DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim 2 has been cancelled.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
2. A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 10/22/2025 has been entered.
Status of Claims
3. This Office Action is in response to the application filed on 10/22/2025. Claims 1 and 3-20 are presently pending and are presented for examination.
4. 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 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.
Response to Arguments
5. Applicant's arguments filed 10/22/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argued that Kim does not teach or suggest assigning different CCs in different frequency ranges for HARQ retransmissions.
Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Salem teaches a first assignment for a first transmission with a first hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) process identifier (process ID) in a first network resource, receiving, by the UE, a second assignment for a second transmission with
a second HARQ process ID in a second network resource, wherein the first network resource and the second network resource differ in a domain wherein the network resource is frequency resources (see paragraph 18 and pargraph 265). In addition, Salem teaches HARQ process in licensed band (not shared as in unlicensed band) is more reliable (see paragraph 182).
Salem does not explicitly teach the first arrangement comprises the first CC being in a first frequency range (FR1) and the second CC being in a second frequency range (FR2) different from the FR1.
However, Kim teaches both FR1 and FR2 frequency ranges. These ranges can be applied for frequency assignment of HARQ in Salem system (see paragraphs 143-146)-The frequency ranges are considered design requirements. In addition, Kim teaches HARQ-ACK feedback is transmitted in a licensed carrier and/or channel (see paragraph 703).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. 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.
Claims 1, 3-11, and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Salem et al. (US 2019/0215104 A1) in view of Kim et al. (US 2022/0116150 A1).
For claim 1 Salem teaches a method, comprising:
performing a hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) transmission as a HARQ initial transmission on a first component carrier (CC); and
performing another HARQ transmission as a HARQ retransmission on a second CC different from the first CC (see paragraphs 191-192 “one or more of the methods described herein applied to New Radio-unlicensed (NR-U) uplink grant based (HARQ) retransmissions in respect of initial uplink grant based (HARQ) transmissions , where the uplink grant of retransmission and granted uplink resource can be in different component carrier from the initial transmission”),
wherein the HARQ initial transmission and the HARQ retransmission are performed based an arrangement (see paragraph 171 “HARQ feedback arrangement on CC as an exemplarily”, paragraph 31 “first and second HARQs association configuration (an exemplarily arrangement)”, claim 1 “first HARQ assignment (arrangement) in a first network resource and the second HARQ assignment in a second network resource” and claim 4 “ the first and the second network resource is a frequency resource”), and
wherein:
the arrangement comprises the first CC being in a first frequency range (FR1) and the second CC being in a second frequency range (FR2) different from the FR1 ,both the FR1 and the FR2 corresponding to licensed frequency band (see paragraph 13 “NR frequency spectrum”, paragraphs 21, 88 “network resource include at least a frequency resource”, paragraph 265 “frequency resources for HARQ transmission assignment”, and paragraph 182 “HARQ process over licensed CC (frequencies) are more reliable-design option).
Salem does not explicitly teach the first arrangement comprises the first CC being in a first frequency range (FR1) and the second CC being in a second frequency range (FR2) different from the FR1.
However, Kim teaches In NR, multiple numerologies (e.g., SCSs) are supported to support a variety of 5G services. For example, a wide area in cellular bands is supported for an SCS of 15 kHz, a dense-urban area, a lower latency, and a wider carrier bandwidth are supported for an SCS of30 kHz/60 kHz, and a larger bandwidth than 24.25 GHz is supported for an SCS of 60 kHz or more, to overcome phase noise. An NR frequency band is defined by two types of frequency ranges, FR1 and FR2. FR1 may be a sub-6 GHz range, and FR2 may be an above-6 GHz range, that is, a millimeter wave (mm Wave) band (see Kim: paragraphs 144-146).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to use the teaching of Kim in the HARQ transmission assignments of Salem in order to assign one HARQ transmission over FR1 and the another HARQ transmission over FR2 to support variety of 5G services (see Kim: paragraphs 144-146).
For claim 3 Salem teaches the method, wherein each of the HARQ initial transmission and the HARQ retransmission is performed using a common pool of HARQ processes corresponding to both the first CC and the second CC and defined per cell group (see paragraphs 191-192 “one or more of the methods described herein applied to New Radio-unlicensed (NR-U) uplink grant based (HARQ) retransmissions in respect of initial uplink grant based (HARQ) transmissions , where the uplink grant of retransmission and granted uplink resource can be in different component carrier from the initial transmission” and paragraph 27 “an indication indicating that a pool of HARQ
process IDs are common across at least the first and second network resources”).
For claim 4 Salem teaches the method of Claim 3, wherein a maximum number of HARQ processes in the common pool is a sum of a maximum HARQ processes supported for all CCs in the common pool (see paragraph 94 “a large number of HARQ processes supported across component carriers”).
For claim 5 Salem teaches the method of Claim 3, further comprising:
receiving or transmitting, via a radio resource control (RRC) signaling, a configuration on a maximum number of HARQ processes configurable per physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) group or for a group of cells (see paragraph 90 “HARQ process are shared across two or more carriers in a carrier group, and these shared HARQ process are pre-configured, for example, semi-statically using radio resource control (RRC) signaling on a per UE basis” and “AUE can be RRC configured with the association of a pool of HARQ process IDs and corresponding CC indices of component carriers that are to use the common pool of HARQ processes.”).
For claim 6 Salem teaches the method, wherein a first HARQ process for the HARQ initial transmission is mapped to a second HARQ process for and the HARQ retransmission (see paragraph 27 “an indication indicating that a pool of HARQ
process IDs are common across at least the first and second network resources, wherein the first HARQ process ID and the second HARQ process ID are the same to indicate that the first and second HARQ process IDs map to the TB” and paragraph 36 “wherein the indication further comprises at least one semi-statically configured mapping rule (configurable mapping rules) that associates the first HARQ process ID on the first network resource with the second HARQ process ID on the second network resource”).
For claim 7 Salem teaches the method of Claim 6, further comprising: receiving or transmitting a configuration that maps the first HARQ process and the second HARQ process either semi-statically via radio resource control (RRC) signaling or dynamically (see paragraph 27 “an indication indicating that a pool of HARQ process IDs are common across at least the first and second network resources, wherein the first HARQ process ID and the second HARQ process ID are the same to indicate that the first and second HARQ process IDs map to the TB” and paragraph 36 “wherein the indication further comprises at least one semi-statically configured mapping rule (configurable mapping rules) that associates the first HARQ process ID on the first network resource with the second HARQ process ID on the second network resource”, paragraph 193 “the network transmits a configuration of auxiliary HARQ Processes/Mapping Rule.
For example, a gNB may semi-statically configure the UEs with the auxiliary HARQ processes through higher layer signaling, e.g., RRC. The mapping rule can be signaled as a lookup table or parameters of a pre-determined formulae/arithmetic procedure”, and paragraph 87 “Alternatively, the assignment can be provided to the UE as a combination of semi-static and dynamic signaling”).
For claim 8 Salem teaches the method of Claim 6, further comprising:
receiving or transmitting a downlink control information (DCI) signaling with a DCI bit-field (see paragraph 197 “If the network needs to retransmit HARQ process i on CCx but its LBT before the retransmission fails on CCx or a BWP thereof, after receiving a NACK or not receiving any feedback for a preset duration, a DCI for the retransmission
takes place on CCy or a BWP thereof instead of CCx using one of the following methods depending on whether a mapping rule or formula is pre-configured and whether the DCI is cross-carrier scheduling or self-scheduling”),
wherein a first value of the DCI bit-field indicates that the HARQ retransmission is scheduled on the second CC and is associated with the HARQ initial transmission performed on the first CC (see paragraph 197 “If the network needs to retransmit HARQ process i on CCx but its LBT before the retransmission fails on CCx or a BWP thereof, after receiving a NACK or not receiving any feedback for a preset duration, a DCI for the retransmission
takes place on CCy or a BWP thereof instead of CCx using one of the following methods depending on whether a mapping rule or formula is pre-configured and whether the DCI is cross-carrier scheduling or self-scheduling”), and
wherein a second value of the DCI bit-field indicates the HARQ retransmission is scheduled on the first CC and is associated with the HARQ initial transmission performed on the first CC (see paragraph 197 “If the network needs to retransmit HARQ process i on CCx but its LBT before the retransmission fails on CCx or a BWP thereof, after receiving a NACK or not receiving any feedback for a preset duration, a DCI for the retransmission
takes place on CCy or a BWP thereof instead of CCx using one of the following methods depending on whether a mapping rule or formula is pre-configured and whether the DCI is cross-carrier scheduling or self-scheduling”).
For claim 9 Salem teaches the method of Claim 8, wherein, in an event that the DCI bit-field is set to the first value, a new data indicator (NDI) (see pargraph 45 “Optionally, in any of the preceding embodiments, an embodiment wherein the first assignment comprises a first TB size indicator indicating a size of the first TB and a
first new data indicator (NDI), wherein the second assignment comprises a second indicator indicating the size of the second TB and a second NDI, wherein the first assignment and the second assignment indicate the same TB size, and wherein the first NDI and the second NDI are the same”) is:
not toggled to indicate that the HARQ retransmission of an associated HARQ process is on one other CC different than the first CC (see paragraph 208 “same new data indicator (NDI) as original (non-toggled)”); or
For claim 10 Salem teaches the method of Claim 6, further comprising:
receiving or transmitting a downlink control information (DCI) signaling with a DCI bit-field indicating either or both of a carrier index and a HARQ identifier (ID) corresponding to the HARQ initial transmission (see paragraph 87 “DCI indicate carrier index indicating HARQ process ID” and paragraph 161 “One or more of scheduling DCIs in PCC and SCC(s) may include one or more of: carrier indices of the other carrier(s) where DCI for duplication or same packet transmission is received, HARQ indices which are used in the DCIs sent over other carriers participating in duplication. This indication may be in addition to the carrier index and HARQ process ID indication in the DCI for a given carrier.”).
For claim 11 Salem teaches the method of Claim 10, wherein the DCI signaling with the DCI bit-field is applicable to the HARQ retransmission, and wherein a new data indicator (NDI) is either not toggled (see paragraph 262 “as a validation of the received DCI, UE can check if obtained HARQ ID i is among the associated processes of CCx. This is in addition to the same TB size as original and the non-toggled NDI filed w.r.t that of the original DCI scheduled process i”) or or
For claim 16 Salem teaches an apparatus (see Fig. 18 A & Fig. 18 B”), comprising:
a transceiver configured to communicate wirelessly (see Fig. 18 and Fig. 18 B “transceiver 1802 and transceiver 1852”); and
a processor coupled to the transceiver and configured to perform (see Fig. 18 and Fig. 18 B “processing unit 1800 and processing unit 1850”); operations comprising:
performing, via the transceiver, a hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) as a HARQ initial transmission on a first component carrier (CC) (as discussed in claim 1); and
performing, via the transceiver, another HARQ transmission as a HARQ retransmission on a second CC different from the first CC (as discussed in claim 1), and
wherein the HARQ initial transmission and the HARQ retransmission are performed based on an arrangement (see paragraph 18 “a first HARQ transmission assignment (arrangement) and a second HARQ transmission assignment)”), and
wherein the arrangement comprises the first CC being in a frequency range (FR1) and the second CC being in a second frequency range (FR2) different from the FR1, both the FR1 and the FR2 corresponding to licensed frequency bands (as discussed in claim 1).
For claim 17 Salem teaches the apparatus, wherein each of the HARQ initial transmission and the HARQ retransmission is performed using a common pool of HARQ processes corresponding to both the first CC and the second CC and defined per cell group, and wherein a maximum number of HARQ processes in the common pool is a sum of a maximum HARQ processes supported for all CCs in the common pool (as discussed in claims 3-4).
For claim 18 Salem teaches the apparatus, wherein a first HARQ process for the HARQ initial transmission is mapped to a second HARQ process for and the HARQ retransmission, wherein the processor is further configured to perform operations comprising at least one of:
receiving or transmitting, via the transceiver, a configuration that maps the first HARQ process and the second HARQ process either semi-statically via radio resource control (RRC) signaling or dynamically (as discussed in claim 7);
.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
7. 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.
Claims 12-15 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Salem et al. (US 2019/0215104 A1) in view of Kim et al. (US 2022/0116150 A1) and further in view of Zou et al. (US 2021/0083806 A1).
For claim 12 Salem in view of Kim teaches the method, wherein the HARQ initial transmission is performed using either a first pool of HARQ processes corresponding to the first CC or a second pool of HARQ processes corresponding to the second CC, wherein the HARQ retransmission is performed using a cross-CC pool of HARQ processes corresponding to both the first CC and the second CC, wherein each HARQ process of the first pool of HARQ processes is mapped to a first respective HARQ process of the cross-CC pool of HARQ processes, and wherein each HARQ process of the second pool of HARQ processes is mapped to a second respective HARQ process of the cross-CC pool of HARQ processes (see Salem: paragraph 27 “an indication indicating that a pool of HARQ process IDs are common across at least the first and second network resources, wherein the first HARQ process ID and the second HARQ process ID are the same to indicate that the first and second HARQ process IDs map to the TB”, paragraph 29 “wherein the first and second HARQ process IDs are the same and belong to the subset of the pool and the first and second network resources belong to the subset of the set of network resources to indicate that the first and second HARQ process IDs map to the T”, paragraph 36 “wherein the indication further comprises at least one semi-statically configured mapping rule that associates the first HARQ process ID on the first network resource with the second HARQ process ID on the second network resource”).
Salem in view Kim does not explicitly teach a first pool of HARQ processes, a second pool of HARQ processes, and mapping relationship, although mapping rule can be configured to satisfy various design requirements.
However, Zou teaches a more specific solution may include configuring
separate pools of HARQ process IDs, such as a pool for HARQ process IDs to be used for dynamic grants and a separate pool for HARQ process IDs to be used for SPS. According to some embodiments, a method includes selecting the HARQ process IDs associated with the dynamic grants from a first pool of HARQ process IDs, where the first pool of HARQ process IDs is disjoint from a second pool of HARQ process IDs comprising the HARQ process IDs associated with SPS (see Zou: paragraph 10).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to use the teachings of Zou in the combined pool of HARQ process of Kim and Salem in order to create sperate pools of HARQ process IDs to avoid a collision between the HARQ process ID used for SPS and HARQ process IDs used for dynamic grants (see Zhou: paragraph 7).
For claim 13 Salem in view of Kim and further in view of Zhou teaches the method, wherein each of the HARQ initial transmission and the HARQ retransmission is performed using any of a first pool of HARQ processes corresponding to the first CC, a second pool of HARQ processes corresponding to the second CC, or a common pool of HARQ processes corresponding to both the first CC and the second CC (see Salem: paragraph 27 “an indication indicating that a pool of HARQ process IDs are common across at least the first and second network resources, wherein the first HARQ process ID and the second HARQ process ID are the same to indicate that the first and second HARQ process IDs map to the TB” and paragraph 28 “wherein the indication comprises an indication indicating that a subset of a pool of HARQ process IDs are common across at least the first and second network Resources” and as discussed in claim 12).
For claim 14 Salem in view of Kim and further in view of Zhou teaches the method of Claim 13, wherein there is no mapping between the first pool of HARQ processes and the common pool of HARQ processes, and wherein there is no mapping between the second pool of HARQ processes and the common pool of HARQ processes (see Salem: paragraph 197 “Explicit Indication in DCI (No Mapping Rule is Pre-Configured)” Fi. 2B “250, 252, and 254 groups”, and Fig. 3B “group 35 and group 352” and as discussed in claim 12).
For claim 15 Salem in view of Kim and further in view of Zhou teaches the method of Claim 13, wherein either or both:
a second UE capability is defined on a number of transport blocks (TBs) per slot for cross-carrier HARQ transmissions (see Salem: paragraph 192 “the UE is configured to inform the network (for example by informing a gNB) of its capability to soft-combine TBs received across multiple CCs. Based on this information, the network can then decide on the redundancy version to use with auxiliary HARQ retransmission”).
For claim 19 Salem in view of Kim and further in view of Zhou teaches the apparatus, wherein the HARQ initial transmission is performed using either a first pool of HARQ processes corresponding to the first CC or a second pool of HARQ processes corresponding to the second CC, wherein the HARQ retransmission is performed using a cross-CC pool of HARQ processes corresponding to both the first CC and the second CC, wherein each HARQ process of the first pool of HARQ processes is mapped to a first respective HARQ process of the cross-CC pool of HARQ processes, and wherein each HARQ process of the second pool of HARQ processes is mapped to a second respective HARQ process of the cross-CC pool of HARQ processes (as discussed in claim 12).
For claim 20 Salem in view of Kim and further in view of Zhou teaches the apparatus, wherein each of the HARQ initial transmission and the HARQ retransmission is performed using any of a first pool of HARQ processes corresponding to the first CC, a second pool of HARQ processes corresponding to the second CC, or a common pool of HARQ processes corresponding to both the first CC and the second CC (as discussed in claim 12).
Conclusion
8. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Ranjan et al. (US 2023/0180072 A1).
9. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
10. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to David M OVEISSI whose telephone number is (571)270-3127. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8Am-5PM.
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, Jeffrey Rutkowski can be reached on (571) 270 - 1215. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MANSOUR OVEISSI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2415