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).
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. 5 and fig. 6 along with their corresponding paragraphs 172-192, note that fig. 3 and 4 are various embodiments in addition to fig. 5 that could also be applied for rejections):
receiving feedback time indication information (Yerramalli, see at least para. 172-173 along with para. 186 and 175, “...Broadly, SPS configuration 500 illustrates one example of a trigger-based approach for downlink SPS communications. SPS configuration 500 may include a number of SPS periods 505. Each SPS period 505
may be based on the periodicity of the SPS configuration. ... Each SPS period 505 may have one or more configured HARQ processes....”, note that “...At 620, base station 605 may transmit (and UE 610 may receive) an SPS configuration message to the identified UE(s) 610...”, also note that “...The SPS trigger may be sent in a GC-PDCCH, in some examples. In some aspects, the SPS trigger may be indicated by scrambling the DCI of the control signal using an identifier associated with the SPS configuration...”),
wherein the terminal is configured with at least two downlink semi-persistent scheduling (DL SPS) configuration resource (Yerramalli, see at least para. 173, “...SPS configuration 500 may include a number of SPS periods 505. Each SPS period 505 may be based on the periodicity of the SPS configuration...”),
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 (Yerramalli, see at least para. 173, “...Each SPS period 505 may have one or more configured HARQ processes. For example, SPS period 505-a may have HARQ process 530 configured, SPS period 505-b may have HARQ process 535 configured, and SPS period 505-c may have HARQ process 540 configured. Generally, the HARQ process provides a mechanism for transmission of ACK/NACK feedback information from the receiving device...”),
the first feedback information is feedback information corresponding to a downlink data channel of a first target DL SPS (Yerramalli, see at least para. 175, for one non-limiting example, “...The SPS trigger may be for one or more than one UEs. The base station may then transmit (and the UE may receive) the downlink message in the subframe or slot 545 according to the SPS trigger. The downlink message may be associated with HARQ process 530 where the UE transmits ACK/NACK information based on whether the downlink message was successfully received and decoded by the UE...”, note that HARQ process 535 or 540 could also be applied),
and
the first target DL SPS is at least one of the at least two DL SPSs (Yerramalli, see at least para. 175 along with para. 176-177, for one non-limiting example, “...The SPS trigger may be for one or more than one UEs. The base station may then transmit (and the UE may receive) the downlink message in the subframe or slot 545 according to the SPS trigger. The downlink message may be associated with HARQ process 530 where the UE transmits ACK/NACK information based on whether the downlink message was successfully received and decoded by the UE...”, note that the downlink message in the subframe or slot 550 or 555 could also be applied);
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 (Yerramalli, see at least para. 173, “...Each SPS period 505 may have one or more configured HARQ processes. For example, SPS period 505-a may have HARQ process 530 configured, SPS period 505-b may have HARQ process 535 configured,
and SPS period 505-c may have HARQ process 540 configured. Generally, the HARQ process provides a mechanism for transmission of ACK/NACK feedback information from the receiving device...”).
Yerramalli does not specifically teach:
wherein the feedback time indication information comprises:
an offset value, wherein the offset value comprises an offset value of the first candidate time-domain feedback resource relative to a first reference point;
wherein the first reference point comprises one of the following:
a receiving occasion of DCI for activating a second target DL SPS;
a receiving occasion of a first downlink data channel of the second target DL SPS; and
a feedback occasion of feedback information corresponding to a first downlink data channel of the second target DL SPS;
wherein the second target DL SPS is a DL SPS with a smallest or largest identifier in the first target DL SPS.
KIM teaches:
wherein the feedback time indication information comprises (KIM, in general, see para. 500-550 that also including but not limited to fig. 35A/B, in particular, see at least para. 500, “...In a proposed method, each of a DCI indicating activation of the SPS PDSCH, ... Each of the index and bitmap included in the DCI may indicate a combination of one or more SPS PDSCHs...”):
an offset value, wherein the offset value comprises an offset value of the first candidate time-domain feedback resource relative to a first reference point (KIM, see at least para. 239, “...DCI may include a slot offset or sub-slot offset for feedback of the HARQ response...”),
wherein the first reference point comprises one of the following:
a receiving occasion of DCI for activating a second target DL SPS;
a receiving occasion of a first downlink data channel of the second target DL SPS (KIM, see at least para. 242 along with para. 239, “...The DCI may include resources of a DL data channel, a slot offset or sub-slot offset (e.g., HARQ response timing) for feedback of an HARQ response for the DL data channel, and a PRI. The terminal may identify a UL (sub)slot in which the UL control channel is to be transmitted based on the HARQ response timing...”);
and
a feedback occasion of feedback information corresponding to a first downlink data channel of the second target DL SPS;
wherein the second target DL SPS is a DL SPS with a smallest or largest identifier in the first target DL SPS (KIM, see at least para. 507 along with at least para. 534 of fig. 35A, “...the DL-DCI may activate or deactivate one or more DL SPSs. To support this operation, one DL SPS index or one bit included in the bitmap may indicate two or more DL SPSs..”, note that para. 534 discloses “...two DL SPSs (e.g., DL SPS a and DL SPS b)...” as an example).
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 comprises at least one of the following: all DL SPSs configured for the terminal; a DL SPS with a specified priority; 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 further 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; and a number or a set of numbers of the first candidate time-domain feedback resource.
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 03/20/2026 have been fully considered. Regarding independent claims 1, 9, and 12, since applicant's amendment necessitated new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action, previous Office action's rejections are moot. Accordingly, corresponding dependent claims have also been rejected in this Office action.
Conclusion
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.
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
Prosecution Insights