DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 13, and 14 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 1, in line 10, “the transmission parameters” with --the transmission parameter--.
Regarding claim 13, in line 11, “the transmission parameters” with --the transmission parameter--.
Regarding claim 14, in line 11, “the transmission parameters” with --the transmission parameter--.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-2, 4-6 and 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Sundararajan et al (US 2021/0274520 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Sundararajan discloses a method of operating a wireless communication device communicating data with a node of a communications network (Fig. 1), the method comprising:
participating in an initial transmission of multiple code block groups of a transport block using a first value of a transmission parameter (Fig. 4B, Fig. 5, and 63rd paragraph, CBG1-CBG6 of TB share the same RV value of “0” because they are all associated with the first HARQ transmission. Herein, the RV is the transmission parameter and the first HARQ transmission is the initial transmission), the multiple code block groups respectively comprising a part of the data (Fig. 4A and 56th paragraph, the CBGs, e.g., CBG1, CBG2, CBG3, CBG4, CBG5, and CBG6 carry data of TB), and
participating in one or more retransmissions of at least one of the multiple code block groups using one or more second values of the transmission parameter (70th and 88th paragraphs, different RVs may be indicated for CBGs in a TB segment that includes a retransmission of a failed CBG with the first transmission of a new CBG. As illustrated in Fig. 10A, a retransmission of CBG1 and CBG3 having RV value of 2 instead of 0 as in the first transmission),
wherein the first value is different than at least one of the one or more second values (Fig. 10A, CGB1 and CBG3 have RV value of 2 instead of 0 as in the first transmission), and
wherein the transmission parameter is at least one of a count of repetitions (88th paragraph, retransmissions may include more repetitions of CBG A3 and CBG A4) or a modulation and coding scheme of a respective code block group (70th paragraph, the PHY layer of the transmitting wireless device may change the MCS between TB segments of the multiple TB segments of the multi-slot TB 400. Herein, a TB segment may include one or more CBG and each CBG may be a new transmission and/or a retransmission. Therefore, CBGs, including initial and retransmission, may have different MCS value).
Regarding claim 2, Sundararajan discloses that wherein the transmission parameter further includes a count of redundancy versions for multiple repetitions of the respective code block group (88th paragraph and Fig. 10A, different RV values are used for first transmission and retransmission for CBG1 and CBG3. Retransmissions may include more repetitions having different RV values).
Regarding claim 4, Sundararajan discloses obtaining, from the node, an explicit or implicit indication of the one or more second values (Fig. 10A, DCI indicates RV value of 2 for CBG1 and CBG3).
Regarding claim 5, Sundararajan discloses receiving, from the node, a downlink control information comprising scheduling information for the initial transmission and the one or more retransmissions, the scheduling information being indicative of time-frequency resources being respectively allocated to the initial transmission and the one or more retransmissions based on the transport block (50th paragraph, TB is transmitted within the resources allocated by the gNB scheduling, e.g., the scheduler of Fig. 2. Herein, the resources are time and frequency resources associated with first transmission and retransmission, illustrated in Figs. 9A, 9B, 10A, and 11B), wherein the one or more second values are determined in accordance with an amount of the time frequency resources (Fig. 11B, retransmission of CBG1, CBG3, CBG4, and CBG5 having different RV values in different allocated slots).
Regarding claim 6, Sundararajan discloses that wherein the one or more second values are determined to fill up the time frequency resources allocated for the one or more retransmission (Fig. 11B, in the retransmission, the number of repetitions for CBG3 and CBG4 are 2 while the number of repetitions for CBG1 and CBG5 are 1 in the allocated slots).
Regarding claim 12, Sundararajan discloses that wherein at least one of the one or more retransmissions includes at least two code block groups (Fig. 11B, retransmission includes at least CBG3 and CBG4), wherein different ones of the at least two code block groups are re-transmitted in the at least one of the one or more retransmissions using different second values (Fig. 11B, retransmissions of CBG3 and CBG 4 using RV value of 2 and RV value of 1).
Regarding claim 13, Sundararajan discloses a method of operating a node of a communication network, the node communicating data with a wireless communication device (Fig. 1), the method comprising:
participating in an initial transmission of multiple code block groups of a transport block using a first value of a transmission parameter (Fig. 4B, Fig. 5, and 63rd paragraph, CBG1-CBG6 of TB share the same RV value of “0” because they are all associated with the first HARQ transmission. Herein, the RV is the transmission parameter and the first HARQ transmission is the initial transmission), the multiple code block groups respectively comprising a part of the data (Fig. 4A and 56th paragraph, the CBGs, e.g., CBG1, CBG2, CBG3, CBG4, CBG5, and CBG6 carry data of TB), and
participating in one or more retransmissions of at least one of the multiple code block groups using one or more second values of the transmission parameter (70th and 88th paragraphs, different RVs may be indicated for CBGs in a TB segment that includes a retransmission of a failed CBG with the first transmission of a new CBG. As illustrated in Fig. 10A, a retransmission of CBG1 and CBG3 having RV value of 2 instead of 0 as in the first transmission),
wherein the first value is different than at least one of the one or more second values (Fig. 10A, CGB1 and CBG3 have RV value of 2 instead of 0 as in the first transmission), and
wherein the transmission parameter is at least one of a count of repetitions (88th paragraph, retransmissions may include more repetitions of CBG A3 and CBG A4) or a modulation and coding scheme of a respective code block group (70th paragraph, the PHY layer of the transmitting wireless device may change the MCS between TB segments of the multiple TB segments of the multi-slot TB 400. Herein, a TB segment may include one or more CBG and each CBG may be a new transmission and/or a retransmission. Therefore, CBGs, including initial and retransmission, may have different MCS value).
Regarding claim 14, Sundararajan discloses a wireless communication device (Fig. 8, UE 800) for communicating data with a node (Fig. 7, BS 700) of a communications network (Fig. 1), the wireless communication device comprising a control circuitry (Fig. 8, controller/processor 280), the control circuitry being configured to:
participate in an initial transmission of multiple code block groups of a transport block using a first value of a transmission parameter (Fig. 4B, Fig. 5, and 63rd paragraph, CBG1-CBG6 of TB share the same RV value of “0” because they are all associated with the first HARQ transmission. Herein, the RV is the transmission parameter and the first HARQ transmission is the initial transmission), the multiple code block groups respectively comprising a part of the data (Fig. 4A and 56th paragraph, the CBGs, e.g., CBG1, CBG2, CBG3, CBG4, CBG5, and CBG6 carry data of TB), and
participate in one or more retransmissions of at least one of the multiple code block groups using one or more second values of the transmission parameter (70th and 88th paragraphs, different RVs may be indicated for CBGs in a TB segment that includes a retransmission of a failed CBG with the first transmission of a new CBG. As illustrated in Fig. 10A, a retransmission of CBG1 and CBG3 having RV value of 2 instead of 0 as in the first transmission),
wherein the first value is different than at least one of the one or more second values (Fig. 10A, CGB1 and CBG3 have RV value of 2 instead of 0 as in the first transmission), and
wherein the transmission parameter is at least one of a count of repetitions (88th paragraph, retransmissions may include more repetitions of CBG A3 and CBG A4) or a modulation and coding scheme of a respective code block group (70th paragraph, the PHY layer of the transmitting wireless device may change the MCS between TB segments of the multiple TB segments of the multi-slot TB 400. Herein, a TB segment may include one or more CBG and each CBG may be a new transmission and/or a retransmission. Therefore, CBGs, including initial and retransmission, may have different MCS value).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sundararajan in view of Ouchi et al (US 2023/0155746 A1).
Regarding claim 11, Sundararajan discloses receiving and decoding CBGs of a TB (Figs. 5 and 6). Sundararajan does not disclose providing to the communication network a capability of the wireless communication device to support the first value being different than the one or more second values. Ouchi discloses that the terminal providing capability information indicating the terminal supports different parameters (143rd paragraph). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to transmit terminal’s capability in Sundararajan’s system, as suggested by Ouchi, to indicate terminal’s flexibility.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-10 are 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed January 29, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues in page 6 that Sundararajan fails to disclose first value of a transmission parameter for an initial transmission being different from a second value of the transmission parameter for a retransmission, wherein the transmission parameter is at least one of a count of repetitions or a modulation and coding scheme of a respective code block group. Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Sundararajan discloses that retransmissions may include more repetitions of CBG A3 and CBG A4 (88th paragraph). Herein, the number or count of repetitions of retransmissions of CBG A3 and CBG A4 is different from initial transmissions of CBG A3 and CBG A4.
Sundarajan discloses that the PHY layer of the transmitting wireless device may change the MCS between TB segments of the multiple TB segments of the multi-slot TB 400 (70th paragraph). Herein, a TB segment may include one or more CBG and each CBG may be a new transmission and/or a retransmission. Therefore, CBGs, including initial and retransmission, may have different MCS value.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 ANH VU H LY whose telephone number is (571)272-3175. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-5pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Nick Jensen can be reached at 571-270-5443. 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.
ANH VU H. LY
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2472
/ANH VU H LY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2472