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 .
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 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); 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 nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 21-40 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,245,249. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because
For claim 21, U.S. Patent No. 12,245,249 discloses: receive one or more radio resources (RRC) messages with one or more configuration parameters for a plurality of cells scheduled by a downlink control information (DCI) format; receive a DCI, based on the DCI format, comprising: resource assignments for the plurality of cells; and a channel state information (CSI) request; determine one cell, of the plurality of cells, to transmit a CSI based on the CSI request; and transmit, based on the DCI: a first uplink signal comprising the CSI via the one cell of the plurality of cells (claim 1: receive downlink control information (DCI) comprising: a cell index indicating a first plurality of cells of a plurality of cells; resource assignments for the first plurality of cells; and a channel state information (CSI) request; determine a cell, of the first plurality of cells, to transmit a CSI based on the CSI request and the cell index; and transmit, via the cell, the CSI); and a second uplink signal comprising a transport block via a second cell of the plurality of cells (claim 5: transmit: the first transport block via the first cell; and the second transport block via the second cell).
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.
Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Zhang et al. (US 2023/0268968) (“Zhang”).
For claim 21, Zhang discloses: receive one or more radio resources (RRC) messages with one or more configuration parameters for a plurality of cells (paragraph 83: The serving cell, via base station 105, may signal CSI configuration information to UE 115. The CSI configuration information may configured UE 115 with up to 48 CSI report configurations and up to 128 aperiodic CSI trigger states. Each trigger state may be linked with up to 16 CSI report configurations via associated report configuration information included within each trigger state) scheduled by a downlink control information (DCI) format; receive a DCI, based on the DCI format, comprising: resource assignments for the plurality of cells; and a channel state information (CSI) request (paragraph 84: The CSI request, CSI-reference signal (CSI-RS)/CSI-interference measurement (CSI-IM), and uplink transmission (e.g., PUSCH) can be configured for different CCs); determine one cell, of the plurality of cells, to transmit a CSI based on the CSI request (paragraph 84: In a multi-carrier configuration, DCI 302, which carries the CSI request field, may be transmitted by base station 105 and received by UE 115 on a scheduling CC. One of the multiple carriers configured for communication is designated as the scheduling CC. The “carrier indicator” field within DCI 302 indicates to UE 115 on which uplink carrier to transmit the CSI report); and transmit, based on the DCI: a first uplink signal comprising the CSI via the one cell of the plurality of cells (paragraph 84: DCI 302 indicates to UE 115 on which uplink carrier to transmit the CSI report); and a second uplink signal comprising a transport block via a second cell of the plurality of cells (paragraph 84: uplink transmission (e.g., PUSCH) can be configured for different CCs).
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.
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) 22, 23, and 37 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang in view of Kim et al. (US 2022/0052824) (“Kim”).
For claim 22; Zhang discloses the subject matter in claim 21 as described above in the office action.
Zhang does not expressly disclose, but Kim from similar fields of endeavor teaches: wherein the first uplink signal comprises a first physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) transmission; and uplink control information is piggybacked on the first PUSCH transmission (paragraph 315: when the PUCCH and the PUSCH collide (e.g., when the same symbol or the same RE is allocated), information (e.g., CSI, A/N, or SR) to be transmitted to the PUCCH may be piggybacked to the PUSCH and transmitted together the uplink (UL) data through the PUSCH). Thus it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to implement the scheduling as described by Kim in the CSI reporting as described by Zhang. The motivation is to improve resource usage.
For claim 23 and 37; Zhang discloses the subject matter in claim 22 as described above in the office action.
Zhang does not expressly disclose, but Kim from similar fields of endeavor teaches: wherein the uplink control information comprises the CSI (paragraph 315: when the PUCCH and the PUSCH collide (e.g., when the same symbol or the same RE is allocated), information (e.g., CSI, A/N, or SR) to be transmitted to the PUCCH may be piggybacked to the PUSCH and transmitted together the uplink (UL) data through the PUSCH). Thus it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to implement the scheduling as described by Kim in the CSI reporting as described by Zhang. The motivation is to improve resource usage.
Claim(s) 24, 38, 38, and 40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang in view of Kim as applied to claim 23 above, and further in view of Bang et al. (US 2023/0217458) (“Bang”).
For claims 24 and 38; Zhang discloses the subject matter in claim 23 as described above in the office action.
Zhang does not expressly disclose, but Bang from similar fields of endeavor teaches: the DCI further comprises a first cell index indicating a first plurality of cells of the plurality of cells, wherein the first plurality of cells comprise the one cell and the second cell; and the instructions further cause the wireless device to determine the one cell further based on the first cell index (paragraph 195: The base station may designate a plurality of cells as a group through higher layer signaling… For example, cell #0 and cell #1 may be configured for cell group #0 through higher layer signaling, and when the base station indicates cell group #0 through DCI, the UE receiving the DCI may determine that downlink or uplink transmission is scheduled in cell #0 and cell #1). Thus it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to implement the signaling as described by Bang in the CSI reporting as described by Zhang. The motivation is to improve resource usage.
For claim 39; Zhang discloses the subject matter in claim 38 as described above in the office action.
Zhang does not expressly disclose, but Kim from similar fields of endeavor teaches: wherein the first uplink signal comprises a first physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) transmission; and uplink control information is piggybacked on the first PUSCH transmission (paragraph 315: when the PUCCH and the PUSCH collide (e.g., when the same symbol or the same RE is allocated), information (e.g., CSI, A/N, or SR) to be transmitted to the PUCCH may be piggybacked to the PUSCH and transmitted together the uplink (UL) data through the PUSCH). Thus it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to implement the scheduling as described by Kim in the CSI reporting as described by Zhang. The motivation is to improve resource usage.
For claim 40, Zhang discloses: wherein the instructions further cause the wireless device to transmit the CSI in an aperiodic CSI report (paragraph 80: In order to select the particular CSI configuration, base station 105 transmits a DCI message, DCI 300, (e.g., DCI format 0_1), which includes a CSI request field for aperiodic CSI… One codepoint (e.g., codepoint = 0) is reserved to indicate that no aperiodic CSI is requested. With the codepoint mapping of the illustrated example, codepoint = 1 would reference CSI aperiodic trigger state 0.0…).
Claim(s) 25-27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang in view of Kim in view of Bang as applied to claim 24 above, and further in view of Oh et al. (US 2022/0256577) (“Oh”).
For claim 25; Zhang discloses the subject matter in claim 24 as described above in the office action.
Zhang does not expressly disclose, but Oh from similar fields of endeavor teaches: determine the one cell based on the first cell index being a lowest index among one or more cell indexes of the first plurality of cells (paragraph 254-256: the terminal may transmit the UCI in a carrier or cell with the smallest carrier index or cell index (e.g., smallest ServCellIndex) and/or a subband with the smallest subband index (e.g., smallest SubbandIndex) among carriers, cells or subbands in which the PUSCH is transmitted). Thus it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to implement the signaling as described by Oh in the CSI reporting as described by Zhang. The motivation is to improve resource usage.
For claim 26, Zhang discloses: wherein the CSI request indicates a first value in a plurality of values comprising: the first value indicating to transmit the CSI; and a second value indicating to skip transmission of the CSI (paragraph 80: In order to select the particular CSI configuration, base station 105 transmits a DCI message, DCI 300, (e.g., DCI format 0_1), which includes a CSI request field for aperiodic CSI… One codepoint (e.g., codepoint = 0) is reserved to indicate that no aperiodic CSI is requested. With the codepoint mapping of the illustrated example, codepoint = 1 would reference CSI aperiodic trigger state 0.0…).
For claim 27, Zhang discloses: wherein the instructions further cause the wireless device to transmit the CSI in an aperiodic CSI report (paragraph 80: In order to select the particular CSI configuration, base station 105 transmits a DCI message, DCI 300, (e.g., DCI format 0_1), which includes a CSI request field for aperiodic CSI… One codepoint (e.g., codepoint = 0) is reserved to indicate that no aperiodic CSI is requested. With the codepoint mapping of the illustrated example, codepoint = 1 would reference CSI aperiodic trigger state 0.0…).
Claim(s) 28-30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang in view of Kim in view of Bang in view of Oh as applied to claim 27 above, and further in view of Li et al. (US 2023/0053143) (“Li”).
For claim 28; Zhang discloses the subject matter in claim 23 as described above in the office action.
Zhang does not expressly disclose, but Li from similar fields of endeavor teaches: the DCI further comprises a bandwidth part (BWP) index field indicating at least a BWP of at least one cell of the plurality of cells; and a size of the BWP index field is determined based on a respective plurality of BWPs configured for each of the plurality of cells (paragraph 161-171: size of a BWP indicator field in one piece of DCI is determined based on a minimum quantity of BWPs configured on the N scheduled carriers… The DCI includes one BWP group indicator field, and the BWP group indicator field is used to indicate an index of one BWP group instead of indicating an index of one BWP… The DCI includes N BWP indicator fields, and each BWP indicator field is used to indicate one BWP on one carrier). Thus it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to implement the signaling as described by Li in the CSI reporting as described by Zhang. The motivation is to improve resource usage.
For claim 29; Zhang discloses the subject matter in claim 28 as described above in the office action.
Zhang does not expressly disclose, but Li from similar fields of endeavor teaches: wherein the size of the BWP index field is further determined based on a largest number of BWPs among the respective plurality of BWPs (paragraph 161-171: size of a BWP indicator field in one piece of DCI is determined based on a minimum quantity of BWPs configured on the N scheduled carriers… The DCI includes one BWP group indicator field, and the BWP group indicator field is used to indicate an index of one BWP group instead of indicating an index of one BWP… The DCI includes N BWP indicator fields, and each BWP indicator field is used to indicate one BWP on one carrier). Thus it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to implement the signaling as described by Li in the CSI reporting as described by Zhang. The motivation is to improve resource usage.
For claim 30; Zhang discloses the subject matter in claim 29 as described above in the office action.
Zhang does not expressly disclose, but Oh from similar fields of endeavor teaches: wherein the second uplink signal does not comprise the CSI (paragraph 254-256, 273: the terminal may transmit the UCI in a carrier or cell with the smallest carrier index or cell index (e.g., smallest ServCellIndex) and/or a subband with the smallest subband index (e.g., smallest SubbandIndex) among carriers, cells or subbands in which the PUSCH is transmitted… When the terminal does not transmit A-CSI in any of the plurality of PUSCHs, the terminal may determine a PUSCH transmitted in a serving cell with the smallest serving cell index (ServCellIndex) among serving cells that transmit the plurality of PUSCHs, as the PUSCH in which to multiplex and transmit the UCI). Thus it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to implement the signaling as described by Oh in the CSI reporting as described by Zhang. The motivation is to improve resource usage.
Claim(s) 31-33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang in view of Oh.
For claim 31; Zhang discloses the subject matter in claim 21 as described above in the office action.
Zhang does not expressly disclose, but Oh from similar fields of endeavor teaches: determine the one cell based on a cell index, of the one cell, being a lowest index among one or more cell indexes of the plurality of cells (paragraph 254-256: the terminal may transmit the UCI in a carrier or cell with the smallest carrier index or cell index (e.g., smallest ServCellIndex) and/or a subband with the smallest subband index (e.g., smallest SubbandIndex) among carriers, cells or subbands in which the PUSCH is transmitted). Thus it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to implement the signaling as described by Oh in the CSI reporting as described by Zhang. The motivation is to improve resource usage.
For claim 32, Zhang discloses: transmit the CSI in an aperiodic CSI report (paragraph 80: In order to select the particular CSI configuration, base station 105 transmits a DCI message, DCI 300, (e.g., DCI format 0_1), which includes a CSI request field for aperiodic CSI… One codepoint (e.g., codepoint = 0) is reserved to indicate that no aperiodic CSI is requested. With the codepoint mapping of the illustrated example, codepoint = 1 would reference CSI aperiodic trigger state 0.0…).
For claim 33; Zhang discloses the subject matter in claim 32 as described above in the office action.
Zhang does not expressly disclose, but Oh from similar fields of endeavor teaches: wherein the second uplink signal does not comprise the CSI (paragraph 254-256, 273: the terminal may transmit the UCI in a carrier or cell with the smallest carrier index or cell index (e.g., smallest ServCellIndex) and/or a subband with the smallest subband index (e.g., smallest SubbandIndex) among carriers, cells or subbands in which the PUSCH is transmitted… When the terminal does not transmit A-CSI in any of the plurality of PUSCHs, the terminal may determine a PUSCH transmitted in a serving cell with the smallest serving cell index (ServCellIndex) among serving cells that transmit the plurality of PUSCHs, as the PUSCH in which to multiplex and transmit the UCI). Thus it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to implement the signaling as described by Oh in the CSI reporting as described by Zhang. The motivation is to improve resource usage.
34. (New) The wireless device of claim 33, wherein:the first uplink signal comprises a first physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) transmission; anduplink control information is piggybacked on the first PUSCH transmission.
Claim(s) 34-36 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang in view of Oh as applied to claim 33 above, and further in view of Kim.
For claim 34; Zhang discloses the subject matter in claim 33 as described above in the office action.
Zhang does not expressly disclose, but Kim from similar fields of endeavor teaches: wherein the first uplink signal comprises a first physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) transmission; and uplink control information is piggybacked on the first PUSCH transmission (paragraph 315: when the PUCCH and the PUSCH collide (e.g., when the same symbol or the same RE is allocated), information (e.g., CSI, A/N, or SR) to be transmitted to the PUCCH may be piggybacked to the PUSCH and transmitted together the uplink (UL) data through the PUSCH). Thus it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to implement the scheduling as described by Kim in the CSI reporting as described by Zhang. The motivation is to improve resource usage.
For claim 35, Zhang discloses: transmit the CSI in an aperiodic CSI report (paragraph 80: In order to select the particular CSI configuration, base station 105 transmits a DCI message, DCI 300, (e.g., DCI format 0_1), which includes a CSI request field for aperiodic CSI… One codepoint (e.g., codepoint = 0) is reserved to indicate that no aperiodic CSI is requested. With the codepoint mapping of the illustrated example, codepoint = 1 would reference CSI aperiodic trigger state 0.0…).
For claim 36; Zhang discloses the subject matter in claim 35 as described above in the office action.
Zhang does not expressly disclose, but Kim from similar fields of endeavor teaches: wherein the uplink control information comprises the CSI (paragraph 315: when the PUCCH and the PUSCH collide (e.g., when the same symbol or the same RE is allocated), information (e.g., CSI, A/N, or SR) to be transmitted to the PUCCH may be piggybacked to the PUSCH and transmitted together the uplink (UL) data through the PUSCH). Thus it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to implement the scheduling as described by Kim in the CSI reporting as described by Zhang. The motivation is to improve resource usage.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Kim et al. (US 2020/0313831); Kim discloses generate CSI by measuring a CSI resource transmitted in a BWP corresponding to a BWP index in a CSI resource configuration, in a cell corresponding to a cell index in a CSI reporting configuration indicated by a CSI request indicator in the DCI.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN D BLANTON whose telephone number is (571)270-3933. The examiner can normally be reached 7am-6pm EST, Mon-Thu.
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, Faruk Hamza can be reached at 571-272-7969. 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.
/JOHN D BLANTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2466
Prosecution Insights