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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This communication is responsive to Application # 18281538 filed 09/11/2023. Claims 1-30 are subject to examination.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 3, 7-9, and 23-24 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
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, 14, 16-18, and 29-30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by LIN et al. (LIN hereafter) (US 20230379919 A1).
Regarding claim 1 and claim 17, LIN teaches, An apparatus for wireless communication at a user equipment (UE), comprising:
a memory (LIN; the terminal device, Par. 0155); and
at least one processor coupled to the memory and configured to (LIN; the terminal device, Par. 0155):
receive, from a base station, at least one downlink packet or at least one downlink packet retransmission (LIN; Fig. 6, element “SPS 4 and 5” ; The time slot of the first SPS PDSCH received by the terminal device is time slot n+2, Par. 0155);
determine that a transmission of a hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) feedback associated with the at least one downlink packet or the at least one downlink packet retransmission corresponds to a physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) collision (LIN; then the feedback information corresponding to the first SPS PDSCH needs to be transmitted in time slot n+3 ... the terminal device determines the PUCCH resource 2, and the PUCCH resource 2 includes downlink symbols, indicating that the PUCCH resource 2 is not available, Par. 0155);
determine, based on the determination that the transmission of the HARQ feedback corresponds to a PUCCH collision, whether to delay the transmission of the HARQ feedback associated with the at least one downlink packet or the at least one downlink packet retransmission to a first available PUCCH occasion (LIN; maximum feedback defer length of 2 time slots, Par. 0155); and
cancel or delay the transmission of the HARQ feedback to the base station based on the determination whether to delay the transmission of the HARQ feedback (LIN; Fig. 6; The terminal device then determines the next time slot n+4, and the time slot n+4 does not include PUCCH resources ... then determines that the feedback information associated with time slot n+5 … the PUCCH resource 2 is determined, and the symbols occupied by the PUCCH resource 2 are all uplink symbols, so the terminal device determines that the PUCCH resource 2 is available … and the feedback information of SPS PDSCH 4-8 is transmitted in slot n+5, Par. 0155).
Specifically for claim 17, LIN teaches, A method of wireless communication at a user equipment (UE), comprising (LIN; Fig. 6; the terminal device, Par. 0155).
Regarding claim 18 and claim 30, LIN teaches, An apparatus for wireless communication at a base station, comprising:
a memory (LIN; the network device, Par. 0157); and
at least one processor coupled to the memory and configured to (LIN; the network device, Par. 0157):
transmit, to a user equipment (UE), at least one downlink packet or at least one downlink packet retransmission (LIN; Fig. 6, element “SPS 4 and 5” ; The time slot of the first SPS PDSCH received by the terminal device is time slot n+2, Par. 0155); and
receive, from the UE, a transmission of a hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) feedback associated with the at least one downlink packet or the at least one downlink packet retransmission on a first available physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) occasion, the transmission of the HARQ feedback corresponding to a PUCCH collision (LIN; maximum feedback defer length of 2 time slots ... then the feedback information corresponding to the first SPS PDSCH needs to be transmitted in time slot n+3 ... the terminal device determines the PUCCH resource 2, and the PUCCH resource 2 includes downlink symbols, indicating that the PUCCH resource 2 is not available ... The terminal device then determines the next time slot n+4, and the time slot n+4 does not include PUCCH resources ... then determines that the feedback information associated with time slot n+5 … the PUCCH resource 2 is determined, and the symbols occupied by the PUCCH resource 2 are all uplink symbols, so the terminal device determines that the PUCCH resource 2 is available … and the feedback information of SPS PDSCH 4-8 is transmitted in slot n+5, Par. 0155);
Specifically for claim 30, LIN teaches, A method of wireless communication at a user equipment (UE), comprising (LIN; Fig. 6; the network device, Par. 0157).
Regarding claim 14, LIN teaches, The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the transmission of the HARQ feedback is based on semi-persistent scheduling (SPS) (LIN; the feedback information of SPS PDSCH 4-8 is transmitted in slot n+5, Par. 0155).
Regarding claim 16, LIN teaches, The apparatus of claim 1, further comprising a transceiver coupled to the at least one processor (LIN; the terminal device, Par. 0155).
Regarding claim 29, LIN teaches, The apparatus of claim 18, further comprising a transceiver coupled to the at least one processor (LIN; the network device, Par. 0157).
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.
Claim 2, 4-6, 10, 19-22, and 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LIN in view of BAE et al. (BAE hereafter) (US 20230198679 A1) and in further view of Dudda et al. (Dudda hereafter) (US 20220183040 A1).
Regarding claim 2, LIN teaches, The apparatus of claim 1.
LIN fails to explicitly teach,
the at least one processor being further configured to: determine a duration from the first available PUCCH occasion to an ending time of a current industrial internet of things (IIOT) cycle.
However, in the same field of endeavor, BAE teaches,
the at least one processor being further configured to: determine a duration from the first available PUCCH occasion to an ending time of a current industrial internet of things (IIOT) cycle (BAE; The UE may transmit a HARQ-ACK PUCCH ... Next available UL symbol/slot/subslot, Par. 0256; if the ending symbol of the delayed PUCCH is delayed after the starting symbol of another SPS PDSCH occasion associated with the same HARQ process … the UE may perform SPS PDSCH reception on the other SPS PDSCH occasion and drop the delayed HARQ-ACK transmission, Par. 320).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of LIN to include the use of timing of same harq process id as taught by BAE in order to cancel or not transmit harq (BAE; Par. 0320).
Although BAE teaches period of SPS HARQ, but LIN- BAE failed to explicitly teach IIOT cycle.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Dudda teaches in Par. 0006 that “it is feasible to support those multiple DL SPS configurations, and furthermore DL SPS configurations with short periodicities, in order to match the short periodicities of the expected NR-IIOT traffic”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of LIN- BAE to include the use of SPS periodicities as taught by Dudda in order to match with IIOT traffic periodicities (Dudda; Par. 0006).
Regarding claim 4, LIN- BAE- Dudda teaches, The apparatus of claim 2, wherein the determination whether to delay the transmission of the HARQ feedback is based on the duration when the HARQ feedback is a negative ACK (NACK) (BAE; The UE may transmit a HARQ-ACK PUCCH ... Next available UL symbol/slot/subslot, Par. 0256; if the ending symbol of the delayed PUCCH is delayed after the starting symbol of another SPS PDSCH occasion associated with the same HARQ process … the UE may perform SPS PDSCH reception on the other SPS PDSCH occasion and drop the delayed HARQ-ACK transmission, Par. 320; The HARQ-ACK response includes positive ACK (simply, ACK), negative ACK (NACK), Par. 0119).
Regarding claim 5, LIN- BAE- Dudda teaches, The apparatus of claim 4, wherein determining whether to delay the transmission of the HARQ feedback comprises the at least one processor configured to determine to delay the transmission of the HARQ feedback when the HARQ feedback is an ACK (BAE; The UE may transmit a HARQ-ACK PUCCH ... Next available UL symbol/slot/subslot, Par. 0256; if the ending symbol of the delayed PUCCH is delayed after the starting symbol of another SPS PDSCH occasion associated with the same HARQ process … the UE may perform SPS PDSCH reception on the other SPS PDSCH occasion and drop the delayed HARQ-ACK transmission, Par. 320; The HARQ-ACK response includes positive ACK (simply, ACK), negative ACK (NACK), Par. 0119).
Regarding claim 6, LIN- BAE-Dudda teaches, The apparatus of claim 2, wherein the determination whether to delay the transmission of the HARQ feedback is based on the duration (BAE; if the ending symbol of the delayed PUCCH is delayed after the starting symbol of another SPS PDSCH occasion associated with the same HARQ process … the UE may … drop the delayed HARQ-ACK transmission, Par. 320).
Regarding claim 10, LIN teaches, The apparatus of claim 1.
LIN fails to explicitly teach,
wherein determining whether to delay the transmission of the HARQ feedback comprises the at least one processor configured to determine to delay the transmission of the HARQ feedback when the at least one downlink packet or the at least one downlink packet retransmission is received on one of a first number of physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) occasions within a current industrial internet of things (IIOT) cycle, and comprises the at least one processor configured to determine not to delay the transmission of the HARQ feedback when the at least one downlink packet or the at least one downlink packet retransmission is received on a PDSCH occasion after the first number of PDSCH occasions within the current HOT cycle.
However, in the same field of endeavor, BAE teaches,
wherein determining whether to delay the transmission of the HARQ feedback comprises the at least one processor configured to determine to delay the transmission of the HARQ feedback when the at least one downlink packet or the at least one downlink packet retransmission is received on one of a first number of physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) occasions within a current industrial internet of things (IIOT) cycle (BAE; The UE may transmit a HARQ-ACK PUCCH ... Next available UL symbol/slot/subslot, Par. 0256), and
comprises the at least one processor configured to determine not to delay the transmission of the HARQ feedback when the at least one downlink packet or the at least one downlink packet retransmission is received on a PDSCH occasion after the first number of PDSCH occasions within the current IIOT cycle (BAE; if the ending symbol of the delayed PUCCH is delayed after the starting symbol of another SPS PDSCH occasion associated with the same HARQ process … the UE may perform SPS PDSCH reception on the other SPS PDSCH occasion and drop the delayed HARQ-ACK transmission, Par. 320).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of LIN to include the use of timing of same harq process id as taught by BAE in order to cancel or not transmit harq (BAE; Par. 0320).
Although BAE teaches period of SPS HARQ, but LIN- BAE failed to explicitly teach IIOT cycle.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Dudda teaches in Par. 0006 that “it is feasible to support those multiple DL SPS configurations, and furthermore DL SPS configurations with short periodicities, in order to match the short periodicities of the expected NR-IIOT traffic”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of LIN- BAE to include the use of SPS periodicities as taught by Dudda in order to match with IIOT traffic periodicities (Dudda; Par. 0006).
Regarding claim 19, LIN teaches, The apparatus of claim 18.
LIN fails to explicitly teach,
wherein the transmission of the HARQ feedback is based on a duration from the first available PUCCH occasion to an ending time of a current industrial internet of things (IIOT) cycle when the HARQ feedback is a negative ACK (NACK).
However, in the same field of endeavor, BAE teaches,
wherein the transmission of the HARQ feedback is based on a duration from the first available PUCCH occasion to an ending time of a current industrial internet of things (IIOT) cycle (BAE; The UE may transmit a HARQ-ACK PUCCH ... Next available UL symbol/slot/subslot, Par. 0256; if the ending symbol of the delayed PUCCH is delayed after the starting symbol of another SPS PDSCH occasion associated with the same HARQ process … the UE may perform SPS PDSCH reception on the other SPS PDSCH occasion and drop the delayed HARQ-ACK transmission, Par. 320) when the HARQ feedback is a negative ACK (NACK) (BAE;The HARQ-ACK response includes positive ACK (simply, ACK), negative ACK (NACK), Par. 0119).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of LIN to include the use of timing of same harq process id as taught by BAE in order to cancel or not transmit harq (BAE; Par. 0320).
Although BAE teaches period of SPS HARQ, but LIN- BAE failed to explicitly teach IIOT cycle.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Dudda teaches in Par. 0006 that “it is feasible to support those multiple DL SPS configurations, and furthermore DL SPS configurations with short periodicities, in order to match the short periodicities of the expected NR-IIOT traffic”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of LIN- BAE to include the use of SPS periodicities as taught by Dudda in order to match with IIOT traffic periodicities (Dudda; Par. 0006).
Regarding claim 20, LIN- BAE- Dudda teaches, The apparatus of claim 19, wherein the transmission of the HARQ feedback is delayed when the HARQ feedback is an ACK (BAE;The HARQ-ACK response includes positive ACK (simply, ACK), negative ACK (NACK), Par. 0119).
Regarding claim 21, LIN teaches, The apparatus of claim 18.
LIN fails to explicitly teach,
wherein the transmission of the HARQ feedback is based on a duration from the first available PUCCH occasion to an ending time of a current industrial internet of things (IIOT) cycle.
However, in the same field of endeavor, BAE teaches,
wherein the transmission of the HARQ feedback is based on a duration from the first available PUCCH occasion to an ending time of a current industrial internet of things (IIOT) cycle (BAE; The UE may transmit a HARQ-ACK PUCCH ... Next available UL symbol/slot/subslot, Par. 0256; if the ending symbol of the delayed PUCCH is delayed after the starting symbol of another SPS PDSCH occasion associated with the same HARQ process … the UE may perform SPS PDSCH reception on the other SPS PDSCH occasion and drop the delayed HARQ-ACK transmission, Par. 320).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of LIN to include the use of timing of same harq process id as taught by BAE in order to cancel or not transmit harq (BAE; Par. 0320).
Although BAE teaches period of SPS HARQ, but LIN- BAE failed to explicitly teach IIOT cycle.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Dudda teaches in Par. 0006 that “it is feasible to support those multiple DL SPS configurations, and furthermore DL SPS configurations with short periodicities, in order to match the short periodicities of the expected NR-IIOT traffic”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of LIN- BAE to include the use of SPS periodicities as taught by Dudda in order to match with IIOT traffic periodicities (Dudda; Par. 0006).
Regarding claim 22, LIN- BAE-Dudda teaches, The apparatus of claim 21, wherein the ending time of the current IIOT cycle is based on an IIOT cycle duration (BAE; another SPS PDSCH occasion associated with the same HARQ process, Par. 320 [Note that cycle duration is time interval between two PDSCHs with same harq process number]).
Regarding claim 25, LIN teaches, The apparatus of claim 18.
LIN fails to explicitly teach,
wherein the transmission of the HARQ feedback is delayed when the at least one downlink packet or the at least one downlink packet retransmission is transmitted on one of a first number of physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) occasions within a current industrial internet of things (IIOT) cycle, and is not delayed when the at least one downlink packet or the at least one downlink packet retransmission is transmitted on a PDSCH occasion after the first number of PDSCH occasions within the current IIOT cycle.
However, in the same field of endeavor, BAE teaches,
wherein the transmission of the HARQ feedback is delayed when the at least one downlink packet or the at least one downlink packet retransmission is transmitted on one of a first number of physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) occasions within a current industrial internet of things (IIOT) cycle (BAE; The UE may transmit a HARQ-ACK PUCCH ... Next available UL symbol/slot/subslot, Par. 0256), and
is not delayed when the at least one downlink packet or the at least one downlink packet retransmission is transmitted on a PDSCH occasion after the first number of PDSCH occasions within the current IIOT cycle (BAE; if the ending symbol of the delayed PUCCH is delayed after the starting symbol of another SPS PDSCH occasion associated with the same HARQ process … the UE may perform SPS PDSCH reception on the other SPS PDSCH occasion and drop the delayed HARQ-ACK transmission, Par. 320).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of LIN to include the use of timing of same harq process id as taught by BAE in order to cancel or not transmit harq (BAE; Par. 0320).
Although BAE teaches period of SPS HARQ, but LIN- BAE failed to explicitly teach IIOT cycle.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Dudda teaches in Par. 0006 that “it is feasible to support those multiple DL SPS configurations, and furthermore DL SPS configurations with short periodicities, in order to match the short periodicities of the expected NR-IIOT traffic”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of LIN- BAE to include the use of SPS periodicities as taught by Dudda in order to match with IIOT traffic periodicities (Dudda; Par. 0006).
Claim 11 and 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LIN in view of BAE et al. (BAE hereafter) (US 20230198679 A1).
Regarding claim 11, LIN teaches, The apparatus of claim 1.
LIN fails to explicitly teach,
wherein determining whether to delay the transmission of the HARQ feedback comprises the at least one processor configured to determine to delay the transmission of the HARQ feedback when the first available PUCCH occasion occurs before a threshold percentage point of a current semi-persistent scheduling (SPS) period, and comprises the at least one processor configured to determine not to delay the transmission of the HARQ feedback when the first available PUCCH occasion occurs after the threshold percentage point of the current SPS period.
However, in the same field of endeavor, BAE teaches,
wherein determining whether to delay the transmission of the HARQ feedback comprises the at least one processor configured to determine to delay the transmission of the HARQ feedback when the first available PUCCH occasion occurs before a threshold percentage point of a current semi-persistent scheduling (SPS) period (BAE; The UE may transmit a HARQ-ACK PUCCH ... Next available UL symbol/slot/subslot, Par. 0256), and
comprises the at least one processor configured to determine not to delay the transmission of the HARQ feedback when the first available PUCCH occasion occurs after the threshold percentage point of the current SPS period (BAE; if the ending symbol of the delayed PUCCH is delayed after the starting symbol of another SPS PDSCH occasion associated with the same HARQ process … the UE may perform SPS PDSCH reception on the other SPS PDSCH occasion and drop the delayed HARQ-ACK transmission, Par. 320 [Note that PUCCH will be delayed if the pucch is occurring before 0% of the period before the next PDSCH having the same harq process number]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of LIN to include the use of timing of same harq process id as taught by BAE in order to cancel or not transmit harq (BAE; Par. 0320).
Regarding claim 26, LIN teaches, The apparatus of claim 18.
LIN fails to explicitly teach,
wherein the transmission of the HARQ feedback is delayed when the first available PUCCH occasion occurs before a threshold percentage point of a current semi-persistent scheduling (SPS) period, and is not delayed when the first available PUCCH occasion occurs after the threshold percentage point of the current SPS period.
However, in the same field of endeavor, BAE teaches,
wherein the transmission of the HARQ feedback is delayed when the first available PUCCH occasion occurs before a threshold percentage point of a current semi-persistent scheduling (SPS) period (BAE; The UE may transmit a HARQ-ACK PUCCH ... Next available UL symbol/slot/subslot, Par. 0256), and
is not delayed when the first available PUCCH occasion occurs after the threshold percentage point of the current SPS period (BAE; if the ending symbol of the delayed PUCCH is delayed after the starting symbol of another SPS PDSCH occasion associated with the same HARQ process … the UE may perform SPS PDSCH reception on the other SPS PDSCH occasion and drop the delayed HARQ-ACK transmission, Par. 320 [Note that PUCCH will be delayed if the pucch is occurring before 0% of the period before the next PDSCH having the same harq process number]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of LIN to include the use of timing of same harq process id as taught by BAE in order to cancel or not transmit harq (BAE; Par. 0320).
Claim 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LIN- BAE and in further view of Dudda et al. (Dudda hereafter) (US 20220183040 A1).
Regarding claim 12, LIN- BAE teaches, The apparatus of claim 11.
Although BAE teaches period of SPS HARQ, but LIN- BAE failed to explicitly teach,
wherein the current SPS period corresponds to a current industrial internet of things (IIOT) cycle.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Dudda teaches
wherein the current SPS period corresponds to a current industrial internet of things (IIOT) cycle (Dudda; it is feasible to support those multiple DL SPS configurations, and furthermore DL SPS configurations with short periodicities, in order to match the short periodicities of the expected NR-IIOT traffic, Par. 0006”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of LIN- BAE to include the use of SPS periodicities as taught by Dudda in order to match with IIOT traffic periodicities (Dudda; Par. 0006).
Claim 13, 15, 27 and 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LIN in view of ZHANG et al. (ZHANG hereafter) (US 20230396391 A1).
Regarding claim 13 and 27, LIN teaches, The apparatus of claim 1 and The apparatus of claim 18 respectively, wherein the PUCCH collision is associated with a conflicting (LIN; the terminal device determines the PUCCH resource 2, and the PUCCH resource 2 includes downlink symbols, indicating that the PUCCH resource 2 is not available, Par. 0155).
LIN failed to explicitly teach,
conflicting time division duplexing (TDD) configuration.
However, in the same field of endeavor, ZHANG teaches,
conflicting time division duplexing (TDD) configuration (ZHANG; if PUCCH(s) carrying the HARQ-ACK codebook for HARQ-ACK information for the SPS PDSCH(s) overlaps with a set of symbols which are indicated as downlink symbols and/or flexible symbols by higher layer signaling (for example, the parameter tdd-UL-DL-ConfigurationCommon, Par. 0213).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of LIN to include the use of tdd configuration as taught by ZHANG in order to cancel or not transmit harq (ZHANG; Par. 0213).
Regarding claim 15, LIN teaches, The apparatus of claim 1, the at least one processor being further configured to.
LIN failed to explicitly teach,
receive, from the base station, an indication to cancel or delay the transmission of the HARQ feedback.
However, in the same field of endeavor, ZHANG teaches,
receive, from the base station, an indication to cancel or delay the transmission of the HARQ feedback (ZHANG; the base station to indicate to the UE whether the UE may delay the transmission of the HARQ-ACK codebook including HARQ-ACK information only for SPS PDSCH reception(s), Par. 0217).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of LIN to include the use of 1 bit indication as taught by ZHANG in order to indicate UE to delay harq (ZHANG; Par. 0217).
Regarding claim 28, LIN teaches, The apparatus of claim 18, the at least one processor being further configured to:
LIN failed to explicitly teach,
transmit, to the UE, an indication to cancel or delay the transmission of the HARQ feedback.
However, in the same field of endeavor, ZHANG teaches,
transmit, to the UE, an indication to cancel or delay the transmission of the HARQ feedback (ZHANG; the base station to indicate to the UE whether the UE may delay the transmission of the HARQ-ACK codebook including HARQ-ACK information only for SPS PDSCH reception(s), Par. 0217).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of LIN to include the use of 1 bit indication as taught by ZHANG in order to indicate UE to delay harq (ZHANG; Par. 0217).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Reference US 20220353017 A1 teaches in Fig. 21 Par. 0187 that “if the HARQ feedback corresponding to a first PDSCH (e.g., first SPS PDSCH) with a given HARQ process is transmitted in slot j, and a second PDSCH (e.g., second SPS PDSCH) with the same HARQ process is transmitted before slot j, the wireless device may drop the HARQ feedback information corresponding to the first PDSCH (e.g., the first SPS PDSCH)”
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHARMIN CHOWDHURY whose telephone number is (571)272-6419. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Noel Beharry can be reached at 5712705630. 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.
/SHARMIN CHOWDHURY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2416