DETAILED ACTION
Brief Summary
This is a non-final Office action regarding reissue U.S. Application 17/964,639 (hereafter the “reissue ‘639 Application”), which is a reissue application of U.S. Patent 11,456,825 (hereafter “the ‘825 Patent”).
Upon review of the reissue ‘639 Application, the application was filed on October 12, 2022, along with a Reissue Declaration, also filed October 12, 2022.
The ‘825 Patent originally issued on September 27, 2022, with original claims 1-28, being filed as U.S. Application 16/987,783 (hereafter “the original ‘783 Application”). Here, the original ‘783 Application was filed on August 7, 2020, claiming foreign priority to India Application 201941033075, being filed August 16, 2019.
As noted above, the ‘825 Patent issued with claims 1-28. A preliminary amendment was filed on October 12, 2022, which keeps claims 1, 6-9, 12-15, 20-23, and 26-28 in their original form, and amends claims 2-5, 10-11, 16-19, and 24-25. Thus, with the preliminary amendment dated October 12, 2022, claims 1-28 are pending, with claims 1, 12, 15, and 26 being independent.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Reissue
Applicant is reminded of the continuing obligation under 37 CFR 1.178(b), to timely apprise the Office of any prior or concurrent proceeding in which Patent No. 11,456,825 is or was involved. These proceedings would include interferences, reissues, reexaminations, and litigation.
Applicant is further reminded of the continuing obligation under 37 CFR 1.56, to timely apprise the Office of any information which is material to patentability of the claims under consideration in this reissue application.
These obligations rest with each individual associated with the filing and prosecution of this application for reissue. See also MPEP §§ 1404, 1442.01 and 1442.04.
Non-Compliant Amendment
The preliminary amendment filed October 12, 2022 amends claims 2-5, 10-11, 16-19, and 24-25, whereby this preliminary amendment shows matter that is deleted being enclosed in double brackets.
In this regard, 37 CFR 1.173(b) states, in part:
(d) Changes shown by markings. Any changes relative to the patent being reissued which are made to the specification, including the claims, upon filing, or by an amendment paper in the reissue application, must include the following markings:
(1) The matter to be omitted by reissue must be enclosed in brackets; and
(2) The matter to be added by reissue must be underlined, except for amendments submitted on compact discs (§§ 1.96 and 1.821(c))….
With this, the use of double brackets in the amendment to claims 2-5, 10-11, 16-19, and 24-25 does not comply with 37 CFR 1.173(b), as the omitted matter should be enclosed in single brackets for a reissue application, with the changes being made relative to the patent being reissued. Further, claim 11 is amended, adding the word “command” after the term “MAC-CE”, whereby the word “command” must be underlined. Therefore, the preliminary amendment filed October 12, 2022 does not comply with 37 CFR 1.173, which sets forth the manner of making amendments in reissue applications. A supplemental paper correctly amending the reissue application is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 14 and 28 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In both claims 14 and 28, lines 4 and 5 recite “in a same slot same resources”. This is believed to be in error, and is suggested to be amended to read “in a same slot and same resource[s]”, or “in a same slot [same] resource[s]”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Reissue Declaration and Rejection under 35 USC § 251
Claims 1-28 are rejected as being based upon a defective reissue declaration under 35 U.S.C. 251 as set forth above. See 37 CFR 1.175. The nature of the defect(s) in the declaration is set forth in the discussion below in this Office action.
In this regard, 37 CFR 1.175(a) states, in part:
…The inventor’s oath or declaration for a reissue application, in addition to complying with the requirements of § 1.63, § 1.64, or § 1.67, must also specifically identify at least one error pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 251 being relied upon as the basis for reissue …
With this, the reissue oath/declaration filed on September 21, 2022 is defective (see 37 CFR 1.175 and MPEP § 1414) because of the following: the Applicant has not sufficiently identified the error which is relied on to support the reissue application, and has not identified a specific claim that the application seeks to be broadened.
In this regard, the Applicant’s error statement does state that “Some claims are modified with added and/or removed features (e.g., Claims 2-5, 11, and 16-19.) Some claims may be deemed broadening in that they recite features not previously claimed and remove previously claimed features.”
However, this statement is seen to merely be a general statement, and is not seen to specifically identify a claim that the applicant is intending to be broadened.
In this regard, MPEP 1414 (II), states, in part:
The "at least one error" pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 251 which is relied upon to support the reissue application must be specifically identified in the oath/declaration.
…
For an application filed on or after September 16, 2012 that seeks to enlarge the scope of the claims of the patent, the reissue oath or declaration must also identify a claim that the application seeks to broaden in the identification of the error that is relied upon to support the reissue application. A general statement, e.g., that all claims are broadened, is not sufficient to satisfy this requirement. In specifically identifying the error as required by 37 CFR 1.175(a), it is sufficient that the reissue oath/declaration identify the claim being broadened and a single word, phrase, or expression in the specification or in an original claim, and how it renders the original patent wholly or partly inoperative or invalid.
With this, the error statement is required to identify a specific claim that is being broadened, and “a single phrase, or expression in the specification or in an original claim, and how it renders the original patent wholly or partly inoperative or invalid”. Correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(a)
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.
Claims 2-5 and 16-19 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.
Here, dependent claims 2 and 16 are amended to introduce a “third DCI”. The specification of the ‘825 is not seen to sufficiently describe receiving or sending “a third DCI that does not schedule a PDSCH transmission”. In the Remarks filed with the amendment dated October 12, 2022, the Applicant states that support for the amendment is in “at least paragraph [0091]” of the original application that matured into the ‘825 Patent. This paragraph corresponds to the paragraph in col. 15, lines 12-24 of the ‘825 Patent. In this regard, this section of the ‘825 Patent states:
In some cases, the second DCI may not schedule a PDSCH transmission at all. For example, such DCI may be used primarily for indicating the timing of HARQ-ACK for PDSCH transmission scheduled with non-numeric K1 values. In some cases, this type of DCI may be addressed to one or more UEs. Further, this type of DCI may be used to indicate the timing and PUCCH resources for one or a subset of the addressed UEs to use for transmitting acknowledgment feedback for one or more PDSCH transmissions scheduled with non-numeric feedback timing indicators. In some cases, such DCI may identify the one or more PDSCH transmissions by indicating their corresponding HARQ process IDs.
Here, this section of the specification of the ‘825 Patent expressly describe an alternative embodiment where a second DCI may not schedule a transmission, and utilizes non-numeric values. With this, the specification is not clear of having the first two DCIs, as defined in independent claims 1 and 15, and then having a third DCI that does not schedule a PDSCH transmission, as now recited in dependent claim 3. Thus, the specification is not seen to sufficiently describe the claimed subject matter. Here, because the specification is clear that the alternate embodiment alters the functionality of the second DCI, and not by adding a third DCI, the amended claim limitations are seen to be adding new matter.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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 16 and 28 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.
Here, with respect to claim 16, in lines 1 and 2, the claim is amended to recite “wherein the at least one processor is further configured to receive a third DCI …” In this regard, claim 16 depends on independent claim 15, which is drawn to a network entity apparatus, whereby the network entity sends a first DCI and a second DCI. With this, the network entity apparatus in claim 16 would likewise appear to “send” the third DCI, instead of the now recited “receive a third DCI”. This becomes apparent in dependent claim 17, that specifies that “the third DCI is addressed to one or more UEs”. Here, in claim 17, the UEs would be what is receiving the third DCI.
With respect to claim 28, in lines 1 and 2, the claim recites “wherein the UE transmits acknowledgment feedback…”. With this, independent claim 26, for which claim 28 ultimately depends on, is drawn to a network entity apparatus, which sends a first DCI to a UE, and then determines when the UE can receive another DCI. In this regard, the UE is a separate apparatus than the network entity apparatus, and thus, claim 28 is unclear as to the scope of the network entity apparatus defined in claim 26. The Examiner suggests amending independent claim 26 to recite “a system” that includes both the network entity apparatus and the UE apparatus, or to amend claim 28 to recite functionality performed by the network entity apparatus, notably so claim 28 would read something similar to “wherein the [UE transmits] apparatus receives, from the UE, acknowledgment feedback for both the PDSCH transmission for the first HARQ process ID and the PDSCH transmission for the second HARQ process ID in a same slot resources.”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 251
Claims 2-5 and 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 251 as being based upon new matter added to the patent for which reissue is sought. The added material which is not supported by the prior patent is as follows:
As discussed above in the claim rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(a), claims 2-5 and 16-19 now recite a “third DCI”, whereby a “third DCI” is seen to be new matter, as the specification of the ‘825 Patent describes an alternate embodiment where the “second DCI” has different functionality, and not the claimed first DCI and second DCI in claims 1 and 15, respectively, followed by the now claimed third DCI.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 12-19, and 26-28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication 2020/0221428, with the inventor of Moon et al. (hereafter “Moon”) in view of ZTE, et al., “Discussion on scheduling and HARQ for NR-U”, 3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #97, Reno, USA, May 13th – 17th, 2019, R1-1905953 (hereafter “ZTE”, being cited in the Information Disclosure Statement dated October 12, 2022).
Regarding claim 1, Moon discloses an apparatus for wireless communications by a user equipment (UE) [see Figs. 1 and 2], comprising:
at least one processor [processor 210, seen in Fig. 2] configured to:
receive a first downlink control information (DCI) that schedules a first physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) transmission [see Figs. 6 and 8, “First DCI”; also see paragraphs 0099-0100, wherein “Referring to FIG. 6, as an embodiment of Method M100, a case in which a first DCI and a second DCI schedule the same PDSCH in an n-th slot and a terminal transmits an HARQ-ACK for the PDSCH in an (n+2)-th slot.”; also see paragraphs 0105-0106, wherein “Referring to FIG. 8, a first DCI may schedule a first PDSCH in an n-th slot and a second DCI may schedule a second PDSCH in an (n+1)-th slot. The first and second PDSCHs may correspond to the same TB(s). The terminal may transmit an HARQ-ACK corresponding to the first and second PDSCHs in an (n+2)-th slot.”; also see paragraphs 0149-0153, wherein “In general, when a plurality of DCIs having the same HARQ process number and the same NDI are received, the terminal may regard scheduling by a DCI received later as a retransmission of scheduling by a DCI previously received. The scheduling by the previously received DCI may correspond to an initial transmission or retransmission.”] …;
receive a second DCI that schedules a second PDSCH transmission [see Figs. 6 and 8; also see paragraphs 0099-0100; also see paragraphs 0105-0106] and includes a numeric feedback timing indicator [see paragraph 0069, wherein “The DCI may be a DCI including scheduling information of a PDSCH or a PUSCH. In this case, the PDSCH or PUSCH scheduled through the DCI may be transmitted in the bandwidth part indicated by the bandwidth part indicator field.”; also see paragraph 0078, wherein “Examples of the common DCI may include resource allocation information of a PDSCH for transmission of system information, paging, power control command, slot format indicator, preemption indicator, and the like. Examples of the UE-specific DCI may include resource allocation information for transmission of a PDSCH and a PUSCH. A plurality of DCI formats may be defined according to a payload, a size, a type of a radio network temporary identifier (RNTI), and the like of the DCI.”],
wherein the second DCI comprises a first detected DCI with a numeric feedback timing indicator that is detected after the first DCI that schedules the first PDSCH transmission [see paragraph 0069, wherein “The DCI may be a DCI including scheduling information of a PDSCH or a PUSCH. In this case, the PDSCH or PUSCH scheduled through the DCI may be transmitted in the bandwidth part indicated by the bandwidth part indicator field.”; also see paragraph 0078, wherein “Examples of the common DCI may include resource allocation information of a PDSCH for transmission of system information, paging, power control command, slot format indicator, preemption indicator, and the like. Examples of the UE-specific DCI may include resource allocation information for transmission of a PDSCH and a PUSCH. A plurality of DCI formats may be defined according to a payload, a size, a type of a radio network temporary identifier (RNTI), and the like of the DCI.”]; and
determine at least one of whether to or when to transmit acknowledgment feedback for the first PDSCH transmission based at least in part on the numeric feedback timing indicator included in the second DCI [see paragraph 0106, wherein “For example, the HARQ-ACK transmission timing may be determined based on the PDSCH (i.e., the second PDSCH) whose last symbol is received later. In other words, a slot offset K1 between the PDSCH reception and the HARQ-ACK transmission may be determined based on a slot to which the last symbol of a union of all PDSCH resource regions belongs.”; also see paragraphs 0149-0157, wherein “In this case, the terminal may regard all of the multiple DCIs as DCIs for the same order of HARQ transmissions, i.e., the n-th HARQ transmission (e.g., initial transmission when n=1, and retransmission when n>1). In general, the time window for Method M230 and the first time period may be different from each other. …”],
wherein:
when the determination is to transmit acknowledgment feedback for the first PDSCH transmission, the processor is further configured to transmit acknowledgment feedback for both the first PDSCH transmission and the second PDSCH transmission in a same slot [see Figs. 6 and 8; also see paragraphs 0104-0109, wherein “ Alternatively, when a plurality of PDSCHs are scheduled by a plurality of DCIs in Method M110, the plurality of PDSCHs may be limited to be scheduled in the same slot. When the multi-slot scheduling is allowed in Method M110, the plurality of PDSCHs may be scheduled in the same set of slots.”] …; and
a memory coupled with the at least one processor [memory 220, seen in Fig. 2].
Here, however, Moon is not clear of teaching if the first DCI “includes a non-numeric feedback timing indicator”. In addition, Moon fails to expressly disclose of transmitting acknowledgment feedback for both the first PDSCH transmission and the second PDSCH transmission in a same slot “and physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) resource”
But the reference of ZTE discloses an apparatus for wireless communications by a user equipment (UE) [see Figure 1 on page 4, which illustrates a UE and a gNB], comprising:
at least one processor [being inherent in the UE described in ZTE] configured to:
receive a first downlink control information (DCI) that schedules a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) transmission [see page 3, last paragraph to page 4, first paragraph, wherein “One DCI or a DL grant/UL grant indicates which PDSCH HARQ process or process ID group HARQ-ACK is needed to feedback,…”] and
includes a non-numeric feedback timing indicator [see page 1, wherein “Agreement: A non-numerical value is added to the possible range of PDSCH-to-HARQ-timing-indicator values…”];
receive a second DCI that schedules a PDSCH transmission [see page 3, last paragraph to page 4, first paragraph, wherein “…and another DCI indicates the exact HARQ feedback timing or the time resource as illustrated in Figure 1, …”], and
includes a numeric feedback timing indicator [see Figure 1; also see Page 3, last paragraph, wherein “One DCI or a DL grant/UL grant indicates which PDSCH HARQ process or process ID group HARQ-ACK is needed to feedback, and another DCI indicates the exact HARQ feedback timing or the time resource as illustrated in Figure 1, wherein …the second trigger DCI transmits on the slot K and X is the timing value between the second DCI and exact HARQ feedback resource.”],
wherein the second DCI comprises a first detected DCI with a numeric feedback timing indicator that is detected after the first DCI that schedules the first PDSCH transmission [see Page 3, last paragraph, wherein “One DCI or a DL grant/UL grant indicates which PDSCH HARQ process or process ID group HARQ-ACK is needed to feedback, and another DCI indicates the exact HARQ feedback timing or the time resource as illustrated in Figure 1, wherein …the second trigger DCI transmits on the slot K and X is the timing value between the second DCI and exact HARQ feedback resource.”]; and
determine at least one of whether to or when to transmit acknowledgment feedback for the first PDSCH transmission based at least in part on the numeric feedback timing indicator included in the second DCI [see page 3, last paragraph to page 4, first paragraph, wherein “Such a scheme can also be used in the case if the network does not provide sufficient time for UE processing between the last symbol of the PDSCH(s) and the starting symbol of the PUCCH, when two-step-like mechanism can also be used. For example, one DCI tells UE that HARQ-ACK information transmission can be postponed and the other DCI indicates the exact HARQ feedback timing or the time resource.”; also see page 5, under “Alt 5”, wherein “For example, the DCI can give the multiple slot positions or give the delayed time of the HARQ-ACK feedback can be allowed.”], wherein:
when the determination is to transmit acknowledgment feedback for the first PDSCH transmission, the processor is further configured to transmit acknowledgment feedback for both the first PDSCH transmission and the second PDSCH transmission in a same slot and physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) resource [see page 1, which states in “Option 1” that “One PUCCH can carry HARQ-Ack feedback for one or more PDSCH groups”; also see page 2, which states in “Option 2” that “One PUCCH can carry HARQ-ACK feedback for a single PDSCH group”; also see Table on page 3].
Moon and the ZTE reference are combinable because they are from the same field of endeavor, each being wireless mobile systems that that describe utilizing multiple downlink control information (DCI) for scheduling transmissions. At the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have the apparatus of Moon further include the functionality that the first DCI includes “a non-numeric feedback timing indicator”, and that the acknowledgment feedback is transmitted in a same slot “and physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) resource”, as recognized by ZTE. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would be that the system of Moon would become more efficient, as adding a non-numerical value to the first DCI would be “used to indicate to the UE that the HARQ-ACK feedback for the corresponding PDSCH is postponed until the timing and resource for the HARQ-ACK feedback is provided by the gNB” in the subsequent second DCI, as described by ZTE on page 1. In addition, the system of Moon would allow for “solutions and techniques for next generation wireless systems operating on unlicensed bands”, as recognized by ZTE in the “Introduction” on page 1. Here, Moon would easily be modified with the known techniques, as described by ZTE, whereby this modification would yield predictable results. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine the teachings of ZTE with the apparatus of Moon to obtain the invention specified in claim 1.
Regarding claim 2, Moon and ZTE disclose the apparatus discussed above in claim 1, and Moon further teaches wherein the at least one processor is further configured to receive a third DCI that does not schedule a PDSCH transmission [see paragraphs 0017, wherein “Information on a number of DCIs transmitted for scheduling the same TB or the TBs belonging to the same HARQ process may be provided from the base station, the DCIs may include the first DCI and the second DCI, and the DCIs may be received within the time window.”; also see paragraphs 0037-0038; also see paragraph 0098, wherein “Therefore, in this case, it is possible to use Method M100, since the transmission of a plurality of DCIs (i.e., PDCCHs) for scheduling the same PDSCH is helpful to achieve a beam diversity effect. In this case, since there is one scheduled PDSCH, the payloads of the DCIs transmitted through the respective PDCCHs may be the same. Also, since there is only one scheduled PDSCH, the terminal may apply a HARQ-ACK transmission timing based on a PDSCH reception time point as in the conventional case.”].
Regarding claim 3, Moon and ZTE disclose the apparatus discussed above in claim 2, and Moon further teaches wherein the third DCI is addressed to one or more UEs [see Fig. 1; also see paragraphs 0051-0057, wherein “Also, each of the plurality of base stations 110-1, 110-2, 110-3, 120-1, and 120-2 may be connected to the core network through the ideal or non-ideal backhaul. Each of the plurality of base stations 110-1, 110-2, 110-3, 120-1, and 120-2 may transmit a signal received from the core network to the corresponding terminal 130-1, 130-2, 130-3, 130-4, 130-5, or 130-6, and transmit a signal received from the corresponding terminal 130-1, 130-2, 130-3, 130-4, 130-5, or 130-6 to the core network. …The downlink control information (DCI) of the LTE system includes common information such as system information, random access response, paging information, and terminal-specific information such as uplink and downlink data channel scheduling information.”; also see paragraph 0078, wherein “A common DCI may be mainly transmitted in the common search space, and a UE-specific DCI may be mainly transmitted in the UE-specific search space. However, in consideration of degree of freedom in scheduling and fallback transmission, the UE-specific DCI may be transmitted also in the common search space.”].
Regarding claim 4, Moon and ZTE disclose the apparatus discussed above in claim 3, and Moon further teaches wherein the third DCI is used to indicate timing and PUCCH resources for one or a subset of the UEs to use for transmitting acknowledgment feedback for one or more PDSCH transmissions scheduled [see paragraph 0069, wherein “The DCI may be a DCI including scheduling information of a PDSCH or a PUSCH. In this case, the PDSCH or PUSCH scheduled through the DCI may be transmitted in the bandwidth part indicated by the bandwidth part indicator field.”].
Here, Moon does not expressly describe having “non-numeric feedback timing indicators”.
But ZTE further teaches wherein the third DCI is used to indicate timing and PUCCH resources for one or a subset of the UEs to use for transmitting acknowledgment feedback for one or more PDSCH transmissions scheduled with non-numeric feedback timing indicators [see page 1, wherein “Agreement: A non-numerical value is added to the possible range of PDSCH-to-HARQ-timing-indicator values…”; also see pages 3 and 4 under “Alt 1” and “Alt 2”].
Again, Moon and the ZTE reference are combinable because they are from the same field of endeavor, each being wireless mobile systems that that describe utilizing multiple downlink control information (DCI) for scheduling transmissions. At the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have the apparatus of Moon further include the functionality that a third DCI includes “non-numeric feedback timing indicators”, as recognized by ZTE. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would be that the system of Moon would become more efficient, as adding a non-numerical value to the first DCI would be “used to indicate to the UE that the HARQ-ACK feedback for the corresponding PDSCH is postponed until the timing and resource for the HARQ-ACK feedback is provided by the gNB” in the subsequent second DCI, as described by ZTE on page 1. In addition, the system of Moon would allow for “solutions and techniques for next generation wireless systems operating on unlicensed bands”, as recognized by ZTE in the “Introduction” on page 1. Here, Moon would easily be modified with the known techniques, as described by ZTE, whereby this modification would yield predictable results. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine the teachings of ZTE with the apparatus of Moon to obtain the invention specified in claim 4.
Regarding claim 5, Moon and ZTE disclose the apparatus discussed above in claim 4, and Moon further teaches wherein the third DCI further identifies the one or more PDSCH transmissions by indicating a corresponding one or more hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) process IDs [see paragraph 0006, wherein “An embodiment of the present invention for achieving the above-described objective, as a method for transmitting a downlink control channel (physical downlink control channel (PDCCH)) performed by a base station in a communication system, may comprise transmitting a first PDCCH including a first downlink control information (DCI) to a terminal through a first PDCCH search space; and transmitting a second PDCCH including a second DCI to the terminal through a second PDCCH search space, wherein the first DCI and the second DCI are for scheduling a same downlink data channel (physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH)) for a same transport block (TB) or TBs belonging to a same hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) process, for scheduling different PDSCHs for a same TB or TBs belonging to a same HARQ process, or for scheduling different PDSCHs for different TBs or TBs belonging to different HARQ processes, and wherein the first DCI and the second DCI are transmitted to the terminal within a time window.”].
Regarding claim 12, Moon discloses an apparatus for wireless communications by a user equipment (UE) [see Figs. 1 and 2], comprising:
at least one processor [processor 210, seen in Fig. 2] configured to:
receive a first downlink control information (DCI) that schedules a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) transmission for a first hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) process ID [see Figs. 6 and 8, “First DCI”; also see paragraphs 0099-0100, wherein “Referring to FIG. 6, as an embodiment of Method M100, a case in which a first DCI and a second DCI schedule the same PDSCH in an n-th slot and a terminal transmits an HARQ-ACK for the PDSCH in an (n+2)-th slot.”; also see paragraphs 0105-0106, wherein “Referring to FIG. 8, a first DCI may schedule a first PDSCH in an n-th slot and a second DCI may schedule a second PDSCH in an (n+1)-th slot. The first and second PDSCHs may correspond to the same TB(s). The terminal may transmit an HARQ-ACK corresponding to the first and second PDSCHs in an (n+2)-th slot.”; also see paragraphs 0149-0153, wherein “In general, when a plurality of DCIs having the same HARQ process number and the same NDI are received, the terminal may regard scheduling by a DCI received later as a retransmission of scheduling by a DCI previously received. The scheduling by the previously received DCI may correspond to an initial transmission or retransmission.”] … ;
receive a second DCI that schedules a PDSCH transmission for a second HARQ process ID [see Figs. 6 and 8; also see paragraphs 0099-0100; also see paragraphs 0105-0106]; and
determine when the UE can receive another DCI scheduling another PDSCH transmission for the first HARQ process ID based, at least in part, on information in the second DCI [see paragraph 0106, wherein “For example, the HARQ-ACK transmission timing may be determined based on the PDSCH (i.e., the second PDSCH) whose last symbol is received later. In other words, a slot offset K1 between the PDSCH reception and the HARQ-ACK transmission may be determined based on a slot to which the last symbol of a union of all PDSCH resource regions belongs.”; also see paragraphs 0149-0157, wherein “In this case, the terminal may regard all of the multiple DCIs as DCIs for the same order of HARQ transmissions, i.e., the n-th HARQ transmission (e.g., initial transmission when n=1, and retransmission when n>1). In general, the time window for Method M230 and the first time period may be different from each other. …”]; and
a memory coupled with the at least one processor [memory 220, seen in Fig. 2].
Here, however, Moon is not clear of teaching if the first DCI “includes a non-numeric feedback timing indicator”.
But the reference of ZTE discloses an apparatus for wireless communications by a user equipment (UE) [see Figure 1 on page 4, which illustrates a UE and a gNB], comprising:
at least one processor [being inherent in the UE described in ZTE] configured to:
receive a first downlink control information (DCI) that schedules a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) transmission for a first hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) process ID [see page 3, last paragraph to page 4, first paragraph, wherein “One DCI or a DL grant/UL grant indicates which PDSCH HARQ process or process ID group HARQ-ACK is needed to feedback,…”] and
includes a non-numeric feedback timing indicator [see page 1, wherein “Agreement: A non-numerical value is added to the possible range of PDSCH-to-HARQ-timing-indicator values…”];
receive a second DCI that schedules a PDSCH transmission for a second HARQ process ID [see page 3, last paragraph to page 4, first paragraph, wherein “…and another DCI indicates the exact HARQ feedback timing or the time resource as illustrated in Figure 1, …”]; and
determine when the UE can receive another DCI scheduling another PDSCH transmission for the first HARQ process ID based, at least in part, on information in the second DCI [see page 3, last paragraph to page 4, first paragraph, wherein “Such a scheme can also be used in the case if the network does not provide sufficient time for UE processing between the last symbol of the PDSCH(s) and the starting symbol of the PUCCH, when two-step-like mechanism can also be used. For example, one DCI tells UE that HARQ-ACK information transmission can be postponed and the other DCI indicates the exact HARQ feedback timing or the time resource.”; also see page 5, under “Alt 5”, wherein “For example, the DCI can give the multiple slot positions or give the delayed time of the HARQ-ACK feedback can be allowed.”].
Moon and the ZTE reference are combinable because they are from the same field of endeavor, each being wireless mobile systems that that describe utilizing multiple downlink control information (DCI) for scheduling transmissions. At the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have the apparatus of Moon further include the functionality that the first DCI includes “a non-numeric feedback timing indicator”, and that the acknowledgment feedback is transmitted in a same slot “and physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) resource”, as recognized by ZTE. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would be that the system of Moon would become more efficient, as adding a non-numerical value to the first DCI would be “used to indicate to the UE that the HARQ-ACK feedback for the corresponding PDSCH is postponed until the timing and resource for the HARQ-ACK feedback is provided by the gNB” in the subsequent second DCI, as described by ZTE on page 1. In addition, the system of Moon would allow for “solutions and techniques for next generation wireless systems operating on unlicensed bands”, as recognized by ZTE in the “Introduction” on page 1. Here, Moon would easily be modified with the known techniques, as described by ZTE, whereby this modification would yield predictable results. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine the teachings of ZTE with the apparatus of Moon to obtain the invention specified in claim 12.
Regarding claim 13, Moon and ZTE disclose the apparatus discussed above in claim 12, and Moon further teaches wherein:
the second DCI includes numeric feedback timing indicator for providing acknowledgement feedback for the PDSCH transmission for a second HARQ process ID [see paragraph 0069, wherein “The DCI may be a DCI including scheduling information of a PDSCH or a PUSCH. In this case, the PDSCH or PUSCH scheduled through the DCI may be transmitted in the bandwidth part indicated by the bandwidth part indicator field.”; also see paragraph 0078, wherein “Examples of the common DCI may include resource allocation information of a PDSCH for transmission of system information, paging, power control command, slot format indicator, preemption indicator, and the like. Examples of the UE-specific DCI may include resource allocation information for transmission of a PDSCH and a PUSCH. A plurality of DCI formats may be defined according to a payload, a size, a type of a radio network temporary identifier (RNTI), and the like of the DCI.”]; and
the determination is that the UE can receive another DCI scheduling another PDSCH transmission for the first HARQ process ID after transmitting acknowledgment feedback for the PDSCH transmission for the second HARQ process ID [see paragraphs 0108-0109, wherein “Meanwhile, a PDSCH decoding time N1 may also be determined based on a reception completion time point of the first PDSCH or the second PDSCH. For example, the terminal may determine N1 based on the PDSCH (i.e., the second PDSCH) whose last symbol is received later. Alternatively, a later time point among PDSCH processing completion times estimated by N1s of the first and second PDSCHs, and a value of N1 corresponding thereto may be used to determine a valid HARQ-ACK transmission time point. … Accordingly, a valid HARQ-ACK transmission time point according to N1 of the second PDSCH may be later than that of the first PDSCH, and the terminal may derive the valid HARQ-ACK transmission time point based on the second PDSCH.”].
Regarding claim 14, Moon and ZTE disclose the apparatus discussed above in claim 12, and Moon further teaches wherein the UE transmits acknowledgement feedback for both the PDSCH transmission for the first HARQ process ID and the PDSCH transmission for the second HARQ process ID in a same slot same resources [see Figs. 6 and 8; also see paragraphs 0104-0109, wherein “ Alternatively, when a plurality of PDSCHs are scheduled by a plurality of DCIs in Method M110, the plurality of PDSCHs may be limited to be scheduled in the same slot. When the multi-slot scheduling is allowed in Method M110, the plurality of PDSCHs may be scheduled in the same set of slots.”].
Regarding claim 15, Moon discloses an apparatus for wireless communications by a network entity [see Figs. 1 and 2], comprising:
at least one processor [processor 210, seen in Fig. 2] configured to:
send a first downlink control information (DCI) that schedules a first physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) transmission to user equipment (UE) [see Figs. 6 and 8, “First DCI”; also see paragraphs 0099-0100, wherein “Referring to FIG. 6, as an embodiment of Method M100, a case in which a first DCI and a second DCI schedule the same PDSCH in an n-th slot and a terminal transmits an HARQ-ACK for the PDSCH in an (n+2)-th slot.”; also see paragraphs 0105-0106, wherein “Referring to FIG. 8, a first DCI may schedule a first PDSCH in an n-th slot and a second DCI may schedule a second PDSCH in an (n+1)-th slot. The first and second PDSCHs may correspond to the same TB(s). The terminal may transmit an HARQ-ACK corresponding to the first and second PDSCHs in an (n+2)-th slot.”; also see paragraphs 0149-0153, wherein “In general, when a plurality of DCIs having the same HARQ process number and the same NDI are received, the terminal may regard scheduling by a DCI received later as a retransmission of scheduling by a DCI previously received. The scheduling by the previously received DCI may correspond to an initial transmission or retransmission.”] …;
send a second DCI that schedules a second PDSCH transmission [see Figs. 6 and 8; also see paragraphs 0099-0100; also see paragraphs 0105-0106] and includes a numeric feedback timing indicator [see paragraph 0069, wherein “The DCI may be a DCI including scheduling information of a PDSCH or a PUSCH. In this case, the PDSCH or PUSCH scheduled through the DCI may be transmitted in the bandwidth part indicated by the bandwidth part indicator field.”; also see paragraph 0078, wherein “Examples of the common DCI may include resource allocation information of a PDSCH for transmission of system information, paging, power control command, slot format indicator, preemption indicator, and the like. Examples of the UE-specific DCI may include resource allocation information for transmission of a PDSCH and a PUSCH. A plurality of DCI formats may be defined according to a payload, a size, a type of a radio network temporary identifier (RNTI), and the like of the DCI.”],
wherein the second DCI comprises a first detected DCI with a numeric feedback timing indicator that is detected after the first DCI that schedules the first PDSCH transmission [see paragraph 0069, wherein “The DCI may be a DCI including scheduling information of a PDSCH or a PUSCH. In this case, the PDSCH or PUSCH scheduled through the DCI may be transmitted in the bandwidth part indicated by the bandwidth part indicator field.”; also see paragraph 0078, wherein “Examples of the common DCI may include resource allocation information of a PDSCH for transmission of system information, paging, power control command, slot format indicator, preemption indicator, and the like. Examples of the UE-specific DCI may include resource allocation information for transmission of a PDSCH and a PUSCH. A plurality of DCI formats may be defined according to a payload, a size, a type of a radio network temporary identifier (RNTI), and the like of the DCI.”]; and
determine at least one of whether or when the UE is to transmit acknowledgment feedback for the first PDSCH transmission based at least in part on the numeric feedback timing indicator included in the second DCI [see paragraph 0106, wherein “For example, the HARQ-ACK transmission timing may be determined based on the PDSCH (i.e., the second PDSCH) whose last symbol is received later. In other words, a slot offset K1 between the PDSCH reception and the HARQ-ACK transmission may be determined based on a slot to which the last symbol of a union of all PDSCH resource regions belongs.”; also see paragraphs 0149-0157, wherein “In this case, the terminal may regard all of the multiple DCIs as DCIs for the same order of HARQ transmissions, i.e., the n-th HARQ transmission (e.g., initial transmission when n=1, and retransmission when n>1). In general, the time window for Method M230 and the first time period may be different from each other. …”],
wherein:
when the determination is the UE is to transmit acknowledgment feedback for the first PDSCH transmission, the at least one processor is configured to receive acknowledgment feedback for both the first PDSCH transmission and the second PDSCH transmission in a same slot [see Figs. 6 and 8; also see paragraphs 0104-0109, wherein “ Alternatively, when a plurality of PDSCHs are scheduled by a plurality of DCIs in Method M110, the plurality of PDSCHs may be limited to be scheduled in the same slot. When the multi-slot scheduling is allowed in Method M110, the plurality of PDSCHs may be scheduled in the same set of slots.”] …; and
a memory coupled with the at least one processor [memory 220, seen in Fig. 2].
Here, however, Moon is not clear of teaching if the first DCI “includes a non-numeric feedback timing indicator”. In addition, Moon fails to expressly disclose of transmitting acknowledgment feedback for both the first PDSCH transmission and the second PDSCH transmission in a same slot “and physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) resource”
But the reference of ZTE discloses an apparatus for wireless communications by a network entity [see Figure 1 on page 4, which illustrates a UE and a gNB], comprising:
at least one processor [being inherent in the gNB described in ZTE] configured to:
send a first downlink control information (DCI) that schedules a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) transmission to a user equipment (UE) [see page 3, last paragraph to page 4, first paragraph, wherein “One DCI or a DL grant/UL grant indicates which PDSCH HARQ process or process ID group HARQ-ACK is needed to feedback,…”] and
includes a non-numeric feedback timing indicator [see page 1, wherein “Agreement: A non-numerical value is added to the possible range of PDSCH-to-HARQ-timing-indicator values…”];
send a second DCI that schedules a PDSCH transmission [see page 3, last paragraph to page 4, first paragraph, wherein “…and another DCI indicates the exact HARQ feedback timing or the time resource as illustrated in Figure 1, …”], and
includes a numeric feedback timing indicator [see Figure 1; also see Page 3, last paragraph, wherein “One DCI or a DL grant/UL grant indicates which PDSCH HARQ process or process ID group HARQ-ACK is needed to feedback, and another DCI indicates the exact HARQ feedback timing or the time resource as illustrated in Figure 1, wherein …the second trigger DCI transmits on the slot K and X is the timing value between the second DCI and exact HARQ feedback resource.”],
wherein the second DCI comprises a first detected DCI with a numeric feedback timing indicator that is detected after the first DCI that schedules the first PDSCH transmission [see Page 3, last paragraph, wherein “One DCI or a DL grant/UL grant indicates which PDSCH HARQ process or process ID group HARQ-ACK is needed to feedback, and another DCI indicates the exact HARQ feedback timing or the time resource as illustrated in Figure 1, wherein …the second trigger DCI transmits on the slot K and X is the timing value between the second DCI and exact HARQ feedback resource.”]; and
determine at least one of whether or when the UE is to transmit acknowledgment feedback for the first PDSCH transmission based at least in part on the numeric feedback timing indicator included in the second DCI [see page 3, last paragraph to page 4, first paragraph, wherein “Such a scheme can also be used in the case if the network does not provide sufficient time for UE processing between the last symbol of the PDSCH(s) and the starting symbol of the PUCCH, when two-step-like mechanism can also be used. For example, one DCI tells UE that HARQ-ACK information transmission can be postponed and the other DCI indicates the exact HARQ feedback timing or the time resource.”; also see page 5, under “Alt 5”, wherein “For example, the DCI can give the multiple slot positions or give the delayed time of the HARQ-ACK feedback can be allowed.”], wherein:
when the determination is the UE is to transmit acknowledgment feedback for the first PDSCH transmission, the processor is further configured to transmit acknowledgment feedback for both the first PDSCH transmission and the second PDSCH transmission in a same slot and physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) resource [see page 1, which states in “Option 1” that “One PUCCH can carry HARQ-Ack feedback for one or more PDSCH groups”; also see page 2, which states in “Option 2” that “One PUCCH can carry HARQ-ACK feedback for a single PDSCH group”; also see Table on page 3].
Moon and the ZTE reference are combinable because they are from the same field of endeavor, each being wireless mobile systems that that describe utilizing multiple downlink control information (DCI) for scheduling transmissions. At the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have the apparatus of Moon further include the functionality that the first DCI includes “a non-numeric feedback timing indicator”, and that the acknowledgment feedback is transmitted in a same slot “and physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) resource”, as recognized by ZTE. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would be that the system of Moon would become more efficient, as adding a non-numerical value to the first DCI would be “used to indicate to the UE that the HARQ-ACK feedback for the corresponding PDSCH is postponed until the timing and resource for the HARQ-ACK feedback is provided by the gNB” in the subsequent second DCI, as described by ZTE on page 1. In addition, the system of Moon would allow for “solutions and techniques for next generation wireless systems operating on unlicensed bands”, as recognized by ZTE in the “Introduction” on page 1. Here, Moon would easily be modified with the known techniques, as described by ZTE, whereby this modification would yield predictable results. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine the teachings of ZTE with the apparatus of Moon to obtain the invention specified in claim 15.
Regarding claim 16, Moon and ZTE disclose the apparatus discussed above in claim 15, and Moon further teaches wherein the at least one processor is further configured to receive a third DCI that does not schedule a PDSCH transmission [see paragraphs 0017, wherein “Information on a number of DCIs transmitted for scheduling the same TB or the TBs belonging to the same HARQ process may be provided from the base station, the DCIs may include the first DCI and the second DCI, and the DCIs may be received within the time window.”; also see paragraphs 0037-0038; also see paragraph 0098, wherein “Therefore, in this case, it is possible to use Method M100, since the transmission of a plurality of DCIs (i.e., PDCCHs) for scheduling the same PDSCH is helpful to achieve a beam diversity effect. In this case, since there is one scheduled PDSCH, the payloads of the DCIs transmitted through the respective PDCCHs may be the same. Also, since there is only one scheduled PDSCH, the terminal may apply a HARQ-ACK transmission timing based on a PDSCH reception time point as in the conventional case.”].
Regarding claim 17, Moon and ZTE disclose the apparatus discussed above in claim 16, and Moon further teaches wherein the third DCI is addressed to one or more UEs [see Fig. 1; also see paragraphs 0051-0057, wherein “Also, each of the plurality of base stations 110-1, 110-2, 110-3, 120-1, and 120-2 may be connected to the core network through the ideal or non-ideal backhaul. Each of the plurality of base stations 110-1, 110-2, 110-3, 120-1, and 120-2 may transmit a signal received from the core network to the corresponding terminal 130-1, 130-2, 130-3, 130-4, 130-5, or 130-6, and transmit a signal received from the corresponding terminal 130-1, 130-2, 130-3, 130-4, 130-5, or 130-6 to the core network. …The downlink control information (DCI) of the LTE system includes common information such as system information, random access response, paging information, and terminal-specific information such as uplink and downlink data channel scheduling information.”; also see paragraph 0078, wherein “A common DCI may be mainly transmitted in the common search space, and a UE-specific DCI may be mainly transmitted in the UE-specific search space. However, in consideration of degree of freedom in scheduling and fallback transmission, the UE-specific DCI may be transmitted also in the common search space.”].
Regarding claim 18, Moon and ZTE disclose the apparatus discussed above in claim 17, and Moon further teaches wherein the third DCI is used to indicate timing and PUCCH resources for one or a subset of the UEs to use for transmitting acknowledgment feedback for one or more PDSCH transmissions scheduled [see paragraph 0069, wherein “The DCI may be a DCI including scheduling information of a PDSCH or a PUSCH. In this case, the PDSCH or PUSCH scheduled through the DCI may be transmitted in the bandwidth part indicated by the bandwidth part indicator field.”].
Here, Moon does not expressly describe having “non-numeric feedback timing indicators”.
But ZTE further teaches wherein the third DCI is used to indicate timing and PUCCH resources for one or a subset of the UEs to use for transmitting acknowledgment feedback for one or more PDSCH transmissions scheduled with non-numeric feedback timing indicators [see page 1, wherein “Agreement: A non-numerical value is added to the possible range of PDSCH-to-HARQ-timing-indicator values…”; also see pages 3 and 4 under “Alt 1” and “Alt 2”].
Again, Moon and the ZTE reference are combinable because they are from the same field of endeavor, each being wireless mobile systems that that describe utilizing multiple downlink control information (DCI) for scheduling transmissions. At the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have the apparatus of Moon further include the functionality that a third DCI includes “non-numeric feedback timing indicators”, as recognized by ZTE. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would be that the system of Moon would become more efficient, as adding a non-numerical value to the first DCI would be “used to indicate to the UE that the HARQ-ACK feedback for the corresponding PDSCH is postponed until the timing and resource for the HARQ-ACK feedback is provided by the gNB” in the subsequent second DCI, as described by ZTE on page 1. In addition, the system of Moon would allow for “solutions and techniques for next generation wireless systems operating on unlicensed bands”, as recognized by ZTE in the “Introduction” on page 1. Here, Moon would easily be modified with the known techniques, as described by ZTE, whereby this modification would yield predictable results. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine the teachings of ZTE with the apparatus of Moon to obtain the invention specified in claim 18.
Regarding claim 19, Moon and ZTE disclose the apparatus discussed above in claim 18, and Moon further teaches wherein the third DCI further identifies the one or more PDSCH transmissions by indicating a corresponding one or more hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) process IDs [see paragraph 0006, wherein “An embodiment of the present invention for achieving the above-described objective, as a method for transmitting a downlink control channel (physical downlink control channel (PDCCH)) performed by a base station in a communication system, may comprise transmitting a first PDCCH including a first downlink control information (DCI) to a terminal through a first PDCCH search space; and transmitting a second PDCCH including a second DCI to the terminal through a second PDCCH search space, wherein the first DCI and the second DCI are for scheduling a same downlink data channel (physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH)) for a same transport block (TB) or TBs belonging to a same hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) process, for scheduling different PDSCHs for a same TB or TBs belonging to a same HARQ process, or for scheduling different PDSCHs for different TBs or TBs belonging to different HARQ processes, and wherein the first DCI and the second DCI are transmitted to the terminal within a time window.”].
Regarding claim 26, Moon discloses an apparatus for wireless communications by a network entity [see Figs. 1 and 2], comprising:
at least one processor [processor 210, seen in Fig. 2] configured to:
send a first downlink control information (DCI) to a user equipment (UE) that schedules a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) transmission for a first hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) process ID [see Figs. 6 and 8, “First DCI”; also see paragraphs 0099-0100, wherein “Referring to FIG. 6, as an embodiment of Method M100, a case in which a first DCI and a second DCI schedule the same PDSCH in an n-th slot and a terminal transmits an HARQ-ACK for the PDSCH in an (n+2)-th slot.”; also see paragraphs 0105-0106, wherein “Referring to FIG. 8, a first DCI may schedule a first PDSCH in an n-th slot and a second DCI may schedule a second PDSCH in an (n+1)-th slot. The first and second PDSCHs may correspond to the same TB(s). The terminal may transmit an HARQ-ACK corresponding to the first and second PDSCHs in an (n+2)-th slot.”; also see paragraphs 0149-0153, wherein “In general, when a plurality of DCIs having the same HARQ process number and the same NDI are received, the terminal may regard scheduling by a DCI received later as a retransmission of scheduling by a DCI previously received. The scheduling by the previously received DCI may correspond to an initial transmission or retransmission.”] … ;
send a second DCI that schedules a PDSCH transmission for a second HARQ process ID [see Figs. 6 and 8; also see paragraphs 0099-0100; also see paragraphs 0105-0106]; and
determine when the UE can receive another DCI scheduling another PDSCH transmission for the first HARQ process ID based, at least in part, on information in the second DCI [see paragraph 0106, wherein “For example, the HARQ-ACK transmission timing may be determined based on the PDSCH (i.e., the second PDSCH) whose last symbol is received later. In other words, a slot offset K1 between the PDSCH reception and the HARQ-ACK transmission may be determined based on a slot to which the last symbol of a union of all PDSCH resource regions belongs.”; also see paragraphs 0149-0157, wherein “In this case, the terminal may regard all of the multiple DCIs as DCIs for the same order of HARQ transmissions, i.e., the n-th HARQ transmission (e.g., initial transmission when n=1, and retransmission when n>1). In general, the time window for Method M230 and the first time period may be different from each other. …”]; and
a memory coupled with the at least one processor [memory 220, seen in Fig. 2].
Here, however, Moon is not clear of teaching if the first DCI “includes a non-numeric feedback timing indicator”.
But the reference of ZTE discloses an apparatus for wireless communications by a network entity [see Figure 1 on page 4, which illustrates a UE and a gNB], comprising:
at least one processor [being inherent in the gNB described in ZTE] configured to:
send a first downlink control information (DCI) to a user equipment (UE) that schedules a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) transmission for a first hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) process ID [see page 3, last paragraph to page 4, first paragraph, wherein “One DCI or a DL grant/UL grant indicates which PDSCH HARQ process or process ID group HARQ-ACK is needed to feedback,…”] and
includes a non-numeric feedback timing indicator [see page 1, wherein “Agreement: A non-numerical value is added to the possible range of PDSCH-to-HARQ-timing-indicator values…”];
send a second DCI that schedules a PDSCH transmission for a second HARQ process ID [see page 3, last paragraph to page 4, first paragraph, wherein “…and another DCI indicates the exact HARQ feedback timing or the time resource as illustrated in Figure 1, …”]; and
determine when the UE can receive another DCI scheduling another PDSCH transmission for the first HARQ process ID based, at least in part, on information in the second DCI [see page 3, last paragraph to page 4, first paragraph, wherein “Such a scheme can also be used in the case if the network does not provide sufficient time for UE processing between the last symbol of the PDSCH(s) and the starting symbol of the PUCCH, when two-step-like mechanism can also be used. For example, one DCI tells UE that HARQ-ACK information transmission can be postponed and the other DCI indicates the exact HARQ feedback timing or the time resource.”; also see page 5, under “Alt 5”, wherein “For example, the DCI can give the multiple slot positions or give the delayed time of the HARQ-ACK feedback can be allowed.”].
Moon and the ZTE reference are combinable because they are from the same field of endeavor, each being wireless mobile systems that that describe utilizing multiple downlink control information (DCI) for scheduling transmissions. At the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have the apparatus of Moon further include the functionality that the first DCI includes “a non-numeric feedback timing indicator”, and that the acknowledgment feedback is transmitted in a same slot “and physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) resource”, as recognized by ZTE. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would be that the system of Moon would become more efficient, as adding a non-numerical value to the first DCI would be “used to indicate to the UE that the HARQ-ACK feedback for the corresponding PDSCH is postponed until the timing and resource for the HARQ-ACK feedback is provided by the gNB” in the subsequent second DCI, as described by ZTE on page 1. In addition, the system of Moon would allow for “solutions and techniques for next generation wireless systems operating on unlicensed bands”, as recognized by ZTE in the “Introduction” on page 1. Here, Moon would easily be modified with the known techniques, as described by ZTE, whereby this modification would yield predictable results. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine the teachings of ZTE with the apparatus of Moon to obtain the invention specified in claim 26.
Regarding claim 27, Moon and ZTE disclose the apparatus discussed above in claim 26, and Moon further teaches wherein:
the second DCI includes numeric feedback timing indicator for providing acknowledgement feedback for the PDSCH transmission for a second HARQ process ID [see paragraph 0069, wherein “The DCI may be a DCI including scheduling information of a PDSCH or a PUSCH. In this case, the PDSCH or PUSCH scheduled through the DCI may be transmitted in the bandwidth part indicated by the bandwidth part indicator field.”; also see paragraph 0078, wherein “Examples of the common DCI may include resource allocation information of a PDSCH for transmission of system information, paging, power control command, slot format indicator, preemption indicator, and the like. Examples of the UE-specific DCI may include resource allocation information for transmission of a PDSCH and a PUSCH. A plurality of DCI formats may be defined according to a payload, a size, a type of a radio network temporary identifier (RNTI), and the like of the DCI.”]; and
the determination is that the UE can receive another DCI scheduling another PDSCH transmission for the first HARQ process ID after transmitting acknowledgment feedback for the PDSCH transmission for the second HARQ process ID [see paragraphs 0108-0109, wherein “Meanwhile, a PDSCH decoding time N1 may also be determined based on a reception completion time point of the first PDSCH or the second PDSCH. For example, the terminal may determine N1 based on the PDSCH (i.e., the second PDSCH) whose last symbol is received later. Alternatively, a later time point among PDSCH processing completion times estimated by N1s of the first and second PDSCHs, and a value of N1 corresponding thereto may be used to determine a valid HARQ-ACK transmission time point. … Accordingly, a valid HARQ-ACK transmission time point according to N1 of the second PDSCH may be later than that of the first PDSCH, and the terminal may derive the valid HARQ-ACK transmission time point based on the second PDSCH.”].
Regarding claim 28, Moon and ZTE disclose the apparatus discussed above in claim 27, and Moon further teaches wherein the UE transmits acknowledgement feedback for both the PDSCH transmission for the first HARQ process ID and the PDSCH transmission for the second HARQ process ID in a same slot same resources [see Figs. 6 and 8; also see paragraphs 0104-0109, wherein “ Alternatively, when a plurality of PDSCHs are scheduled by a plurality of DCIs in Method M110, the plurality of PDSCHs may be limited to be scheduled in the same slot. When the multi-slot scheduling is allowed in Method M110, the plurality of PDSCHs may be scheduled in the same set of slots.”].
Claim(s) 6-11 and 20-25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication 2020/0221428, with the inventor of Moon et al. (hereafter “Moon”) in view of ZTE, et al., “Discussion on scheduling and HARQ for NR-U”, 3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #97, Reno, USA, May 13th – 17th, 2019, R1-1905953 (hereafter “ZTE”, being cited in the Information Disclosure Statement dated October 12, 2022), and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication 2020/0205150, with the inventor of Cheng et al. (hereafter “Cheng”).
Regarding claim 6, Moon and ZTE disclose the apparatus discussed above in claim 1, but both fail to expressly disclose if the at least one processor is further configured to:
determine at least one of whether to or when to apply an action indicated by a media access control (MAC-CE) command carried by the first PDSCH transmission.
But Cheng discloses an apparatus for wireless communications by a user equipment (UE) [see Figs. 1, 5, and 6], comprising:
at least one processor [processor 626, seen in Fig. 6; also see paragraphs 0136-0141] configured to:
receive a first downlink control information (DCI) that schedules a first physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) transmission [see paragraphs 0005-0026];
and
a memory coupled with the at least one processor [memory 628, seen in Fig. 6].
Cheng further teaches wherein at least one processor is further configured to:
determine at least one of whether to or when to apply an action indicated by a media access control (MAC-CE) command carried by the first PDSCH transmission [see paragraphs 0008-0021, wherein “In another implementation of the first aspect, the information related to the transmission of the PUCCH is first information and the downlink signaling comprises RRC signaling, the method further comprising receiving, through one of DCI and a MAC CE, second information that either complement or overwrite the first information. … In another implementation of the second aspect, the downlink signaling comprises one of radio resource control (RRC) signaling, a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE), and DCI.”; also see paragraphs 0058, wherein “For example, the time offset between each PUCCH repetition may be configured by the RRC signaling, and the MAC CE may activate/deactivate the PUCCH repetition for each PUCCH resource. The DCI signaling may be used to indicate the number of repetition for the PUCCH transmission. In some of the present implementations, if there are more than one activation/deactivation bit field for the intra-slot PUCCH repetition in DCI, MAC CE, and/or RRC signaling, the UE may consider only one activation/deactivation bit field as a valid indicator, followed by the priority order of the DCI, MAC CE, and then RRC signaling.”; also see paragraphs 0109-0115].
Moon, ZTE, and Cheng are combinable because they are each from the same field of endeavor, each being wireless mobile systems that that describe utilizing multiple downlink control information (DCI) for scheduling transmissions. At the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have the apparatus of Moon and ZTE further include the functionality that “determine[s] at least one of whether to or when to apply an action indicated by a media access control (MAC-CE) command carried by the first PDSCH transmission”, as recognized by Cheng. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would be that the system of Moon and ZTE would be more robust, having the additional functionality of a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE), as described by Cheng in paragraphs 0004-0026, so as to “fulfil both reliability and latency requirements”, as noted in paragraph 0003 of Cheng. Here, Moon and ZTE would easily be modified with the known techniques, as described by Cheng, whereby this modification would yield predictable results. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine the teachings of Cheng with the apparatus of Moon and ZTE to obtain the invention specified in claim 6.
Regarding claim 7, Moon, ZTE, and Cheng disclose the apparatus discussed above in claim 6, and Moon further teaches wherein the determination of at least one of whether to or when to apply the action is based at least in part on the second DCI [see paragraph 0106, wherein “For example, the HARQ-ACK transmission timing may be determined based on the PDSCH (i.e., the second PDSCH) whose last symbol is received later. In other words, a slot offset K1 between the PDSCH reception and the HARQ-ACK transmission may be determined based on a slot to which the last symbol of a union of all PDSCH resource regions belongs.”; also see paragraphs 0149-0157, wherein “In this case, the terminal may regard all of the multiple DCIs as DCIs for the same order of HARQ transmissions, i.e., the n-th HARQ transmission (e.g., initial transmission when n=1, and retransmission when n>1). In general, the time window for Method M230 and the first time period may be different from each other. …”].
Regarding claim 8, Moon, ZTE, and Cheng disclose the apparatus discussed above in claim 6, and Moon further teaches wherein the determination of at least one of whether to or when to apply the action is to apply the action at a fixed time after transmitting acknowledgment feedback for the first PDSCH transmission [see paragraphs 0108-0109, wherein “Meanwhile, a PDSCH decoding time N1 may also be determined based on a reception completion time point of the first PDSCH or the second PDSCH. For example, the terminal may determine N1 based on the PDSCH (i.e., the second PDSCH) whose last symbol is received later. Alternatively, a later time point among PDSCH processing completion times estimated by N1s of the first and second PDSCHs, and a value of N1 corresponding thereto may be used to determine a valid HARQ-ACK transmission time point. … Accordingly, a valid HARQ-ACK transmission time point according to N1 of the second PDSCH may be later than that of the first PDSCH, and the terminal may derive the valid HARQ-ACK transmission time point based on the second PDSCH.”].
Regarding claim 9, Moon, ZTE, and Cheng disclose the apparatus discussed above in claim 6, and Moon further teaches wherein the determination of at least one of whether to or when to apply the action is to apply the action only when acknowledgment feedback is transmitted for the first PDSCH transmission [see paragraphs 0108-0109, wherein “Meanwhile, a PDSCH decoding time N1 may also be determined based on a reception completion time point of the first PDSCH or the second PDSCH. For example, the terminal may determine N1 based on the PDSCH (i.e., the second PDSCH) whose last symbol is received later. Alternatively, a later time point among PDSCH processing completion times estimated by N1s of the first and second PDSCHs, and a value of N1 corresponding thereto may be used to determine a valid HARQ-ACK transmission time point. … Accordingly, a valid HARQ-ACK transmission time point according to N1 of the second PDSCH may be later than that of the first PDSCH, and the terminal may derive the valid HARQ-ACK transmission time point based on the second PDSCH.”].
Regarding claim 10, Moon, ZTE, and Cheng disclose the apparatus discussed above in claim 6, and Cheng further teaches wherein the determination of at least one of whether to or when to apply the action is to apply the action a fixed time after a next expected transmission of acknowledgment feedback regardless of whether the acknowledgment feedback is for the first PDSCH transmission that carries the MAC-CE command [see paragraphs 0056-0058; also see paragraphs 0108-0110, wherein “Alternatively, the UE 400 may receive a MAC-CE signaling which activates PUCCH repetition transmission for PUCCH resource #1 based on the PUCCH resource ID and activate/deactivate indicator (i.e., AID field) of the MAC-CE.”; also see paragraphs 0115-0116, wherein “Alternatively, the UE 400 may receive a MAC CE signaling which may indicate that the UE may transmit the PUCCH resource repetitively, where the first repetitive PUCCH is on the OFDM symbol#4 and symbol#5 in slot#n+4 and the second repetitive PUCCH is on the OFDM symbol#7 and symbol#8 in slot#n+4, and so on. The MAC CE may contain the PUCCH resource ID which may indicate the PUCCH resource #1 and the time offset between repetitive PUCCH resources is “1 symbol”.”].
Moon, ZTE, and Cheng are combinable because they are each from the same field of endeavor, each being wireless mobile systems that that describe utilizing multiple downlink control information (DCI) for scheduling transmissions. At the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have the apparatus of Moon and ZTE further include the functionality that “the determination of at least one of whether to or when to apply the action is to apply the action a fixed time after a next expected transmission of acknowledgment feedback regardless of whether the acknowledgment feedback is for the first PDSCH transmission that carries the MAC-CE command”, as recognized by Cheng. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would be that the system of Moon and ZTE would be more robust, having the additional functionality of a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE), as described by Cheng in paragraphs 0004-0026, so as to “fulfil both reliability and latency requirements”, as noted in paragraph 0003 of Cheng. Here, Moon and ZTE would easily be modified with the known techniques, as described by Cheng, whereby this modification would yield predictable results. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine the teachings of Cheng with the apparatus of Moon and ZTE to obtain the invention specified in claim 10.
Regarding claim 11, Moon, ZTE, and Cheng disclose the apparatus discussed above in claim 6, and Cheng further teaches wherein the determination of at least one of whether to or when to apply the action is to apply the action a fixed time after an end of the first PDSCH transmission that carries the MAC-CE command [see paragraphs 0056-0058; also see paragraphs 0108-0110, wherein “Alternatively, the UE 400 may receive a MAC-CE signaling which activates PUCCH repetition transmission for PUCCH resource #1 based on the PUCCH resource ID and activate/deactivate indicator (i.e., AID field) of the MAC-CE.”; also see paragraphs 0115-0116, wherein “Alternatively, the UE 400 may receive a MAC CE signaling which may indicate that the UE may transmit the PUCCH resource repetitively, where the first repetitive PUCCH is on the OFDM symbol#4 and symbol#5 in slot#n+4 and the second repetitive PUCCH is on the OFDM symbol#7 and symbol#8 in slot#n+4, and so on. The MAC CE may contain the PUCCH resource ID which may indicate the PUCCH resource #1 and the time offset between repetitive PUCCH resources is “1 symbol”.”].
Moon, ZTE, and Cheng are combinable because they are each from the same field of endeavor, each being wireless mobile systems that that describe utilizing multiple downlink control information (DCI) for scheduling transmissions. At the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have the apparatus of Moon and ZTE further include the functionality that “the determination of at least one of whether to or when to apply the action is to apply the action a fixed time after an end of the first PDSCH transmission that carries the MAC-CE command”, as recognized by Cheng. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would be that the system of Moon and ZTE would be more robust, having the additional functionality of a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE), as described by Cheng in paragraphs 0004-0026, so as to “fulfil both reliability and latency requirements”, as noted in paragraph 0003 of Cheng. Here, Moon and ZTE would easily be modified with the known techniques, as described by Cheng, whereby this modification would yield predictable results. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine the teachings of Cheng with the apparatus of Moon and ZTE to obtain the invention specified in claim 11.
Regarding claim 20, Moon and ZTE disclose the apparatus discussed above in claim 15, but both fail to expressly disclose if the at least one processor is further configured to:
determine at least one of whether to or when the UE is to apply an action indicated by a media access control (MAC-CE) command carried by the first PDSCH transmission.
But Cheng discloses an apparatus for wireless communications by a network entity [see Figs. 1, 5, and 6], comprising:
at least one processor [processor 626, seen in Fig. 6; also see paragraphs 0136-0141] configured to:
send a first downlink control information (DCI) that schedules a first physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) transmission [see paragraphs 0005-0026];
and
a memory coupled with the at least one processor [memory 628, seen in Fig. 6].
Cheng further teaches wherein at least one processor is further configured to:
determine at least one of whether to or when to apply an action indicated by a media access control (MAC-CE) command carried by the first PDSCH transmission [see paragraphs 0008-0021, wherein “In another implementation of the first aspect, the information related to the transmission of the PUCCH is first information and the downlink signaling comprises RRC signaling, the method further comprising receiving, through one of DCI and a MAC CE, second information that either complement or overwrite the first information. … In another implementation of the second aspect, the downlink signaling comprises one of radio resource control (RRC) signaling, a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE), and DCI.”; also see paragraphs 0058, wherein “For example, the time offset between each PUCCH repetition may be configured by the RRC signaling, and the MAC CE may activate/deactivate the PUCCH repetition for each PUCCH resource. The DCI signaling may be used to indicate the number of repetition for the PUCCH transmission. In some of the present implementations, if there are more than one activation/deactivation bit field for the intra-slot PUCCH repetition in DCI, MAC CE, and/or RRC signaling, the UE may consider only one activation/deactivation bit field as a valid indicator, followed by the priority order of the DCI, MAC CE, and then RRC signaling.”; also see paragraphs 0109-0115].
Moon, ZTE, and Cheng are combinable because they are each from the same field of endeavor, each being wireless mobile systems that that describe utilizing multiple downlink control information (DCI) for scheduling transmissions. At the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have the apparatus of Moon and ZTE further include the functionality that “determine[s] at least one of whether to or when to apply an action indicated by a media access control (MAC-CE) command carried by the first PDSCH transmission”, as recognized by Cheng. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would be that the system of Moon and ZTE would be more robust, having the additional functionality of a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE), as described by Cheng in paragraphs 0004-0026, so as to “fulfil both reliability and latency requirements”, as noted in paragraph 0003 of Cheng. Here, Moon and ZTE would easily be modified with the known techniques, as described by Cheng, whereby this modification would yield predictable results. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine the teachings of Cheng with the apparatus of Moon and ZTE to obtain the invention specified in claim 20.
Regarding claim 21, Moon, ZTE, and Cheng disclose the apparatus discussed above in claim 20, and Moon further teaches wherein the determination of at least one of whether or when the UE is to apply the action is based at least in part on the second DCI [see paragraph 0106, wherein “For example, the HARQ-ACK transmission timing may be determined based on the PDSCH (i.e., the second PDSCH) whose last symbol is received later. In other words, a slot offset K1 between the PDSCH reception and the HARQ-ACK transmission may be determined based on a slot to which the last symbol of a union of all PDSCH resource regions belongs.”; also see paragraphs 0149-0157, wherein “In this case, the terminal may regard all of the multiple DCIs as DCIs for the same order of HARQ transmissions, i.e., the n-th HARQ transmission (e.g., initial transmission when n=1, and retransmission when n>1). In general, the time window for Method M230 and the first time period may be different from each other. …”].
Regarding claim 22, Moon, ZTE, and Cheng disclose the apparatus discussed above in claim 20, and Moon further teaches wherein the determination of at least one of whether or when the UE is to apply the action is to apply the action at a fixed time after transmitting acknowledgment feedback for the first PDSCH transmission [see paragraphs 0108-0109, wherein “Meanwhile, a PDSCH decoding time N1 may also be determined based on a reception completion time point of the first PDSCH or the second PDSCH. For example, the terminal may determine N1 based on the PDSCH (i.e., the second PDSCH) whose last symbol is received later. Alternatively, a later time point among PDSCH processing completion times estimated by N1s of the first and second PDSCHs, and a value of N1 corresponding thereto may be used to determine a valid HARQ-ACK transmission time point. … Accordingly, a valid HARQ-ACK transmission time point according to N1 of the second PDSCH may be later than that of the first PDSCH, and the terminal may derive the valid HARQ-ACK transmission time point based on the second PDSCH.”].
Regarding claim 23, Moon, ZTE, and Cheng disclose the apparatus discussed above in claim 20, and Moon further teaches wherein the determination of at least one of whether or when the UE is to apply the action is to apply the action only when acknowledgment feedback is transmitted for the first PDSCH transmission [see paragraphs 0108-0109, wherein “Meanwhile, a PDSCH decoding time N1 may also be determined based on a reception completion time point of the first PDSCH or the second PDSCH. For example, the terminal may determine N1 based on the PDSCH (i.e., the second PDSCH) whose last symbol is received later. Alternatively, a later time point among PDSCH processing completion times estimated by N1s of the first and second PDSCHs, and a value of N1 corresponding thereto may be used to determine a valid HARQ-ACK transmission time point. … Accordingly, a valid HARQ-ACK transmission time point according to N1 of the second PDSCH may be later than that of the first PDSCH, and the terminal may derive the valid HARQ-ACK transmission time point based on the second PDSCH.”].
Regarding claim 24, Moon, ZTE, and Cheng disclose the apparatus discussed above in claim 20, and Cheng further teaches wherein the determination of at least one of whether or when the UE is to apply the action is to apply the action a fixed time after a next expected transmission of acknowledgment feedback regardless of whether the acknowledgment feedback is for the first PDSCH transmission that carries the MAC-CE command [see paragraphs 0056-0058; also see paragraphs 0108-0110, wherein “Alternatively, the UE 400 may receive a MAC-CE signaling which activates PUCCH repetition transmission for PUCCH resource #1 based on the PUCCH resource ID and activate/deactivate indicator (i.e., AID field) of the MAC-CE.”; also see paragraphs 0115-0116, wherein “Alternatively, the UE 400 may receive a MAC CE signaling which may indicate that the UE may transmit the PUCCH resource repetitively, where the first repetitive PUCCH is on the OFDM symbol#4 and symbol#5 in slot#n+4 and the second repetitive PUCCH is on the OFDM symbol#7 and symbol#8 in slot#n+4, and so on. The MAC CE may contain the PUCCH resource ID which may indicate the PUCCH resource #1 and the time offset between repetitive PUCCH resources is “1 symbol”.”].
Moon, ZTE, and Cheng are combinable because they are each from the same field of endeavor, each being wireless mobile systems that that describe utilizing multiple downlink control information (DCI) for scheduling transmissions. At the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have the apparatus of Moon and ZTE further include the functionality that “the determination of at least one of whether or when the UE is to apply the action is to apply the action a fixed time after a next expected transmission of acknowledgment feedback regardless of whether the acknowledgment feedback is for the first PDSCH transmission that carries the MAC-CE command”, as recognized by Cheng. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would be that the system of Moon and ZTE would be more robust, having the additional functionality of a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE), as described by Cheng in paragraphs 0004-0026, so as to “fulfil both reliability and latency requirements”, as noted in paragraph 0003 of Cheng. Here, Moon and ZTE would easily be modified with the known techniques, as described by Cheng, whereby this modification would yield predictable results. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine the teachings of Cheng with the apparatus of Moon and ZTE to obtain the invention specified in claim 24.
Regarding claim 25, Moon, ZTE, and Cheng disclose the apparatus discussed above in claim 20, and Cheng further teaches wherein the determination of at least one of whether or when the UE is to apply the action is to apply the action a fixed time after an end of the first PDSCH transmission that carries the MAC-CE command [see paragraphs 0056-0058; also see paragraphs 0108-0110, wherein “Alternatively, the UE 400 may receive a MAC-CE signaling which activates PUCCH repetition transmission for PUCCH resource #1 based on the PUCCH resource ID and activate/deactivate indicator (i.e., AID field) of the MAC-CE.”; also see paragraphs 0115-0116, wherein “Alternatively, the UE 400 may receive a MAC CE signaling which may indicate that the UE may transmit the PUCCH resource repetitively, where the first repetitive PUCCH is on the OFDM symbol#4 and symbol#5 in slot#n+4 and the second repetitive PUCCH is on the OFDM symbol#7 and symbol#8 in slot#n+4, and so on. The MAC CE may contain the PUCCH resource ID which may indicate the PUCCH resource #1 and the time offset between repetitive PUCCH resources is “1 symbol”.”].
Moon, ZTE, and Cheng are combinable because they are each from the same field of endeavor, each being wireless mobile systems that that describe utilizing multiple downlink control information (DCI) for scheduling transmissions. At the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have the apparatus of Moon and ZTE further include the functionality that “the determination of at least one of whether or when the UE is to apply the action is to apply the action a fixed time after an end of the first PDSCH transmission that carries the MAC-CE command”, as recognized by Cheng. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would be that the system of Moon and ZTE would be more robust, having the additional functionality of a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE), as described by Cheng in paragraphs 0004-0026, so as to “fulfil both reliability and latency requirements”, as noted in paragraph 0003 of Cheng. Here, Moon and ZTE would easily be modified with the known techniques, as described by Cheng, whereby this modification would yield predictable results. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine the teachings of Cheng with the apparatus of Moon and ZTE to obtain the invention specified in claim 25.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure:
U.S. Patent Application Publication 2019/0020506, with the inventor of Cheng et al., discloses a wireless communication system that allows a UE to receive first and second DCIs that provide scheduling information for transmission of data; and
U.S. Patent Application Publication 2021/0014883, with the inventor of Khoshnevisan et al., discloses a method of wireless communication that receives multiple DCI signals.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to Joseph R. Pokrzywa, whose telephone number is (571) 272-7410. The Examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday, 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, Michael Fuelling can be reached on (571) 270-1367. The fax 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.
Signed:
/JOSEPH R POKRZYWA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3992
Conferees:
/ROBERT J HANCE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3992
/MICHAEL FUELLING/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3992
Prosecution Insights