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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/18/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On page 12 of the Applicant’s Response, Applicant: “First, YI does not disclose "transmit, for the one or more PDSCH communications, hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) feedback using a sub-codebook of a set of sub- codebooks of a single HARQ codebook," as recited in amended claim 1…Taken together, paragraphs 385 and 372 of YI may, at most, teach that a wireless device maintains multiple independent HARQ-ACK codebooks and, in some circumstances, concatenates bits from those independent codebooks to generate HARQ information. Even when combined, these disclosures do not teach or suggest transmitting HARQ feedback using a sub- codebook of a set of sub-codebooks of a single HARQ codebook, as expressly required by amended claim 1…The claimed invention requires a unified HARQ codebook architecture in which sub- codebooks are defined within a single HARQ codebook and selectively used based on the scheduling context (e.g., single-cell versus multi-cell scheduling). YI's disclosures stop short of this claim language and instead remain limited to separate codebooks with post-hoc bit concatenation, which is materially different from the claimed operation. “.
Examiner respectfully disagrees with Applicant’s argument. Yi discloses both options of concatenating the single cell and multi-cell PDSCH HARQ codebooks and not transmitting separately. Regarding a single HARQ codebook, Yi discloses “wireless device may receive a first DCI (DCI 1) and a third DCI (DCI 2) for a single cell scheduling. The wireless device may determine a first HARQ-ACK codebook based on the first DCI and the third DCI of the single cell scheduling…wireless device may monitor/receive a second DCI (M-DCI 1). The wireless device may determine a second HARQ-ACK codebook when the wireless device receives the second DCI…wireless device may concatenate the first HARQ-ACK codebook and the second HARQ-ACK codebook. The wireless device may transmit the concatenated HARQ-ACK bits via a PUCCH/HARQ-ACK resource” (p354-357). Yi discloses a first HARQ codebook and a second HARQ codebook combined to generate a single HARQ codebook for transmission on a PUCCH resource; the first codebook and second codebook are sub-codebooks used in the single combined HARQ codebook. Yi discloses the first HARQ codebook, i.e. sub-codebook, associated with a single cell scheduling and the second HARQ codebook, i.e. sub-codebook, associated with a multi-cell scheduling (p354-357).
On page 13 of the Applicant’s Response, Applicant: “The claimed invention requires a unified HARQ codebook architecture in which sub- codebooks are defined within a single HARQ codebook and selectively used based on the scheduling context (e.g., single-cell versus multi-cell scheduling). YI's disclosures stop short of this claim language and instead remain limited to separate codebooks with post-hoc bit concatenation, which is materially different from the claimed operation.“.
Examiner respectfully disagrees with Applicant’s argument. Yi discloses incrementing C-DAI in figure 23 in regards to the PDCCH monitoring occasions; however, Yi expressly discloses incrementing the C-DAI of single and multi cell DCIs. For example, Yi discloses: “a base station and/or a wireless device may determine C-DAI/DAI and T-DAI of one or more first DCIs based on one or more first DCI formats of a single cell scheduling separately/independently from C-DAI/DAI and T-DAI of one or more second DCIs based on one or more second DCI formats of a multi-cell scheduling. For example, the base station and/or the wireless device may increment a value of C-DAI/DAI across one or more DCIs, based on the one or more first DCI formats, scheduling resource(s) for a serving cell. The base station and/or the wireless device may increment a value of T-DAI across the one or more first DCIs across one or more serving cells. For example, the base station and/or the wireless device may increment a value of C-DAI/DAI across one or more DCIs, based on the one or more second DCI formats, scheduling resource(s) for a serving cell.” (p355).
In view of the above discussions the rejection of claims 1-3, 5-15, 17-26, 33-29, and 31-34 still stands.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5, 6, 13-15, 17, 18, 25, 26, 28, 29, and 31-34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Yi et al. (US 2024/0057108) (“Yi”).
For claim 1, 13, 25, and 28; Yi discloses: receive one or more physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) communications scheduled by downlink control information (DCI) (paragraph 343: the wireless device may receive the first DCI of a single-cell scheduling based on a first DCI format (e.g., a DCI format 1_1, a DCI format 1_0, a DCI format 1_2) scheduling reception of PDSCH(s) and/or SPS PDSCH release(s). The wireless device may receive the second DCI of a multi-cell scheduling based on a second DCI format (e.g., a DCI format 1_3) scheduling reception of PDSCH(s) and/or SPS PDSCH release(s) of a plurality of cells); and transmit, for the one or more PDSCH communications, hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) feedback using a sub-codebook of a set of sub-codebooksof a single HARQ codebook, wherein the sub-codebook is a single-cell scheduling sub-codebook, of the set of sub-codebooks, or a multi-cell scheduling sub-codebook, of the set of sub-codebooks (paragraph 354-357: wireless device may receive a first DCI (DCI 1) and a third DCI (DCI 2) for a single cell scheduling. The wireless device may determine a first HARQ-ACK codebook based on the first DCI and the third DCI of the single cell scheduling…wireless device may monitor/receive a second DCI (M-DCI 1). The wireless device may determine a second HARQ-ACK codebook when the wireless device receives the second DCI…wireless device may concatenate the first HARQ-ACK codebook and the second HARQ-ACK codebook. The wireless device may transmit the concatenated HARQ-ACK bits via a PUCCH/HARQ-ACK resource), based at least in part on whether the DCI is a first format configured for scheduling the one or more PDSCH communications on a single carrier or a second format configured for scheduling the one or more PDSCH communications on a plurality of carriers (paragraph 356: wireless device may concatenate the first HARQ-ACK codebook and the second HARQ-ACK codebook if joint HARQ-ACK feedback is configured (e.g., configured via RRC signaling of MCellACKNACKFeedbackMode=JointFeedback)) wherein a counter downlink assignment index (C-DAI) value for the DCI is incremented on a per-sub-codebook basis for the set of sub-codebooks (paragraph 355: a base station and/or a wireless device may determine C-DAI/DAI and T-DAI of one or more first DCIs based on one or more first DCI formats of a single cell scheduling separately/independently from C-DAI/DAI and T-DAI of one or more second DCIs based on one or more second DCI formats of a multi-cell scheduling…increment a value of C-DAI/DAI across one or more DCIs, based on the one or more first DCI formats… increment a value of C-DAI/DAI across one or more DCIs, based on the one or more second DCI formats).
For claim 2 and 14, Yi discloses: wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the UE to: receive the DCI scheduling the one or more PDSCH communications (paragraph 343: the wireless device may receive the first DCI of a single-cell scheduling based on a first DCI format (e.g., a DCI format 1_1, a DCI format 1_0, a DCI format 1_2) scheduling reception of PDSCH(s) and/or SPS PDSCH release(s). The wireless device may receive the second DCI of a multi-cell scheduling based on a second DCI format (e.g., a DCI format 1_3) scheduling reception of PDSCH(s) and/or SPS PDSCH release(s) of a plurality of cells).
For claim 3 and 15, Yi discloses: wherein the set of sub-codebooks are concatenated to form a single HARQ codebook for both single-cell scheduling and multi-cell scheduling (paragraph 354-357: wireless device may receive a first DCI (DCI 1) and a third DCI (DCI 2) for a single cell scheduling. The wireless device may determine a first HARQ-ACK codebook based on the first DCI and the third DCI of the single cell scheduling…wireless device may monitor/receive a second DCI (M-DCI 1). The wireless device may determine a second HARQ-ACK codebook when the wireless device receives the second DCI…wireless device may concatenate the first HARQ-ACK codebook and the second HARQ-ACK codebook. The wireless device may transmit the concatenated HARQ-ACK bits via a PUCCH/HARQ-ACK resource).
For claim 5 and 17, Yi discloses: wherein a total downlink assignment index (T-DAI) value for the DCI is incremented on a per-sub-codebook basis for the set of sub-codebooks (paragraph 314-316: the wireless device may check/determine whether the wireless device has received a DCI comprising/indicating C-DAI/DAI and/or T-DAI. In response to the DCI, the wireless device may determine one or more HARQ-ACK feedback bits corresponding to a PDSCH scheduled by the DCI… The first DCI (DCI 1) may indicate a C-DAI=1 and T-DAI=1. Based on the existing mechanisms, the M-DCI (M-DCI 1) may indicate a T-DAI=2. For example, up to the first monitoring occasion of the first cell, the base station determines two PDCCH monitoring occasions (e.g., the first monitoring occasion of the second cell and the first monitoring occasion of the first cell) comprising DCIs scheduling PDSCHs/SPS PDSCH releases).
For claim 6 and 18, Yi discloses: wherein whether the DCI is the first format or the second format is semi-statically configured for a cell (paragraph 249: the DCI and the second DCI may be based on a DCI format 1_2 for downlink (e.g., downlink scheduling and/or semi-persistent scheduling (SPS))).
For claim 26 and 29, Yi discloses: wherein the set of sub-codebooks are concatenated to form a single HARQ codebook for both single-cell scheduling and multi-cell scheduling (paragraph 351: wireless device may concatenate the first HARQ-ACK codebook and the second HARQ-ACK codebook and transmit the concatenated HARQ-ACK codebook via the first PUCCH resource).
For claims 31-34; Yi discloses: wherein HARQ feedback corresponding to both single-cell scheduling and multi-cell scheduling is transmitted via a single PUCCH resource or a single PUSCH resource. (paragraph 357: wireless device may receive a first DCI (DCI 1) and a third DCI (DCI 2) for a single cell scheduling. The wireless device may determine a first HARQ-ACK codebook based on the first DCI and the third DCI of the single cell scheduling…wireless device may monitor/receive a second DCI (M-DCI 1). The wireless device may determine a second HARQ-ACK codebook when the wireless device receives the second DCI…wireless device may concatenate the first HARQ-ACK codebook and the second HARQ-ACK codebook. The wireless device may transmit the concatenated HARQ-ACK bits via a PUCCH/HARQ-ACK resource).
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 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.
Claim(s) 7 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yi in view of Liang et al. (US 2024/0179716) (“Liang”).
For claim 7 and 19; Yi discloses the subject matter in claim 1 as described above in the office action.
Yi does not expressly disclose, but Liang from similar fields of endeavor teaches: wherein whether the DCI is the first format or the second format is dynamically indicated for a cell (paragraph 120: This flag may be an entirely new bit in the DCI format or, to minimise the impact on DCI size, may be an existing bit that has been redefined for the purpose of providing the dynamic single-cell/multi-cell indication). Thus it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to implement the signaling as described by Liang in the multi-cell scheduling as described by Yi. The motivation is to improve switching scheduling schemes.
Claim(s) 8-10 and 20-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yi in view of MolavianJazi et al. (US 2023/0139269) (“MolavianJazi”).
For claim 8 and 20; Yi discloses the subject matter in claim 1 as described above in the office action.
Yi does not expressly disclose, but MolavianJazi from similar fields of endeavor teaches: wherein a quantity of HARQ bits of the HARQ feedback is based at least in part on a configuration of the UE (paragraph 68: the DCI format triggers multiple HARQ-ACK information bits, no less than a number of co-scheduled PDSCHs/cells (and with up to a factor of 2 of the number, if any of the co-scheduled cells is configured with 2-TB per PDSCH)). Thus it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to implement the signaling as described by MolavianJazi in the multi-cell scheduling as described by Yi. The motivation is to improve HARQ process configuration.
For claim 9 and 21; Yi discloses the subject matter in claim 1 as described above in the office action.
Yi does not expressly disclose, but MolavianJazi from similar fields of endeavor teaches: wherein a quantity of HARQ bits of the HARQ feedback is based at least in part on at least one of a UE configuration or a radio resource control configured parameter (paragraph 68: the DCI format triggers multiple HARQ-ACK information bits, no less than a number of co-scheduled PDSCHs/cells (and with up to a factor of 2 of the number, if any of the co-scheduled cells is configured with 2-TB per PDSCH)). Thus it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to implement the signaling as described by MolavianJazi in the multi-cell scheduling as described by Yi. The motivation is to improve HARQ process configuration.
For claim 10 and 22; Yi discloses the subject matter in claim 1 as described above in the office action.
Yi does not expressly disclose, but MolavianJazi from similar fields of endeavor teaches: wherein a spatial bundling parameter for the HARQ feedback is configured on a per cell basis and based at least in part on whether the DCI is the first format or the second format (paragraph 68: the DCI format triggers multiple HARQ-ACK information bits, no less than a number of co-scheduled PDSCHs/cells (and with up to a factor of 2 of the number, if any of the co-scheduled cells is configured with 2-TB per PDSCH)). Thus it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to implement the signaling as described by MolavianJazi in the multi-cell scheduling as described by Yi. The motivation is to improve HARQ process configuration.
Claim(s) 11, 12, 23, and 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yi in view of El Hamss et al. (US 2025/0142589) (“El Hamss”).
For claim 11 and 23; Yi discloses the subject matter in claim 1 as described above in the office action.
Yi does not expressly disclose, but El Hamss from similar fields of endeavor teaches: wherein a total downlink assignment index (T-DAI) parameter is included in the DCI based at least in part on a quantity of downlink cells configured for the UE to monitor for the DCI (paragraph 14-15: Determining the scheduling may include determining a number of scheduled cells using a counter downlink assignment index (DAI) in the single DCI and a total of (DAI) values in the single DCI). Thus it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to implement the signaling as described by El Hamss in the multi-cell scheduling as described by Yi. The motivation is to improve HARQ process configuration.
For claim 12 and 24; Yi discloses the subject matter in claim 1 as described above in the office action.
Yi does not expressly disclose, but El Hamss from similar fields of endeavor teaches: wherein the UE is configured to interpret a total downlink assignment index (T-DAI) parameter included in the DCI based at least in part on a quantity of downlink cells configured for the UE to monitor for the DCI (paragraph 14-15: A value of a difference between the counter DAI and the total of DAI values in the single DCI may indicate the number of scheduled cells). Thus it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to implement the signaling as described by El Hamss in the multi-cell scheduling as described by Yi. The motivation is to improve HARQ process configuration.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Wang et al. (US 2025/0062864); Wang discloses Multi-PDSCH Scheduling for Multi-Cell Scheduling.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN D BLANTON whose telephone number is (571)270-3933. The examiner can normally be reached 7am-6pm EST, Mon-Thu.
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, Faruk Hamza can be reached at 571-272-7969. 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.
/JOHN D BLANTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2466