Response to Amendment
This office action is in response to claim amendment filed on December 23, 2025.
Claims 1 and 18 have been amended.
Claims 21-37 were previously cancelled.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements received September 23, 2025 has been considered.
Response to Arguments
The objection to the specification has been withdrawn for the reasons stated in applicant’s response (see remarks Pg. 8).
Applicant’s arguments (see remarks Pg. 8-10) with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-20 under 35 U.S.C. §102 and 35 U.S.C. §103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made as necessitated by the claim amendments.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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, 7-8, 15, and 18, are rejected under 35 U.S.C.102(a)(2) as being anticipated by DAI et al., US 20240032024 A1, (hereinafter DAI).
Regarding claim 1, and 18, DAI teaches a method comprising:
at a user device: determining, (TBS), or a multi-slot physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) based on at least a plurality of slots and a number of physical resource blocks (PRBs) allocated to the user device (see Fig. 7, e.g., element 700, 720 – Determine a TBS of a PUSCH transmission; ¶ [0102], At 720, the UE 704 may determine a TBS of a PUSCH transmission. In some examples, the UE 704 may determine, at 720, the TBS of the PUSCH transmission based on at least one of a maximum number of PRBs, a maximum number of slots, a maximum number of symbols, and/or a maximum modulation order (e.g., QPSK));
and transmitting, over the plurality of slots, a transport block (TB), see ¶ [0095], It may be appreciated that TBS scaling-up may increase use of processing resources at the base station (e.g., for receiving the PUSCH transmission) and the UE (e.g., for transmitting the PUSCH transmission). ¶ [0115], At 804, the UE transmits the PUSCH repetitions with scaling based on the scaling parameter indicated in the scheduling DCI, as described in connection with the PUSCH repetitions 740 of FIG. 7. For example, the transmitting of the PUSCH repetitions with scaling based on the scaling parameter indicated in the scheduling DCI may be performed by a scaling parameter transmissions component 1142 of the apparatus 1102 of FIG. 11. In some examples, the TBS of the PUSCH transmissions may be based on at least one of a maximum number of PRBs, a maximum number of slots, a maximum number of symbols, or a maximum modulation order.).
Regarding claim 7, DAI teaches the limitations of Claim 1.
DAI further teaches, wherein transmitting the TB comprises:
transmitting, over the plurality of slots, the TB using a redundancy version to enable the transmitted TB to be individually decoded (see ¶ [0064], e.g., For each slot of the multiple-slot PUSCH 400, the transmission block (TB) may be the same, but the encoded bits may differ such that a redundancy value (RV) of each slot is different. For example, the RV of a first slot may be indicated in the scheduling DCI, while the RV of another slot (n) may be determined by “n mod 4.” In the illustrated example of FIG. 4, an example RV over slots for a new transmission of a 4-slot PDSCH may include RV0, RV2, RV3, and RV1.).
Regarding claim 8, WU teaches the limitations of Claim 7.
DAI further teaches, further comprising:
retransmitting the TB over the plurality of slots using a different redundancy version to enable the retransmitted TB to be decoded (see ¶ [0064] For each slot of the multiple-slot PUSCH 400, the transmission block (TB) may be the same, but the encoded bits may differ such that a redundancy value (RV) of each slot is different. For example, the RV of a first slot may be indicated in the scheduling DCI, while the RV of another slot (n) may be determined by “n mod 4.” In the illustrated example of FIG. 4, an example RV over slots for a new transmission of a 4-slot PDSCH may include RV0, RV2, RV3, and RV1. Another example RV over slots of a new retransmission of a 4-slot PDSCH may include RV3, RV1, RV0, and RV2.).
Regarding claim 15, WU teaches the limitations of Claim 1.
DAI further teaches, wherein transmitting the TB comprises:
transmitting the TB in each of the plurality of slots using a different redundancy version (see ¶ [0064], e.g., For each slot of the multiple-slot PUSCH 400, the transmission block (TB) may be the same, but the encoded bits may differ such that a redundancy value (RV) of each slot is different. For example, the RV of a first slot may be indicated in the scheduling DCI, while the RV of another slot (n) may be determined by “n mod 4.” In the illustrated example of FIG. 4, an example RV over slots for a new transmission of a 4-slot PDSCH may include RV0, RV2, RV3, and RV1.).
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 non-obviousness.
Claim(s) 2-3, 5-6, 9-10, 16-17 and 19-20, rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DAI in view of WU et al., US 20200304231 A1, (hereinafter WU).
Regarding claim 2, and 19, WU teaches the limitations of Claim 1 and 18.
DAI teaches, wherein determining the TBS comprises:
determining a total number of available resource elements, REs, in the plurality of slots (¶ [0091], The TBS may be based on different numbers of data REs in different slots of the plurality of slots or nominal repetitions. In some examples, the UE may transmit the PUSCH repetition with the TBS determined over the repetition unit comprising the plurality of single repetitions. In some examples, the UE applies a different overhead configuration to determine the TBS for the set of PUSCH repetitions than for a single PUSCH repetition. In some examples, the UE may determine the TBS based on a total number of resource elements (N.sub.RE) based on a largest average number of REs per slot. In some examples, the UE may determine the total number of REs (N.sub.RE) based on a minimum of the largest average number of REs per slot multiplied by a number of the plurality of single repetitions, and a number of per-PRB REs over the plurality of single repetitions (N.sub.RE″). In some examples, the number of per PRB REs may be greater than 14 symbols. In some examples, the PUSCH repetitions with the determined TBS may be based on at least one of a maximum number of PRBs, a maximum number of slots, a maximum number of symbols, and/or a maximum modulation order (e.g., QPSK));
however, it does not explicitly teach determining, based on the total number of available REs, the number of allowed information bits in the plurality of slots; and determining the TBS based on the number of allowed information bits
WU teaches, determining, based on the total number of available REs, the number of allowed information bits in the plurality of slots; and
determining the TBS based on the number of allowed information bits (see ¶ [0088], e.g., the TB size selection circuitry 708 may be configured to determine a total number of bits available for transmission in the aggregated slots (reserved resources) N.sub.info from the modulation order Q.sub.o (indicated by the selected MCS 720), the number of transmission streams, and a total number of available REs across the aggregated slots. The TB size selection circuitry 708 may then be configured to determine the TBS 724 from N.sub.info.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to have modified determining the TBS based on REs of DAI to incorporate the teachings of WU to include determining, based on the total number of available REs, the number of allowed information bits in the plurality of slots. Doing so would facilitate in achieving TBS determination based on available bits in the aggregated slots as suggested by WU (see ¶ [0080], e.g., In an example, assuming a modulation and coding scheme (MCS) index of 4 (e.g., QPSK and a code rate of 602/1024) and a total number of available bits in the aggregated slots (e.g., the number of bits associated with the available resources in each of the slots 502a, 502b, and 502c) of 17,520, the transmitting sidelink device may determine that the TBS of the TB is 10,248 bits. In some examples, the number of available bits in the aggregated slots may be determined based on the modulation order (Q.sub.o), the number of transmission streams, and the number of available REs in the aggregated slots.).
Regarding claim 3, and 20, DAI as improved by WU teaches the limitations of Claim 2 and 19.
DAI further teaches, wherein determining the total number of available REs in the plurality of slots comprises:
determining the number of available REs for each slot of the plurality of slots (see ¶ [0069], e.g., it may be beneficial to determine the TB size by PUSCH resource over multiple slots (sometimes referred to as “TBS scaling”). ¶ [0070] In some examples, the TB size may be determined by first calculating a per-PRB and per-slot number of data REs (N.sub.RE′). For example, Equation 3 (below) may be used to calculate the per-PRB and per-slot number of data REs (N.sub.RE′).);
and determining the total number of available REs as a sum of a plurality of numbers of available REs determined for the plurality of slots (see ¶ [0091], The TBS may be based on different numbers of data REs in different slots of the plurality of slots or nominal repetitions. In some examples, the UE may determine the TBS based on a total number of resource elements (N.sub.RE) based on a largest average number of REs per slot. In some examples, the UE may determine the total number of REs (N.sub.RE) based on a minimum of the largest average number of REs per slot multiplied by a number of the plurality of single repetitions, and a number of per-PRB REs over the plurality of single repetitions (N.sub.RE″).).
Regarding claim 5, DAI as improved by WU teaches the limitations of Claim 1.
DAI does not teach but WU teaches, wherein transmitting the TB comprises: generating a plurality of coded bits from the TB;
grouping the plurality of coded bits into a plurality of TB trunks (see ¶ [0102], e.g., The CB parameter selection circuitry 806 is configured to select CB parameters 820 utilized by the transmitting sidelink device in segmenting the TB into a plurality of CBs. The CB parameters 820 may indicate, for example, the number of encoded CBs and the size of each encoded CB (e.g., the number of coded bits)); and
mapping the plurality of TB trunks onto a plurality of physical resource blocks, PRBs, over the plurality of slots on the basis of PRBs or on the basis of slots (see ¶ [0060], e.g., each RE may represent one or more bits of information. In some examples, a block of REs may be referred to as a physical resource block (PRB) or more simply a resource block (RB) 308, Fig. 5 e.g., element Slot 1-3, CB1, CB2, ¶ [0081], e.g., The transmitting sidelink device may then map CB1 and CB2 to RBs in the slots 502a, 502b, and 502c using a frequency-first mapping scheme (e.g., mapping modulation symbols of the CBs to the RBs from sub-carrier to sub-carrier) or a time-first mapping scheme (e.g., mapping modulation symbols of the CBs to the RBs from OFDM symbol to OFDM symbol).).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to have modified TB transmission of DAI to incorporate the teachings of WU to include generating a plurality of coded bits from the TB; grouping the plurality of coded bits into a plurality of TB trunks. Doing so would facilitate in achieving segmenting the transport block into the plurality of encoded code blocks and decoding the plurality of encoded code blocks to produce the packet as suggested by WU (see ¶ [0080], e.g., The processor and the memory are further configured to segment the transport block into the plurality of encoded code blocks based on the code block parameters, and decode the plurality of encoded code blocks based on the code block parameters to produce the packet.).
Regarding claim 6, DAI as improved by WU teaches the limitations of Claim 1.
DAI does not teach but WU teaches, wherein transmitting the TB comprises:
generating a plurality of cyclic redundancy check bits from the TB (see ¶ [0081], e.g., The transmitting sidelink device may then segment the TB into two CBs, each of size 5,160 and each including 24 CRC bits (excluding filler bits));
generating a plurality of coded bits from the TB based on the plurality of cyclic redundancy check bits;
dividing the plurality of coded bits into a plurality of segments of coded bits (see ¶ [0102], e.g., The CB parameter selection circuitry 806 is configured to select CB parameters 820 utilized by the transmitting sidelink device in segmenting the TB into a plurality of CBs. The CB parameters 820 may indicate, for example, the number of encoded CBs and the size of each encoded CB (e.g., the number of coded bits). The CB parameters 820 may be selected based on at least the TBS 814 and the RPs 818, see ¶ [0098], e.g., Using the above example of three aggregated slots in the reserved resources and one encoded CB per slot with N.sub.info,1=3,240, N.sub.info,2=3,664, and N.sub.info,3=3,384, after LDPC coding, the encoded CB sizes may be as follows: CB.sub.1=3,264, CB.sub.2=3,668, and CB.sub.3=3,408 (including 24 CRC bits, excluding filler bits)); and
transmitting a segment of coded bits of the plurality of segments of coded bits in a slot of the plurality of slots (see ¶ [0074], e.g., In some cases, not only is the TBS too large for transmission within the reserved resources for a single slot, but the code block size may also be too large for transmission within the reserved resources for a single slot. In this example, slot aggregation may further be applied to encoded code blocks 408, such that a single encoded code block 408 may span multiple (two or more) slots. In examples in which a transport block 402 is not segmented into code blocks prior to coding (e.g., the transport block 402 includes a single encoded code block 408), it may be considered that slot aggregation is applied at the transport block level or the code block level.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to have modified TB transmission of DAI to incorporate the teachings of WU to include generating a plurality of coded bits from the TB based on the plurality of cyclic redundancy check bits. Doing so would facilitate in achieving, encoded code block is decoded properly at the receiving device as suggested by WU (see ¶ [0080], e.g., To facilitate this process, a transmitted encoded code block may include a cyclic redundancy check (CRC) portion, a checksum, or any other suitable mechanism known to those of ordinary skill in the art to determine whether the encoded code block is decoded properly at the receiving device).
Regarding claim 9, DAI as improved by WU teaches the limitations of Claim 1.
DAI does not teach but WU teaches, wherein transmitting the TB comprises:
determining a code block, CB, size; dividing the TB into a plurality of CBs with the CB size (see ¶ [0080], e.g., In an example, assuming a modulation and coding scheme (MCS) index of 4 (e.g., QPSK and a code rate of 602/1024) and a total number of available bits in the aggregated slots (e.g., the number of bits associated with the available resources in each of the slots 502a, 502b, and 502c) of 17,520, the transmitting sidelink device may determine that the TBS of the TB is 10,248 bits. In some examples, the number of available bits in the aggregated slots may be determined based on the modulation order (Q.sub.o), the number of transmission streams, and the number of available REs in the aggregated slots. ¶ [0081], e.g., The transmitting sidelink device may then segment the TB into two CBs, each of size 5,160 and each including 24 CRC bits (excluding filler bits)); and
transmitting the plurality of CBs over the plurality of slots (¶ [0074], e.g., In some cases, not only is the TBS too large for transmission within the reserved resources for a single slot, but the code block size may also be too large for transmission within the reserved resources for a single slot. it may be considered that slot aggregation is applied at the transport block level or the code block level. ¶ [0075], e,g., if a code block is transmitted across two slots, but decoding fails in only one of the slots used in slot aggregation, the entire code block is retransmitted across one or more additional slots (depending on the granted resources for the retransmission)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to have modified TB transmission of DAI to incorporate the teachings of WU to include determining a code block, CB, size; dividing the TB into a plurality of CBs with the CB size. Doing so would facilitate in achieving segmenting the transport block into the plurality of encoded code blocks and decoding the plurality of encoded code blocks to produce the packet as suggested by WU (see ¶ [0080], e.g., The processor and the memory are further configured to segment the transport block into the plurality of encoded code blocks based on the code block parameters, and decode the plurality of encoded code blocks based on the code block parameters to produce the packet.).
Regarding claim 10, DAI as improved by WU teaches the limitations of Claim 9.
DAI does not teach but WU teaches, wherein the CB size is: a fixed value, configured by a network device, or
selected from a set of CB sizes based on at least one of the TBS, the number of slots of the plurality of slots and coding rate (see ¶ [0080], e.g., In an example, assuming a modulation and coding scheme (MCS) index of 4 (e.g., QPSK and a code rate of 602/1024) and a total number of available bits in the aggregated slots (e.g., the number of bits associated with the available resources in each of the slots 502a, 502b, and 502c) of 17,520, the transmitting sidelink device may determine that the TBS of the TB is 10,248 bits.¶ [0081], e.g., The transmitting sidelink device may then segment the TB into two CBs, each of size 5,160 and each including 24 CRC bits (excluding filler bits). ¶ [0098], e.g., Using the above example of three aggregated slots in the reserved resources and one encoded CB per slot with N.sub.info,1=3,240, N.sub.info,2=3,664, and N.sub.info,3=3,384, after LDPC coding, the encoded CB sizes may be as follows: CB.sub.1=3,264, CB.sub.2=3,668, and CB.sub.3=3,408 (including 24 CRC bits, excluding filler bits). In this example, the size of CB.sub.3 may have originally been 3,492 bits, but after size-reduction of the encoded CB to ensure the TB fits within the three encoded CBs, the size of CB.sub.3 may be 3,408.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to have modified TB transmission of DAI to incorporate the teachings of WU to include selecting from a set of CB sizes based on at least one of the TBS, the number of slots of the plurality of slots and coding rate. Doing so would facilitate in achieving containing encoded code blocks within a respective slot and segmenting the transport block into the plurality of encoded code blocks and decoding the plurality of encoded code blocks to produce the packet as suggested by WU (see ¶ [0009], e.g., The code block parameters include a number of the plurality of encoded code blocks and a respective code block size of each of the plurality of encoded code blocks such that each of the plurality of encoded code blocks is fully contained within a respective slot of the set of two or more of the plurality of slots. The method further includes segmenting the transport block into the plurality of encoded code blocks based on the code block parameters, and decoding the plurality of encoded code blocks based on the code block parameters to produce the packet.).
Regarding claim 16, DAI as improved by WU teaches the limitations of Claim 15.
DAI teaches, wherein determining the TBS comprises:
for at least a slot of the plurality of slots,
modifying the number of allocated physical resource blocks, PRBs, based on the number of slots of the plurality of slots;
determining the number of available resource elements, REs, based on the modified number of allocated PRBs; and
determining a total number of available REs in the plurality of slots (see ¶ [0089], e.g., As described above, after the UE calculates the per-PRB and per-single repetition number of data REs (N.sub.RE″), the UE may calculate the total number of REs (N.sub.RE). For example, the UE may use Equation 8 (below) to calculate the number of REs (N.sub.RE) allocated to the PUSCH. N.sub.RE=min(156*M,N.sub.RE″)*n.sub.PRB Equation 8:; ¶ [0090], e.g., In Equation 8, the parameter “M” refers to slots for PUSCH repetition Type A or nominal repetitions for PUSCH repetition Type B, the parameter “N.sub.RE″” refers to the per-PRB and per-M-single repetition (e.g., per-M-slot for PUSCH repetition Type A or per-M-nominal repetition for PUSCH repetition Type B) number of data REs, and the term “n.sub.PRB” refers to the total number of PRBs. As shown in Equation 8, the total number of REs (N.sub.RE) may be calculated by multiplying the total number of PRBs (n.sub.PRB) by a minimum of the value “156*M” and the per-PRB and per-M-single repetition number of data REs (N.sub.RE″));
however, it does not explicitly teach determining, based on the total number of available REs, the number of allowed information bits in the plurality of slots; and determining the TBS based on the number of allowed information bits.
WU teaches, determining, based on the total number of available REs, the number of allowed information bits in the plurality of slots; and
determining the TBS based on the number of allowed information bits (see ¶ [0088], e.g., The TB size selection circuitry 708 is configured to determine the size of a transport block (e.g., the TBS 724) carrying the packet 702. The TB size selection circuitry 708 may determine the TBS 724 based on, for example, the selected MCS 720, along with the number of transmission streams and the number of available symbols or REs indicated in the resource parameters 722. In an example, the TB size selection circuitry 708 may be configured to determine a total number of bits available for transmission in the aggregated slots (reserved resources) N.sub.info from the modulation order Q.sub.o (indicated by the selected MCS 720), the number of transmission streams, and a total number of available REs across the aggregated slots. The TB size selection circuitry 708 may then be configured to determine the TBS 724 from N.sub.info.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to have modified determining the TBS based on REs of DAI to incorporate the teachings of WU to include determining, based on the total number of available REs, the number of allowed information bits in the plurality of slots. Doing so would facilitate in achieving TBS determination based on available bits in the aggregated slots as suggested by WU (see ¶ [0080], e.g., In an example, assuming a modulation and coding scheme (MCS) index of 4 (e.g., QPSK and a code rate of 602/1024) and a total number of available bits in the aggregated slots (e.g., the number of bits associated with the available resources in each of the slots 502a, 502b, and 502c) of 17,520, the transmitting sidelink device may determine that the TBS of the TB is 10,248 bits. In some examples, the number of available bits in the aggregated slots may be determined based on the modulation order (Q.sub.o), the number of transmission streams, and the number of available REs in the aggregated slots.).
Regarding claim 17, DAI as improved by WU teaches the limitations of Claim 16.
DAI teaches, modifying a coding rate for the TB based on the number of slots (see ¶ [0027], e.g., TBS scaling and/or MCS scaling may be implemented for multiple-slot PUSCH. In an example, a code rate or TBS may be scaled up for a four-slot PUSCH (e.g., scaled by a factor of two or four).);
however, it does not explicitly teach wherein determining the number of allowed information bits in the plurality of slots comprises: determining, based on the total number of available REs and the modified coding rate, the number of allowed information bits in the plurality of slots.
WU teaches, wherein determining the number of allowed information bits in the plurality of slots comprises:
determining, based on the total number of available REs and the modified coding rate, the number of allowed information bits in the plurality of slots (see ¶ [0097], e.g., the encoder 716 may encode the CBs 732 based on the code rate specified in the MCS 720 or may modify the code rate in one or more slots based on the resource parameters 722 (e.g., the number of available REs in each slot) and the size of the CB(s) 732 in each slot. See ¶ [0093], e.g., For example, assuming again that the total available bits in the reserved resources is 17,520, the TBS is 10,248 and the CRC size is 24 bits, the code rate may be determined as (10,248+24)/17,520. In addition, assuming the modulation order is 2 (e.g., Q.sub.o=2) and there are three aggregated slots in the reserved resources with N.sub.RE,l=2,760, N.sub.RE,2=3,120, and N.sub.RE,3=2,880, the number of bits of the TB that may be transmitted in each slot (N.sub.info,l) may be calculated based on the above Equation 1.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to have modified determining the TBS based on REs of DAI to incorporate the teachings of WU to include determining, based on the total number of available REs, the number of allowed information bits in the plurality of slots. Doing so would facilitate in achieving determining the number of available bits in the aggregated slots as suggested by WU (see ¶ [0080], e.g., In an example, assuming a modulation and coding scheme (MCS) index of 4 (e.g., QPSK and a code rate of 602/1024) and a total number of available bits in the aggregated slots (e.g., the number of bits associated with the available resources in each of the slots 502a, 502b, and 502c) of 17,520, the transmitting sidelink device may determine that the TBS of the TB is 10,248 bits. In some examples, the number of available bits in the aggregated slots may be determined based on the modulation order (Q.sub.o), the number of transmission streams, and the number of available REs in the aggregated slots.).
Claim(s) 4, is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DAI in view of WU and in further view of YING et al., US 20220231789 A1, (hereinafter YING).
Regarding claim 4, DAI as improved by WU teaches the limitations of Claim 2.
DAI and WU do not teach but YING teaches, wherein determining the total number of available REs on the plurality of slots comprises:
determining a reference number of available REs for a reference slot of the plurality of slots; and determining the total number of available REs as a product of the reference number of available REs and the number of slots of the plurality of slots (see ¶ [0112], e.g., A region defined by one sub-carrier in the frequency domain and one OFDM/DFT-S-OFDM symbol in the time domain is referred to as a resource element (RE) 389 and is uniquely identified by the index pair (k,l) in a slot, where k and 1 are indices in the frequency and time domains respectively. see ¶ [0139], e.g., Furthermore, when the number of REs of DMRS symbols configured and/or indicated for a PUSCH transmission is N.sub.DMRS_RE and the number of slots for a multi-segment transmission is N.sub.slot_seg, the number of OFDM symbols to calculate the TBS may be N.sub.DMRS_RE*N.sub.slot_seg.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to have modified REs determination of DAI as improved by WU to incorporate the teachings of YING to include OFDM symbols to calculate the TBS to be N.sub.DMRS_RE*N.sub.slot_seg). Doing so would facilitate in achieving TBS determination as suggested by YING (see ¶ [0137], e.g., The TBS may be determined by the number of resource elements (REs) for DMRS symbols, the number of REs as overhead configured by RRC, the number of scheduled OFDM symbols, and/or the number of scheduled physical resource blocks (PRBs).).
Claim(s) 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DAI, WU and in further view of CHEN et al., US 20220061049 A1, (hereinafter CHEN).
Regarding claim 11, DAI as improved by WU teaches the limitations of Claim 9.
DAI as combined with WU does not teach but CHEN teaches, wherein transmitting the plurality of CBs over the plurality of slots comprises:
determining the number of CB groups, CBG; grouping, based on the number of CBG, the plurality of CBs into a plurality of CBG; and transmitting the plurality of CBG over the plurality of slots (Fig. 8, e.g., element S802, ¶ [0089], e.g., In operation S802, code block groups (CBGs) are transmitted to a terminal on N slots after slot aggregation, wherein one or more slot intervals are set in the N slots after slot aggregation, a duration of one slot interval is one or more slots, N is an integer greater than 1, and each CBG includes a plurality of code blocks (CBs)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to have modified transmitting the plurality of CBs over the plurality of slots of DAI and WU to incorporate the teachings of CHEN to include CBG grouping with the plurality of CBs. Doing so would facilitate in achieving confirmation whether the terminal successfully decodes CBGs transmitted before the slot interval and adjusts, in a process of transmitting the CBGs and according to the feedback information as suggested by CHEN (see ¶ [0034], e.g., a receiving module, configured to receive, in the one or more slot intervals, feedback information from the terminal, wherein the feedback information received in a slot interval is used for indicating whether the terminal successfully decodes CBGs transmitted before the slot interval; and ¶ [0035] an adjusting module, configured to adjust, in a process of transmitting the CBGs and according to the feedback information, resources for transmitting CBGs on one or more slots after the slot interval.)
Claim(s) 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DAI, WU, CHEN and in further view of LI et al., CN 113852381 B (see the English translated copy), (hereinafter LI).
Regarding claim 12, DAI and WU as modified by CHEN teaches the limitations of Claim 11.
DAI, WU and CHEN do not teach but LI teaches, wherein determining the number of CBG comprises:
determining a reference number CBG; determining the number of CBG for the TB as a smaller number of the reference number of CBG and the number of CBs for the TB (see Pg. 6, ¶ 10, e.g., S602, determining the number of CBGs that can be transmitted in the PSCH based on the number of symbols allocated to the PSCH (i.e., PDSCH/PUSCH) and the number of symbols for CB in the CBG; see Pg. 8, ¶ 2-5, e.g., the CB size for partitioning can be adjusted so that an integer number of CBs can be loaded into the CBG. The CB size for partitioning is derived based on the number of RE corresponding to the transmission signal symbols occupied by the CBG.This is schematically shown in FIG. 7 and FIG. 8. In FIG. 7 and FIG. 8, it is assumed that each CBGrequires a transmission signal symbol for processing. In FIG. 7, the number of information bits in the CBG is lower than the maximum CB size Kcb. In thiscase, the CB size K 'cb for segmentation is equal to the number of information bits in the CBG and K'cb < Kcb. The actual CB size K after division is equal to K ' cb. Therefore, after the division, each CBGincludes a CB.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to have modified teachings of DAI, WU and CHEN to incorporate the teachings of LI to include determining the number of CBG for the TB. Doing so would facilitate in achieving using CBG as a unit for generating a single HARQ ACK/NACK bit at the receiver for feedback transmission as suggested by LI (see Pg. 5 ¶ 9, e.g., The CBG may be used as a unit for generating a single HARQ ACK/NACK bit at the receiver for feedback transmission. Therefore, for the number of CBGs that can be transmitted in the PDSCH/PUSCH (i.e., the number of CBGs in the TB)).
Claim(s) 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DAI, WU, CHEN, LI, and in further view of HE et al., EP 3780472 A1 (see the English translated copy), (hereinafter HE).
Regarding claim 13, DAI as modified by WU, CHEN and LI teaches the limitations of Claim 12.
DAI, WU, CHEN and LI do not teach but HE teaches, wherein the reference number CBG is indicated by a network device or the same as the number of slots of the plurality of slots (see Pg. 3, ¶3, e.g., multiple (e.g., a set of) CBG transmission information (CBGTI) information elements (IEs) may be transmitted via a DCI message that may schedule multi-slots/sub-slots/mini-slots PUSCH transmissions. In some embodiments, bit numbers of each CBGTI IE (e.g., a number of CBGs per TB for UL transmissions) may be configured by higher layers (e.g., via RRC signaling) on a per UE basis).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to have modified DAI as improved by WU, CHEN and LI to incorporate the teachings of HE to include reference number CBG is indicated by a network device. Doing so would facilitate in achieving improved resource utilization as suggested by HE (see Pg. 3 ¶ 3, e.g., Thus, to improve resource utilization, in some embodiments, to decrease signaling overhead and/or probability of channel unavailability, multiple (e.g., a set of) CBG transmission information (CBGTI) information elements (IEs) may be transmitted via a DCI message that may schedule multi-slots/sub-slots/mini-slots PUSCH transmissions.).
Claim(s) 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DAI, WU, CHEN, and in further view of HE et al., EP 3780472 A1 (see the English translated copy), (hereinafter HE).
Regarding claim 14, WU as modified by CHEN teaches the limitations of Claim 11.
DAI, WU and CHEN do not teach but HE teaches, further comprising:
receiving, from a network device, an indication of the number of CBG and the number of slots for retransmission of the TB (see Pg. 3 ¶ 3, e.g., code block group (CBG) based retransmissions operation for multi-slot/mini-slot PUSCH scheduling may be supported. Such embodiments may improve spectrum efficiency (e.g., usage of the unlicensed band). In some embodiments, a UE may not expect CBG-based retransmissions for a transport block (TB)-based PUSCH scheduled by a multi-slots/mini-slots and/or multi-TTIs PUSCH scheduling DCI format (e.g., as described above). In other words, only TB-based transmission or retransmissions can be scheduled by a multi-slots/mini-slots and/or multi-TTIs PUSCH scheduling DCI message. However, this approach may increase signaling overhead and/or probability of channel unavailability. Thus, to improve resource utilization, in some embodiments, to decrease signaling overhead and/or probability of channel unavailability, multiple (e.g., a set of) CBG transmission information (CBGTI) information elements (IEs) may be transmitted via a DCI message that may schedule multi-slots/sub-slots/mini-slots PUSCH transmissions. In some embodiments, bit numbers of each CBGTI IE (e.g., a number of CBGs per TB for UL transmissions) may be configured by higher layers (e.g., via RRC signaling) on a per UE basis.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to have modified DAI as improved by WU and CHEN to incorporate the teachings of HE to include code block group (CBG) based retransmissions operation for multi-slot. Doing so would facilitate in achieving improved improve spectrum efficiency as suggested by HE (see Pg. 3 ¶ 3, e.g., Such embodiments may improve spectrum efficiency (e.g., usage of the unlicensed band)).
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 POONAM SHARMA whose telephone number is (571)272-6579. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru 8:30-5:30 pm, ET.
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, Kevin Bates can be reached at (571) 272-3980. 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.
/POONAM SHARMA/Examiner, Art Unit 2472
/KEVIN T BATES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2472