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 .
Status of the Claims
Based on the current set of claims (Claims, 03 February 2026), Claims 24 and 28-38 are pending.
Based on the current set of claims (Claims, 03 February 2026), Claims 24 and 36-38 are amended and said amendments are narrowing.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments regarding the objection of Claim 25 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection of Claim 25 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments regarding the rejection of Claims 25-27 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of Claims 25-27 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments regarding the rejection of Claims 24 and 28-38 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
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 24, 28, and 36-38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Zhu et al. (US 20230069308 A1; hereinafter referred to as “Zhu”).
Regarding Claim 24, Claim 24 is rejected on the same basis as Claim 37.
Regarding Claim 28, Zhu discloses the method according to claim 24.
Zhu further discloses wherein the one of the plurality of numeric values includes an indication of whether the scheduling information is for single-cell scheduling or multi-cell scheduling (¶131 & Table 3 & Fig. 16, Zhu discloses that the information field value indicates a single cell to be scheduled or indicates multiple cells to be scheduled).
Regarding Claim 36, Claim 36 is rejected on the same basis as Claim 38.
Regarding Claim 37, Zhu discloses a user equipment (UE) comprising:
a memory storing instructions (¶170-174 & Fig. 21, Zhu discloses a terminal comprising a memory 804 storing instructions); and
at least one processor configured to process the instructions (¶170-174 & Fig. 21, Zhu discloses the terminal further comprising a processor 820 configured to execute the instructions stored on the memory 804) to:
receive, in a Radio Resource Control (RRC) message, first information (¶122-123 & Fig. 16 (S161), Zhu discloses receiving, in higher layer signaling, a mapping relationship. ¶125, Zhu discloses that the higher layer signaling may be radio resource control (RRC) signaling) indicating a mapping between a plurality of numeric values and a plurality of schedulable cell combinations (¶122-123 & Fig. 16 (S161), Zhu discloses that the mapping relationship is a mapping between indication information and a plurality of second cells), wherein the plurality of schedulable cell combinations is a subset of a set of possible cell combinations (¶124 & ¶128-131, Zhu discloses that the second cells are a subset of the plurality of second cells);
receive, in a single scheduling downlink control information (DCI) transmission from an access network (AN) node, control information (¶105 & ¶ Fig. 16 (S121, Zhu discloses receiving, in a downlink control information (DCI) from a base station, control information) comprising:
scheduling information comprising respective resources of shared channel for each cell of a scheduled cell combination (¶105 & ¶ Fig. 16 (S121), Zhu discloses that the control information indicates scheduling information corresponding to downlink data and/or uplink data), and
one of the plurality of numeric values (¶122 & ¶ Fig. 16 (S121), Zhu discloses that the DCI comprises the indication information), determine the scheduled cell combination based on the one of the plurality of numeric values and the first information (¶122 & ¶ Fig. 16 (S151), Zhu discloses determining the at least two cells based upon the indication information and the scheduling information); and
communicate with the AN node in each cell of the scheduled cell combination using the respective resources of the corresponding shared channel (¶122 & ¶ Fig. 16 (S151), Zhu discloses performing data transmission in at least two cells indicated by the indication information).
Regarding Claim 38, Zhu discloses an access network (AN) node comprising:
a memory storing instructions (¶184-186 & Fig. 22, Zhu discloses a base station comprising a memory 932 storing instructions); and
at least one processor configured to process the instructions (¶184-186 & Fig. 22, Zhu discloses the base station further comprising a processor 922 configured to execute the instructions stored on the memory 932) to:
transmit, in a Radio Resource Control (RRC) message to a user equipment (UE), first information (¶122-123 & Fig. 16 (S161), Zhu discloses transmitting, in higher layer signaling, a mapping relationship. ¶125, Zhu discloses that the higher layer signaling may be radio resource control (RRC) signaling) indicating a mapping between a plurality of numeric values and a plurality of schedulable cell combinations (¶122-123 & Fig. 16 (S161), Zhu discloses that the mapping relationship is a mapping between indication information and a plurality of second cells), wherein the plurality of schedulable cell combinations is a subset of a set of possible cell combinations (¶124 & ¶128-131, Zhu discloses that the second cells are a subset of the plurality of second cells);
transmit, in a single scheduling downlink control information (DCI) transmission to the UE, control information (¶105 & ¶ Fig. 16 (S121, Zhu discloses receiving, in a downlink control information (DCI) from a base station, control information) comprising:
scheduling information identifying respective resources of a shared channel for each cell of a scheduled cell combination (¶105 & ¶ Fig. 16 (S121), Zhu discloses that the control information indicates scheduling information corresponding to downlink data and/or uplink data), and
one of the plurality of numeric values (¶122 & ¶ Fig. 16 (S121), Zhu discloses that the DCI comprises the indication information);
wherein the scheduled cell combination is determined by the UE based on the one of the plurality of numeric values and the first information (¶122 & ¶ Fig. 16 (S151), Zhu discloses determining the at least two cells based upon the indication information and the scheduling information); and
communicate with the UE in the each cell of the scheduled cell combination using the respective resources of the shared channel (¶122 & ¶ Fig. 16 (S151), Zhu discloses performing data transmission in at least two cells indicated by the indication information).
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.
Claims 29-30 and 32-33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu in view of Noh et al. (US 20200328849 A1; hereinafter referred to as “Noh”).
Regarding Claim 29, Zhu discloses the method according to claim 24.
However, Zhu do not disclose [the method] further comprising: transmitting, to the AN node, hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) feedback for the shared channel for the each cell of the scheduled cell combination, wherein the HARQ feedback comprises a first HARQ feedback corresponding to a first cell of the scheduled cell combination concatenated with a second HARQ feedback corresponding to a second cell of the scheduled cell combination.
Noh, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, teaches [the method] further comprising:
transmitting, to the AN node, hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) feedback for the shared channel for the each cell of the scheduled cell combination (¶10-11 & ¶229-232 & Fig. 13, Noh discloses transmitting, to a base station (BS) by a user equipment (UE), hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) feedback for each of a first Physical Downlink Shared Channel (PDSCH) corresponding to a first control resource set (CORESET) and a second PDSCH corresponding to a second CORESET where the first PDSCH and the second PDSCH scheduled by information), wherein the HARQ feedback comprises a first HARQ feedback corresponding to a first cell of the scheduled cell combination concatenated with a second HARQ feedback corresponding to a second cell of the scheduled cell combination (¶10-11 & ¶229-232 & Fig. 13, Noh discloses HARQ feedback where the HARQ feedback combines/concatenates HARQ feedback corresponding to the first PDSCH and HARQ feedback corresponding to the second PDSCH).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify Zhu by transmitting, to the AN node, hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) feedback for the shared channel for the each cell of the scheduled cell combination, wherein the HARQ feedback comprises a first HARQ feedback corresponding to a first cell of the scheduled cell combination concatenated with a second HARQ feedback corresponding to a second cell of the scheduled cell combination as taught by Noh because coordinated transmission efficiency and control channel reception efficiency of the terminal is improved by determining HARQ-ACK codebooks for multiple PUCCHs efficiently (Noh, ¶102 & ¶186).
Regarding Claim 32, Cao in view of MediaTek in further view of Noh discloses the method according to claim 29.
Cao further discloses the method further comprises providing the HARQ feedback to the AN node in accordance with the timing (¶60 & Fig. 5 (506) & ¶63 & ¶72, Cao discloses transmitting, by the UE to the BS, uplink data where the uplink data includes HARQ feedback).
MediaTek, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, further teaches wherein the control information further comprises an indication of a timing at which hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) feedback should be provided to the AN node for the shared channel (Pgs. 3-4, §2 DCI Aggregation for Cross-Carrier Scheduling & Figure 2, MediaTek discloses that the first stage DCI includes a PDSCH-to-HARQ_feedback timing indicator field where the PDSCH-to-HARQ_feedback timing indicator indicates a future time to provide HARQ feedback corresponding to the PDSCH), the indication identifying the timing relative to a time of an earliest received of the shared channel (Pgs. 3-4, §2 DCI Aggregation for Cross-Carrier Scheduling & Figure 2, MediaTek discloses that the PDSCH-to-HARQ_feedback timing indicator field indicates a future time to provide HARQ feedback corresponding to the PDSCH relative to the PDSCH).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify Cao in view of MediaTek in view of Noh by requiring that the control information further comprises an indication of a timing at which hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) feedback should be provided to the AN node for the shared channel, the indication identifying the timing relative to a time of an earliest received of the shared channel as taught by MediaTek because DCI scheduling efficiency is improved by moving from the Pcell to the Scell (MediaTek, Pg. 1, § DCI Aggregation for Cross-Carrier Scheduling).
Regarding Claim 33, Cao in view of MediaTek in further view of Noh discloses the method according to claim 29.
Noh, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, further teaches that the HARQ feedback is concatenated in an order corresponding to a respective index or numeric identifier associated:
with each cell of the first cell and second cell (¶10-11 & ¶229-232 & Fig. 13 & Claim 6, Noh discloses concatenating hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) feedback for each of a first Physical Downlink Shared Channel (PDSCH) corresponding to a first control resource set (CORESET) and a second PDSCH corresponding to a second CORESET based upon a first index value and a second index value); or
with each component carrier of a first component carrier on which the first cell is provided, and a second component carrier on which the second cell is provided.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify Cao in view of MediaTek in view of Noh by requiring that the HARQ feedback is concatenated in an order corresponding to a respective index or numeric identifier associated with each cell of the first cell and second cell as taught by Noh because coordinated transmission efficiency and control channel reception efficiency of the terminal is improved by determining HARQ-ACK codebooks for multiple PUCCHs efficiently (Noh, ¶102 & ¶186).
Claim 30 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cao in view of Zhu in view of Noh in further view of MediaTek, Inc. (On Multi-cell PDSCH Scheduling via Single DCI, 19 January 2021, 3GPP TSG RAN WG1 Meeting #104-e, Tdoc: R1-2100611; See IDS dated 28 September 2023: Non-Patent Document, Reference 7; hereinafter referred to as “MediaTek”).
Regarding Claim 30, Zhu in view of Noh discloses the method according to claim 29.
However, Zhu in view of Noh does not disclose the control information further comprises at least one of: a HARQ feedback timing indicator field, a physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) resource indicator field, and a Transmission Power Control (TPC) command field, and wherein the transmitting the HARQ feedback comprises commonly using the at least one of the HARQ feedback timing indicator field, the PUCCH resource indicator field, and the TPC command field for both the first HARQ feedback and the second HARQ feedback.
MediaTek, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, further teaches the control information further comprises at least one of: a HARQ feedback timing indicator field, a physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) resource indicator field, and a Transmission Power Control (TPC) command field (Pgs. 3-4, §2 DCI Aggregation for Cross-Carrier Scheduling & Figure 2, MediaTek discloses that the first stage DCI includes a PDSCH-to-HARQ_feedback timing indicator field, a physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) resource indicator, and "TPC Command for Scheduled PUCCH"), and wherein the transmitting the HARQ feedback comprises commonly using the at least one of the HARQ feedback timing indicator field, the PUCCH resource indicator field, and the TPC command field for both the first HARQ feedback and the second HARQ feedback (Pgs. 3-4, §2 DCI Aggregation for Cross-Carrier Scheduling & Figure 2, MediaTek discloses that the PDSCH-to-HARQ_feedback timing indicator field, the physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) resource indicator, and the "TPC Command for Scheduled PUCCH" is a common field for a first cell and a second cell).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify Zhu in view of Noh by requiring that the control information further comprises at least one of: a HARQ feedback timing indicator field, a physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) resource indicator field, and a Transmission Power Control (TPC) command field, and wherein the transmitting the HARQ feedback comprises commonly using the at least one of the HARQ feedback timing indicator field, the PUCCH resource indicator field, and the TPC command field for both the first HARQ feedback and the second HARQ feedback as taught by MediaTek because DCI scheduling efficiency is improved by moving from the Pcell to the Scell (MediaTek, Pg. 1, § DCI Aggregation for Cross-Carrier Scheduling).
Claim 31 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cao in view of MediaTek in view of Noh in further view of Yuan et al. (US 20230030642 A1; hereinafter referred to as “Yuan”).
Regarding Claim 31, Zhu in view of Noh discloses the method according to claim 29.
However, Zhu in view of Noh does not disclose the control information further comprises downlink assignment index (DAI) information comprising: a counter DAI (C-DAI) that indicates an accumulated number of DCIs that have been transmitted to the UE in a monitoring occasion for the shared channel, and a total DAI (T-DAI) that indicates a total number of the cells scheduled by the DCIs that have been transmitted to the UE in the monitoring occasion.
Yuan, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, teaches the control information includes downlink assignment index (DAI) information including:
a counter DAI (C-DAI) that indicates an accumulated number of DCIs that have been transmitted to the UE in a monitoring occasion for the shared channel (¶5, Yuan discloses that downlink control information (DCI) includes a counter DAI where the counter DAI indicates a number of scheduled PDSCHs up to a point that the first DCI was received), and
a total DAI (T-DAI) that indicates a total number of the cells scheduled by the DCIs that have been transmitted to the UE in the monitoring occasion (¶5, Yuan discloses that the DCI further includes a total DAI where the total DAI a number of scheduled PDSCHs across the at least two component carriers).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify Zhu in view of Noh by requiring that the control information further comprises downlink assignment index (DAI) information comprising: a counter DAI (C-DAI) that indicates an accumulated number of DCIs that have been transmitted to the UE in a monitoring occasion for the shared channel, and a total DAI (T-DAI) that indicates a total number of the cells scheduled by the DCIs that have been transmitted to the UE in the monitoring occasion as taught by Yuan because efficiency in cross-carrier scheduling scenarios and/or dynamic spectrum sharing scenarios is improved (Yuan, ¶26).
Claims 34-35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu in view of MediaTek, Inc. (On Multi-cell PDSCH Scheduling via Single DCI, 19 January 2021, 3GPP TSG RAN WG1 Meeting #104-e, Tdoc: R1-2100611; See IDS dated 28 September 2023: Non-Patent Document, Reference 7; hereinafter referred to as “MediaTek”).
Regarding Claim 34, Zhu discloses the method according to claim 24.
However, Zhu does not disclose wherein, for at least one cell of the scheduled cell combination, the respective resources of the shared channel are provided on a dynamic shared spectrum (DSS) component carrier.
MediaTek, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, further teaches wherein, for at least one cell of the scheduled cell combination, the respective resources of the shared channel are provided on a dynamic shared spectrum (DSS) component carrier (Pgs. 3-4, §2 DCI Aggregation for Cross-Carrier Scheduling, MediaTek discloses that the Pcell and a corresponding PDSCH of the Pcell, of a set of cells including the Pcell and the Scell, is scheduled on resources by the DCI where a component carrier of the Pcell is a Dynamic Shared Spectrum (DSS) carrier).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify Zhu by requiring that wherein, for at least one cell of the scheduled cell combination, the respective resources of the shared channel are provided on a dynamic shared spectrum (DSS) component carrier as taught by MediaTek because DCI scheduling efficiency is improved by moving from the Pcell to the Scell (MediaTek, Pg. 1, § DCI Aggregation for Cross-Carrier Scheduling).
Regarding Claim 35, Zhu discloses the method according to claim 24.
However, Zhu does not disclose the scheduled cell combination comprises a primary cell and a secondary cell, and wherein the receiving the control information comprises receiving the control information in the secondary cell.
MediaTek, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, further teaches the scheduled cell combination comprises a primary cell and a secondary cell (Pgs. 3-4, §2 DCI Aggregation for Cross-Carrier Scheduling, MediaTek discloses that the set of cells include a first cell and a second cell or a Pcell and an SCell), and wherein t the receiving the control information comprises receiving the control information in the secondary cell (Pgs. 3-4, §2 DCI Aggregation for Cross-Carrier Scheduling, MediaTek discloses that DCI is received and processed from the Scell in order to improve DCI scheduling efficiency).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify Zhu by requiring that the scheduled cell combination comprises a primary cell and a secondary cell and that the receiving the control information comprises receiving the control information in the secondary cell as taught by MediaTek because DCI scheduling efficiency is improved by moving from the Pcell to the Scell (MediaTek, Pg. 1, § DCI Aggregation for Cross-Carrier Scheduling).
Internet Communications
Applicant is encouraged to submit a written authorization for Internet communications (PTO/SB/439, http://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/sb0439.pdf) in the instant patent application to authorize the examiner to communicate with the applicant via email. The authorization will allow the examiner to better practice compact prosecution. The written authorization can be submitted via one of the following methods only: (1) Central Fax which can be found in the Conclusion section of this Office action; (2) regular postal mail; (3) EFS WEB; or (4) the service window on the Alexandria campus. EFS web is the recommended way to submit the form since this allows the form to be entered into the file wrapper within the same day (system dependent). Written authorization submitted via other methods, such as direct fax to the examiner or email, will not be accepted. See MPEP § 502.03.
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 ERIC NOWLIN whose telephone number is (313)446-6544. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 12:00PM-10:00PM.
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, Michael Thier can be reached at (571) 272-2832. 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.
/ERIC NOWLIN/Examiner, Art Unit 2474