DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priorities and Examiner Remarks
This application is a Continuation of PCT/CN2021/106266 (filed 07/14/2021), which claims foreign priority to application of CHINA: 202010688012.3 (filed
07/16/2020).
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 11/18/2025 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-5, 7-16, and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yerramalli et al. (US 20190166621 A1, hereinafter Yerramalli), in view of KIM et al. (US 20200252168 A1, hereinafter KIM).
Regarding claim 1, Yerramalli teaches a method for transmitting feedback information, applied to a terminal, wherein the method comprises (in general, see fig. 3 and fig. 6 along with their corresponding paragraphs 150-160 and 184-192, note that fig. 4 and 5 are various embodiments in addition to fig. 3 that could also be applied for rejections):
receiving feedback time indication information (see at least para. 155 and 160, for one example, but not limited to, “…during subframe or slot 360 the base station may transmit a downlink grant to the UE… The downlink grant may also identify HARQ process 340 which identifies resources allocated for transmission of ACK/NACK information from the UE…”),
wherein the terminal is configured with at least one downlink semi-persistent scheduling (DL SPS) configuration resource (see at least para. 155, “…The base station may schedule SPS period 305-c to begin at subframe or slot 355 where the base station may have transmitted a downlink SPS subframe or slot 320…”),
the feedback time indication information is used to indicate at least one first candidate time-domain feedback resource, the first candidate time-domain feedback resource is a candidate time-domain resource for transmission of first feedback information (see at least para. 155 and 160, for one example, but not limited to, “…The downlink grant may also identify HARQ process 340 which identifies resources allocated for transmission of ACK/NACK information from the UE…”),
the first feedback information is feedback information corresponding to a downlink data channel of a first target DL SPS (see at least para. 151 and fig. 3, “…and SPS period 305-c may have HARQ process 340 configured. Generally, the HARQ process provide a mechanism for transmission of ACK/NACK feedback information from the receiving device…”);
determining a target time-domain resource based on the feedback time indication information; and transmitting the first feedback information on the target time-domain resource (see at least para. 155 along with para. 151 and fig. 3, “…and SPS period 305-c may have HARQ process 340 configured. Generally, the HARQ process provide a mechanism for transmission of ACK/NACK feedback information from the receiving device…”).
Yerramalli does not specifically teach the first target DL SPS is at least one of the at least one DL SPS, ... wherein the first target DL SPS comprises at least one of the following: all DL SPSs configured for the terminal; and a DL SPS with a specified priority
KIM teaches the first target DL SPS is at least one of the at least one DL SPS, ... wherein the first target DL SPS comprises at least one of the following: all DL SPSs configured for the terminal; and a DL SPS with a specified priority (in general, see para. 500-550 that also including but not limited to fig. 35A/B, in particular, see at least para. 501 along with para. 507, for one nonlimiting example, “…The base station may configure a plurality of DL SPSs for the corresponding DL BWP to the terminal…”, note that one or more DL SPSs may also be referred to as a DL SPS set).
Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to a person having ordinary skill in the art to incorporate KIM into the method of Yerramalli for improving performance of the communication system by transmitting HARQ responses efficiently.
Regarding claim 2, Yerramalli in view of KIM teaches the first target DL SPS further comprises at least one of the following: a DL SPS with a specified identifier; and an active DL SPS. (Yerramalli, see at least para. 180-181, for one example, but not limited to, use of RNTI to activate SPS configuration and resource allocation)
Regarding claim 3, Yerramalli in view of KIM teaches the specified priority comprises at least one of a highest priority and a lowest priority; or the specified priority is a set of priorities, and the set of priorities comprises a plurality of priorities. (KIM, see at least para. 522-523, “…the terminal may interpret the HPID for the SPS PDSCH having a high priority based on the priority of the traffic (e.g., URLLC traffic having a high priority or eMBB traffic having a low priority), which is implicitly or explicitly indicated by the DL-DCI activating the DL SPS…”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to a person having ordinary skill in the art to incorporate KIM into the method of Yerramalli for improving performance of the communication system by transmitting HARQ responses efficiently.
Regarding claim 4, Yerramalli in view of KIM teaches the feedback time indication information comprises at least one of the following:
a feedback time window, wherein the feedback time window comprises the at least one first candidate time-domain feedback resource (Yerramalli, see at least fig. 3 and para. 151, “…For example, SPS period 305-a may have HARQ process 330 configured, SPS period 305-b may have HARQ process 335 configured, and SPS period 305-c may have HARQ process 340 configured. Generally, the HARQ process provide a mechanism for transmission of ACK/NACK feedback information from the receiving device…”);
a start position of the first candidate time-domain feedback resource; a length of the first candidate time-domain feedback resource; an end position of the first candidate time-domain feedback resource; a quantity of the first candidate time-domain feedback resources; a number or a set of numbers of the first candidate time-domain feedback resource; and an offset value.
Regarding claim 5, Yerramalli in view of KIM teaches the feedback time window comprises at least one time unit, and each time unit comprises at least one of the first candidate time-domain feedback resources, wherein the time unit is slot, sub-slot, or subframe. (Yerramalli, see at least fig. 3 and para. 151, e.g. various time domain resources)
Regarding claim 7, Yerramalli in view of KIM teaches the first feedback information is feedback information for some or all of HARQ processes for the first target DL SPS. (Yerramalli, see at least para. 155 along with para. 151 and fig. 3, “…and SPS period 305-c may have HARQ process 340 configured. Generally, the HARQ process provide a mechanism for transmission of ACK/NACK feedback information from the receiving device…”)
Regarding claim 8, Yerramalli in view of KIM teaches the receiving feedback time indication information comprises receiving the feedback time indication information sent in one of the following manners: sending the feedback time indication information to the terminal by radio resource control RRC; sending the feedback time indication information to the terminal by group common DCI; and sending the feedback time indication information to the terminal by DCI specific to the terminal. (Yerramalli, see at least para. 160, for one example, but not limited to, “…For example, multiple sPUCCH and ePUCCH resources may be RRC configured so that the downlink grant can indicate one of the ACK/NACK resources to use…”)
Regarding claim 9, this claim is rejected for the same reasoning as claim 1. To be more specific, although reciting subject matters slightly different, one skilled in the art would have known claim 9 performs reverse (or corresponding) procedures of claim 1. For example, it would be a network-side device of claim 9 that performs the reverse (or corresponding) receiving from and transmitting to the terminal of claim 1. Hence, the examiner applies the same rejection reasoning as set forth in claim 1.
Regarding claims 10 and 11, in view of claim 9 above, these claims are rejected for the same reasoning as claims 2 and 4, respectively.
Regarding claims 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 18, and 19, these claims are rejected for the same reasoning as claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, and 8, respectively, except each of these claims is in apparatus claim format.
To be more specific, Yerramalli in view of KIM also teaches a same or similar apparatus comprising processor, transceiver, and memory (Yerramalli, see at least fig. 14), which are well known in the art and commonly used for providing and enabling robust and reliable data communication hardware and software.
Claims 6 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yerramalli in view of KIM, as applied to claims 1 and 12 above, and further in view of Ying et al. (US 20190254053 A1, hereinafter Ying).
Regarding claim 6, Yerramalli in view of KIM teaches skipping transmitting the first feedback information on the target time-domain resource (Yerramalli, see at least para. 159, e.g. UE may drop the HARQ-ACK).
Yerramalli in view of KIM differs from the claim, in that, it does not specifically disclose skipping transmitting the first feedback information on the target time-domain resource in a case that the target time-domain resource collides with a time-domain resource for downlink transmission.
Ying, for example, from the similar field of endeavor, teaches similar or known mechanism of skipping transmitting the first feedback information on the target time-domain resource in a case that the target time-domain resource collides with a time-domain resource for downlink transmission (in general, see fig. 3 and corresponding para. 124-139, in particular, see at least para. 124-125, for one example, but not limited to, “…or a case where the symbol(s) carrying HARQ-ACK in slot n+K1 conflicts with DL symbol(s)…”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to a person having ordinary skill in the art to incorporate Ying into the method of Yerramalli in view of KIM for improving communication flexibility and/or efficiency.
Regarding claim 17, this claim is rejected for the same reasoning as claim 6 except this claim is in apparatus claim format.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 10/21/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Examiner provides response in following sections.
Regarding claim 1, applicant argues that:
“Regarding claim 1, paragraphs [180]-[181] of Yerramalli (reproduced below) only mention GC-PDCCH scrambled with GC-SPS C-RNTI can be used to activate SPS. Yerramalli does not disclose how to indicate feedback time-domain resource for all DL SPSs configured for the terminal, and how to indicate feedback time-domain resource for a DL SPS with a specified priority. Thus, Yerramalli fails to disclose the Feature A of claim 1 "wherein the first target DL SPS comprises at least one of the following: all DL SPSs configured for the terminal; a DL SPS with a specified priority".
...
Furthermore, paragraphs [0522]-[0523] of KIM (reproduced below) disclose that DL SPSs have priorities. KIM intends to address whether a UE feeds back an HARQ when a conflict of the same HPID occurs. KIM does not disclose indicating SPS time-domain feedback resource for a DLSPS with a specified priority. KIM is a scheme based on SPS priority. It does not provide any motivation to design feedback for all the technical solutions that have been configured for DL SPS. KIM does not disclose Feature A either.
...
In view of above, Yerramalli does not disclose, teach or suggest claim 1, the deficiency is not cured by KIM or other cited reference documents, and claim 1 is patentable over the cited art. Independent claims 9 and 12 are also patentable for similar reasons. Claims depending from claims 1, 9 or 12 are also patentable for at least the above reasons.”
(Remarks, page 9, 10, and 11)
Examiner respectfully disagrees. KIM at least in para. 501 discloses a base station may configure a plurality of DL SPSs to the terminal. KIM in its para. 507 further teaches that one DL SPS or more than one DL SPSs may be referred to as a DL SPS set. Hence, for this non-limiting example, KIM indeed teaches the first target DL SPS is at least one of the at least one DL SPS, ... wherein the first target DL SPS comprises at least one of the following: all DL SPSs configured for the terminal; and a DL SPS with a specified priority. Therefore, KIM indeed teaches or suggests the argued features as stated.
Regarding independent claims 9 and 12, the traversal grounds are same or similar as those argued in claim 1 above. Therefore, in view of the response above, examiner also respectfully disagrees and has maintained the rejection as presented.
Accordingly, all pending dependent claims of the independent claims 1, 9, and 12, in view of the response above, the examiner has maintained the rejection as presented and believes all rejections are proper and should be sustained.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YEE F LAM whose telephone number is (571)270-7577. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 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, Ayman Abaza can be reached on 571-270-0422. 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.
/YEE F LAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2465