
For claim 12, Ramirez discloses a network device, comprising a processor and a memory, wherein the memory is configured to store a computer program, and the processor is configured to invoke and run the computer program stored in the memory to cause the network device to perform:
sending first signalling to a terminal device (UE receives base-station DCI; Fig. 10, block 350.) [A 0013, 0100], wherein the first signalling is used to dynamically schedule first uplink data (The DCI is accompanied by an UL grant/resource allocation; Fig. 10.) [A 0065, 0100], and the first signalling is used to indicate a transmission waveform of the first uplink data (DCI selects the BWP associated with the target DFT-s-OFDM/CP-OFDM waveform; Fig. 10, blocks 350–360.) [0013, 0100].
For claim 11, Ramirez discloses the first signalling is downlink control information (DCI) or a random access response (RAR) uplink grant (Figs. 9–10, blocks 260/350.) [0065, 0084, 0100].
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 of this title, 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) 2, 3, 7, 8, 13, 16 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramirez et al. (US Pub. 20220376965 A1) in view of Ly et al. (US Pub. 20250030525 A1).
For claims 2 and 13, Ramirez discloses all limitations this claim depended on.
But Ramirez doesn’t explicitly disclose the following limitation taught by Ly.
Ly discloses the first signalling comprises a first indication field (dedicated new or repurposed DCI bit field carries the waveform indication; Fig. 4, signal 410.) [0072, 0081], the first indication field is used to indicate a first parameter (The bit value/field content is the first-waveform indication parameter; Fig. 4, 410.) [0072, 0081, 0131], and the first parameter corresponds to the transmission waveform of the first uplink data (The field selects CP-OFDM or DFT-s-OFDM for PUSCH; Fig. 4.) [0072–0074, 0081–0082] .
Since, all are analogous arts addressing data transmission scheme used in a mobile network; Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings of Ramirez with Ly to ensure proper transmission of data, thus, improving data transmission speed.
For claim 3, Ramirez as modified by Ly, Ly further discloses that the first parameter corresponds to the transmission waveform of the first uplink data comprises that the first parameter corresponds to a parameter used to indicate the transmission waveform of the first uplink data (Under the broadest reasonable interpretation, the DCI field value is or corresponds to the disclosed waveform identifier; Fig. 4.) [0072, 0081, 0130–0131]. See motivation to combine the references from the above.
For claims 7 and 16, Ramirez discloses all limitations this claim depended on.
But Ramirez doesn’t explicitly disclose the following limitation taught by Ly.
Ly discloses if the first uplink data is initial transmission data, the transmission waveform of the first uplink data is determined based on the first signalling (DCI explicitly indicates the waveform used for the PUSCH initial transmission; Fig. 4, 410/414.) [0072–0074, 0081–0082]; and/or
if the first uplink data is retransmission data, the transmission waveform of the first uplink data is determined based on a transmission waveform of initial transmission data of the first uplink data (Retransmission is configured either to retain the first waveform or change from the unsuccessful initial waveform; Fig. 4, 416/418.) [0076, 0085–0086].
Since, all are analogous arts addressing data transmission scheme used in a mobile network; Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings of Ramirez with Ly to ensure proper transmission of data, thus, improving data transmission speed.
For claims 8 and 17, Ramirez discloses all limitations this claim depended on.
But Ramirez doesn’t explicitly disclose the following limitation taught by Ly.
Ly discloses initial transmission data and retransmission data of the first uplink data correspond to a same transmission waveform, or initial transmission data and retransmission data of the first uplink data correspond to different transmission waveforms (Fig. 4, 414–418.) [0076, 0084–0086].
Since, all are analogous arts addressing data transmission scheme used in a mobile network; Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings of Ramirez with Ly to ensure proper transmission of data, thus, improving data transmission speed.
Claim(s) 4, 5, 14, and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramirez et al. (US Pub. 20220376965 A1) in view of Ly et al. (US Pub. 20250030525 A1) in further view of Hwang et al. (US Pub. 20200120642 A1).
For claims 4 and 14, Ramirez, as modified by Ly, discloses all limitations this claim depended on.
But Ramirez, as modified by Ly, doesn’t explicitly disclose the following limitation taught by Hwang.
Hwang discloses the first parameter is used to indicate a resource allocation type of the first uplink data (DCI includes a dynamically selected resource-allocation type; Figs. 10–11.) [0174–0178, 0236–0241], and the resource allocation type of the first uplink data corresponds to the transmission waveform of the first uplink data (selects/changes the PUSCH waveform according to the resource-allocation type contained in DCI; text embodiment associated with Figs. 10–11.) [ 0235–0241].
Since, all are analogous arts addressing data transmission scheme used in a mobile network; Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings of Ramirez and Ly with Hwang to ensure transmission waveforms can be optimized, thus, improving signal quality.
For claims 5 and 15, Ramirez, as modified by Ly, discloses all limitations this claim depended on.
But Ramirez, as modified by Ly, doesn’t explicitly disclose the following limitation taught by Hwang.
Hwang discloses the resource allocation type of the first uplink data comprises a type 0 and a type 1, wherein the type 0 and the type 1 correspond to a discrete Fourier transform-spread orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (DFT-s-OFDM) waveform (dynamically selects both types; Fig. 11 illustrates type 1.) [0174–0178] and a cyclic prefix-orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (CP-OFDM) waveform, respectively, or the type 0 and the type 1 correspond to a CP-OFDM waveform and a DFT-s-OFDM waveform, respectively (supplies exactly two selectable types and ties RA type to the two waveforms—DFT-s for the consecutive-only case and CP otherwise. Assigning the two disclosed labels to the two alternatives is a predictable one-bit mapping; Fig. 11.) [0174–0178, 0235–0241].
Since, all are analogous arts addressing data transmission scheme used in a mobile network; Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings of Ramirez and Ly with Hwang to ensure transmission waveforms can be optimized, thus, improving signal quality.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramirez et al. (US Pub. 20220376965 A1) in view of Ly et al. (US Pub. 20250030525 A1) in further view of Levitsky et al. (US Pub. 20220123983 A1).
For claim 6, Ramirez, as modified by Ly, discloses all limitations this claim depended on.
But Ramirez, as modified by Ly, doesn’t explicitly disclose the following limitation taught by Levitsky.
Levitsky discloses the parameter used to indicate the transmission waveform of the first uplink data comprises a transform precoding parameter (transform-precoder parameter/state selects waveform; Fig. 3, references 310/320.) [0063, 0065, 0068–0074].
Since, all are analogous arts addressing data transmission scheme used in a mobile network; Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings of Ramirez and Ly with Levitsky to ensure transmission waveforms can be optimized, thus, improving signal quality.
Claim(s) 9, 10, 18, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramirez et al. (US Pub. 20220376965 A1) in view of Levitsky et al. (US Pub. 20220123983 A1).
For claims 9 and 18, Ramirez discloses all limitations this claim depended on.
But Ramirez doesn’t explicitly disclose the following limitation taught by Levitsky.
Levitsky discloses the first signalling is used to indicate a transform precoding parameter (The dynamic DCI-selected MCS table correspondingly indicates a transform-precoder parameter state; Fig. 3, 315/320.) [0065, 0071–0074], and
different transmission waveforms for the first uplink data are determined based on the transform precoding parameter (Enabled and disabled transform-precoder states determine DFT-s-OFDM and CP-OFDM; Fig. 3, 320.) [0063, 0068–0075].
Since, all are analogous arts addressing data transmission scheme used in a mobile network; Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings of Ramirez with Levitsky to ensure transmission waveforms can be optimized, thus, improving signal quality.
For claims 10 and 19, Ramirez as modified by Levitsky, Levitsky further discloses when the transform precoding parameter indicates an enabled transform precoder, the transmission waveform of the first uplink data comprises a DFT-s-OFDM waveform (Express mapping; Fig. 3, 320.) [0063, 0069, 0074]; and/or when the transform precoding parameter indicates a disabled transform precoder, the transmission waveform of the first uplink data comprises a CP-OFDM waveform (Express mapping; Fig. 3, 320.) [0063, 0069, 0074]. See motivation to combine the references from the above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 10903956 B2; US 11601311 B2;
Inquiries
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to PAKEE FANG whose telephone number is (571)270-3633. The Examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri 9:00AM-5:00PM.
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, Armouche, Hadi can be reached on 571-270-3618. 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.
/PAKEE FANG/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2409
Prosecution Insights