Application No. 16/794,493
`Reply to Office Action Dated August 5, 2021
`
`REMARKS
`
`Applicant respectfully requests reconsideration of this application in view of the above
`
`amendments and the following remarks. Claims 1 and 17-27 will be pending upon entry ofthis
`
`amendment. Claims 1, 17, 20, 22, 23 and 26 are amended. Claims 2-16 were canceled by way
`
`of previous amendment. No new matter has been addedto the application.
`
`Rejections Under 35 U.S.C. § 103 are Overcome
`
`Claims 1, 17-19, and 22-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
`
`Yao et al (US 20180109286 A1, hereinafter referred to as Yao) in view of Kim et al (US
`
`20180083752 A1, hereinafter referred to as Kim) and Xionget al (US 20160226639 A1,
`
`hereinafter referred to as Xiong).
`
`Claims 20 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yao, Kim,
`
`and Xiong as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Oh et al (US 20180213484 Al,
`
`hereinafter referred to as Oh) and Kazmiet al (US 20140092877 A1, hereinafter referred to as
`
`Kazmi).
`
`Claims 21 and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yao, Kim,
`
`and Xiong as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Papasakellariou (US 20160269939
`
`A1, hereinafter referred to as Papasakellariou).
`
`Applicant has amended independent claims 1 (communication apparatus) and 22
`
`(communication method), as set forth above, to more particularly recite the subject matter that
`
`applicant considersas their invention. Dependent claims 17 and 23 are amendedfor consistency
`
`with the amendments madeto their base claims, and dependent claims 20 and 26 are amended to
`
`correct minor typographicalerror.
`
`Support for the amendments to claims 1 and 22 is found, for example, in §§[0133]-[0137]
`
`of the application as filed.
`
`Independent claim 1 as amended now moreparticularly recites as follows:
`
`1.
`
`(Currently Amended) A communication apparatus comprising:
`
`control circuitry; and
`
`a transmitter, which is coupled to the control circuitry;
`
`

`

`Application No. 16/794,493
`Reply to Office Action Dated August 5, 2021
`
`wherein:
`
`in a first case in which the control circuitry performs a physical uplink shared channel
`
`(PUSCH) mapping of PUSCHrepetition signals in a plurality of subframes, the control circuitry
`
`punctures a part of the PUSCHrepetition signals in a resource in a last single-carrier frequency-
`
`division multiple access (SC-FDMA) symbol of a sounding reference signal (SRS) transmission
`
`candidate subframeofthe plurality of subframes, wherein the resource is counted for the PUSCH
`
`mapping of the PUSCHrepetition signals, and
`
`the transmitter transmits a remaining part of the PUSCH repetition signals apart from the
`
`punctured part of the PUSCHrepetition signals; and
`
`in a second case in which the control circuitry performs a physical uplink control channel
`
`(PUCCH) mapping of PUCCHrepetition signals in a plurality of subframes, the control circuitry
`
`uses a shortened PUCCHformat in a SRS transmission candidate subframeofthe plurality of
`
`subframes, and
`
`the transmitter transmits the PUCCHrepetition signals.
`
`(Emphases added.)
`
`Claim 22 is amended to recite a communication method that generally correspondsto the
`
`communication apparatus recited in claim 1, as amended.
`
`Applicant respectfully submits that claims 1 and 22, as amended, are not rendered
`
`obviousbythe prior art, in any combination and, therefore, are allowable as well as their
`
`respective dependentclaims.
`
`In particular, Yao, Kim, and Xiong cited against claims 1 and 22 do not teach or suggest
`
`the claimed subject matter, alone or even in combination.
`
`For example, while the office cited Figs. 9 and 13-14, J9[0004]-[0007], [0168]-[0169],
`
`[0173], [0178], [0211]-[0212], [0282]-[0286] and [0296]-[0303] of Kim, Kim merely describes
`
`“PUSCHdata transmission is not permitted on the SC-FDMA symboldesignated for SRS”
`
`wherein “[t]he SRS transmissions are always performed in the last SC-FDMA symbolin the
`
`configured subframes.” Kim, §[0169], Fig. 9. That is, Kim teaches, in an SRS subframe, the
`
`SRStransmission is “always performed in the last SC-FDMA symbol”and accordingly the last
`
`SC-FDMAsymbolis not permitted to transmit PUSCH. Thatis, in Kim, the last SC-FDMA
`
`

`

`Application No. 16/794,493
`Reply to Office Action Dated August 5, 2021
`
`symbolis not counted for the PUSCH mapping of the PUSCHrepetition signals. As such, Kim
`
`does not teach or suggest “puncturing a part of the PUSCHrepetition signals in a resource in a
`
`last SC-FDMAsymbol” of a SRS subframe, wherein “the resource is counted for the PUSCH
`
`mapping of the PUSCHrepetition signals” as now claimed. Specifically, Kim does not teach or
`
`suggest the details of the subject matter now more explicitly recited in claims 1 and 22,
`
`including:
`
`in a first case in which the control circuitry performs a physical uplink shared
`channel (PUSCH) mapping of PUSCHrepetition signals in a plurality of
`subframes, the control circuitry punctures a part of the PUSCHrepetition signals
`in a resourcein a last single-carrier frequency-division multiple access (SC-
`FDMA)symbolof a sounding reference signal (SRS) transmission candidate
`subframe of the plurality of subframes, wherein the resource is counted for the
`PUSCH mapping of the PUSCHrepetition signals, and
`
`the transmitter transmits a remaining part of the PUSCHrepetition signals apart
`from the punctured part of the PUSCHrepetition signals.
`
`Accordingly, claims 1 and 22, as amended,are believed to be allowable overthe priorart.
`
`Allowanceof these claims as well as their respective dependent claims is respectfully requested.
`
`Conclusion
`
`Forat least these reasons, Applicant respectfully requests allowance of the pending claims.
`
`In the event the Examinerfinds minor informalities that can be resolved by telephone conference
`
`or if the Examinerbelieves a telephone conference would facilitate prosecution of this application,
`
`the Examiner is urged to contact Applicant’s undersigned representative by telephone at (206)
`
`622-4900 in order to expeditiously resolve prosecution of this application.
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`Seed Intellectual Property Law Group Lip
`
`/Shoko Leek/
`Shoko I. Leek
`Registration No. 43,746
`
`701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 5400
`Seattle, Washington 98104
`Phone: (206) 622-4900 | Fax:
`
`(206) 682-6031
`
`STL jhl
`8125069_1
`
`