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 with respect to claim(s) 1-3, 5, 6, 8-10, 13-15, 17, 18, 20-22, 25, 26, 28, 29, and 31-40 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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, 8-9, 13-15, 17, 20-21, 25, 26, 28, 29, and 31-40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Wang et al. (US 2025/0062864) (“Wang”).
For claims 1, 13, 25, and 28; Wang discloses: receive one or more physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) communications scheduled by downlink control information (DCI) (paragraph 87: Two cells with inconsecutive cell indexes #1 and #3 are scheduled by a DCI for multi-cell scheduling… another PDSCH on cell #2); generate a single hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) codebook comprising a single-cell scheduling sub-codebook (paragraph 87: To generate HARQ-ACK codebook, 1.sup.st sub-codebook is for single cell scheduling, e.g., PDSCH on cell #2) and a multi-cell scheduling sub-codebook (paragraph 87: 2.sup.nd sub-codebook is for multi-cell scheduling, the HARQ-ACK for the two PDSCHs scheduled by the DCI for multi-cell scheduling are concatenated and mapped to a position in the HARQ-ACK), wherein the single HARQ codebook is based at least in part on the multi- cell scheduling sub-codebook being appended to the single-cell scheduling sub- codebook (paragraph 87, figure 5A: the HARQ-ACK for the two PDSCHs scheduled by the DCI for multi-cell scheduling are concatenated and mapped to a position in the HARQ-ACK), wherein the single-cell scheduling sub-codebook is associated with the DCI being in a first format configured for scheduling the one or more PDSCH communications on a single carrier (paragraph 27, 87: for a DCI format which supports multi-cell scheduling, and if the DCI format only schedules single cell, then the DCI is considered to be single-cell scheduling…To generate HARQ-ACK codebook, 1.sup.st sub-codebook is for single cell scheduling, e.g., PDSCH on), wherein the multi-cell scheduling sub-codebook is associated with the DCI being in a second format configured for scheduling the one or more PDSCH communications on a plurality of carriers (paragraph 27: for a DCI format which supports multi-cell scheduling, and if the DCI format only schedules single cell, then the DCI is considered to be single-cell scheduling), and wherein a quantity of HARQ acknowledgement (HARQ-ACK) information bits for at least the multi-cell scheduling sub-codebook is based at least in part on a maximum quantity of PDSCH communications that can be scheduled by the DCI (paragraph 94: For 2.sup.nd sub-codebook, the number of HARQ-ACK bits per PDCCH is N.sub.TB.sup.max… where N.sub.cell.sup.max is the maximum number of PDSCHs scheduled by a DCI for multi-cell scheduling (e.g., the maximum number of PDSCHs for each row in the cell index table for multi-cell scheduling)) and a quantity of HARQ-ACK information bits to be generated per PDSCH communication (paragraph 94: For 2.sup.nd sub-codebook, the number of HARQ-ACK bits per PDCCH is N.sub.TB.sup.max… N.sub.TB,2.sup.max is the maximum configured number of TBs for a PDSCH scheduled by a DCI for multi-cell scheduling); and transmit, for the one or more PDSCH communications, HARQ feedback using the single HARQ codebook (paragraph 87, figure 5A: the HARQ-ACK for the two PDSCHs scheduled by the DCI for multi-cell scheduling are concatenated and mapped to a position in the HARQ-ACK).
For claims 2 and 14; Wang discloses: receive the DCI scheduling the one or more PDSCH communications (paragraph 154: At 902, the process 900 may include detecting a downlink control information (DCI) that schedules multiple physical downlink shared channels (PDSCHs) in a plurality of cells).
For claims 3, 15, 26, and 29; Wang discloses: wherein the single-cell scheduling sub-codebook and the multi-cell scheduling sub-codebook are concatenated to form the single HARQ codebook for the single-cell scheduling sub-codebook and the multi-cell scheduling sub-codebook (paragraph 79, 87: To generate HARQ-ACK codebook, the HARQ-ACK for multiple PDSCHs scheduled by the DCI for multi-cell scheduling are concatenated and mapped to a position in the HARQ-ACK codebook according to reference cell index).
For claims 8 and 20; Wang discloses: wherein the DCI is in the first format, and wherein the quantity of HARQ-ACK information bits for at least the single-cell scheduling sub-codebook is based at least in part on a configuration of the UE (paragraph 95: For 1.sup.st sub-codebook, the number of HARQ-ACK bits per PDCCH is N.sub.TB,1.sup.max. N.sub.TB,1.sup.max is the maximum number of TBs of a PDSCH scheduled by a DCI for single-cell scheduling among all cells).
For claims 9 and 21; Wang discloses: wherein the DCI is in the second format, and wherein the quantity of HARQ-ACK information bits for at least the multi-cell scheduling sub-codebook is based at least in part on at least one of a UE configuration or a radio resource control configured parameter (paragraph 64, 77-78: the number of HARQ-ACK bits for each PDCCH within the sub-codebook for HARQ-ACK for PDSCH scheduled by multi-PDSCH scheduling is determined as below: [0078] a unit of number of HARQ-ACK bits N.sub.TBG.sup.max for the sub-codebook for multi-PDSCH scheduling equals to the maximum number of configured TBs of multiple PDSCHs or multiple PDSCH bundling groups scheduled by a DCI for multi-PDSCH scheduling among all cells).
For claims 31, 32, 33, and 34; Wang discloses: wherein HARQ feedback is transmitted via a single physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) resource or a single physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) resource (paragraph 58, fig. 2A: the same PUCCH for HARQ-ACK feedback).
For claim 35; Wang discloses: wherein, when the DCI is in the second format, a quantity of HARQ-ACK information bits corresponding to PDSCH communications scheduled by the DCI is based at least in part on a product of a quantity of the PDSCH communications scheduled by the DCI and a quantity of transport blocks for the PDSCH communications (paragraph 94: DCI for multi-cell scheduling. For example, N.sub.TB.sup.max=N.sub.cell.sup.max*N.sub.TB,2.sup.max, where N.sub.cell.sup.max is the maximum number of PDSCHs scheduled by a DCI for multi-cell scheduling…N.sub.TB,2.sup.max is the maximum configured number of TBs for a PDSCH scheduled by a DCI for multi-cell scheduling. If at least one serving cell within a PUCCH group is configured with two codewords for multi-cell scheduling, e.g., maxNrofCodeWordsScheduledByDCI=2 and spatial bundling is not configured, N.sub.TB,2.sup.max=2, otherwise, N.sub.TB,2.sup.max=1), and wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: include one or more negative acknowledgement (NACK) bits as padding in the multi-cell scheduling sub-codebook when a maximum quantity of HARQ-ACK information bits for the multi-cell scheduling sub-codebook exceeds the quantity of HARQ-ACK information bits corresponding to the PDSCH communications scheduled by the DCI (paragraph 80, 87: if the number of scheduled PDSCHs by a DCI is less than the maximum number of PDSCHs scheduled by a DCI, the HARQ-ACK for scheduled PDSCHs are first consecutively mapped, and NACKs are appended until the maximum number of HARQ-ACK bits…UE should generate NACK until the maximum number of HARQ-ACK bits).
For claim 36; Wang discloses: wherein the quantity of HARQ-ACK information bits to be generated per PDSCH communication is one when the UE is configured with a spatial bundling parameter, and is two when the UE is configured for two transport blocks and is not configured with the spatial bundling parameter (paragraph 94: If at least one serving cell within a PUCCH group is configured with two codewords for multi-cell scheduling, e.g., maxNrofCodeWordsScheduledByDCI=2 and spatial bundling is not configured, N.sub.TB,2.sup.max=2, otherwise, N.sub.TB,2.sup.max=1).
For claims 37 and 39; Wang discloses: w wherein the maximum quantity of PDSCH communications that can be scheduled by the DCI is based at least in part on a carrier aggregation configuration for multi-cell scheduling (paragraph 94: For example, N.sub.TB.sup.max=N.sub.cell.sup.max*N.sub.TB,2.sup.max, where N.sub.cell.sup.max is the maximum number of PDSCHs scheduled by a DCI for multi-cell scheduling (e.g., the maximum number of PDSCHs for each row in the cell index table for multi-cell scheduling) or the total number of serving cells configured for multi-cell scheduling (e.g., the union of all rows in the cell index table for multi-cell scheduling)).
For claim 38 and 40; Wang discloses: wherein the quantity of HARQ-ACK information bits to be generated per PDSCH communication is based at least in part on a maximum quantity of transport blocks per PDSCH communication (paragraph 94: N.sub.TB.sup.max=N.sub.cell.sup.max*N.sub.TB,2.sup.max, where N.sub.cell.sup.max is the maximum number of PDSCHs scheduled by a DCI for multi-cell scheduling (e.g., the maximum number of PDSCHs for each row in the cell index table for multi-cell scheduling)… N.sub.TB,2.sup.max is the maximum configured number of TBs for a PDSCH scheduled by a DCI for multi-cell scheduling. If at least one serving cell within a PUCCH group is configured with two codewords for multi-cell scheduling, e.g., maxNrofCodeWordsScheduledByDCI=2 and spatial bundling is not configured, N.sub.TB,2.sup.max=2, otherwise, N.sub.TB,2.sup.max=1).
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) 5, 10, 17, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang in view of MolavianJazi et al. (US 2023/0139269) (“MolavianJazi”).
For claims 5 and 17; Wang discloses the subject matter in claim 1 as described above in the office action.
Wang does not expressly disclose, but MolavianJazi from similar fields of endeavor teaches: wherein at least one of a counter downlink assignment index (C-DAI) value or a total downlink assignment index (T-DAI) value for the DCI is applied on a per- sub-codebook basis for the single-cell scheduling sub-codebook and the multi-cell scheduling sub-codebook (paragraph 424: When a UE generates separate Type-2 sub-CBs for single-cell scheduling and multi-cell scheduling DCI formats, the UE determines a first total DAI corresponding to a first Type-2 sub-codebook, and a second total DAI corresponding to a second Type-2 sub-codebook). 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 single DCI multi-cell configuration as described by Wang. The motivation is to improve reliability of sub-codebooks.
For claims 10 and 22; Wang discloses the subject matter in claim 1 as described above in the office action.
Wang 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 in the first format or the second format (paragraph 339: for serving cells with multi-cell configuration, the UE expects to be provided a same configuration for parameters such as: (i) maxNrofCodeWordsScheduledByDCI, and/or (ii) harq-ACK-SpatialBundlingPUCCH, and/or (iii) harq-ACK-SpatialBundlingPUSCH, regardless of whether the serving cells belong to a same set or different sets of co-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 MolavianJazi in the single DCI multi-cell configuration as described by Wang. The motivation is to improve reliability of sub-codebooks.
Claim(s) 6 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang in view of Kim et al. (WO 2011/122825) (“Kim”).
For claims 6 and 18; Wang discloses the subject matter in claim 1 as described above in the office action.
Wang does not expressly disclose, but Kim from similar fields of endeavor teaches: wherein whether the DCI is in the first format or the second format is semi-statically configured for a cell (page 37-38, paragraph 149: The base station may semi-statically set whether cross-carrier scheduling is activated. That is, the base station may semi-statically set whether or not to include the CIF in the DCI format, and may be configured terminal-specific or cell-specific. Through this semi-static configuration it is possible to reduce the signaling overhead between the base station and the terminal). 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 Kim in the single DCI multi-cell configuration as described by Wang. The motivation is to reduce the signaling overhead between the base station and the terminal.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Guo et al. (US 2022/0240187); Guo discloses a new downlink control signal or modify an existing downlink control signal to trigger UE(s) to perform various power saving operations under certain conditions. The present disclosure provides systems and methods for downlink control signaling that has lower overhead and higher reliability for triggering UE to perform various power saving operations with slighting impact on current 5G specification.
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 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
Prosecution Insights