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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 10/31/2023 and 10/23/2024 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
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 1, 5, 8 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 as being anticipated by Zewail et al. (US 20220345253 A1) hereinafter Zewail.
Regarding claim 1,
Zewail teaches a method by a user equipment (UE) in a wireless communication system (HARQ configuration process [0053]-[0064]; Fig. 4), the method comprising: transmitting, to a base station, capability information indicating whether the UE supports a number of increased hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) process (UE sends HARQ capability information to the BS, where the HARQ capability information indicate the UE’s ability to maintain a maximum number of HARQ processes in parallel [0053]-[0057]; element 410 of Fig. 4); in case that the UE supports the number of increased HARQ process, receiving, form the base station, configuration information for the number of increased HARQ process (UE receives configuration information from the BS based on the HARQ capability information which may indicate support for an increased number of HARQ processes [0053]-[0059]; element 410 of Fig. 4); and performing communication with the base station based on an HARQ process identifier (ID) according to the number of increased HARQ process, wherein the increased HARQ process is based on the configuration information (UE receives transmissions associated with a first HARQ process from the BS based on the configured increased number of HARQ processes through the configuration information [0053]-[0064]; Fig. 4).
Claims 5 “BS method”, 8 “UE apparatus” and 12 “BS apparatus” are rejected under the same reasoning as claim 1 “UE method”, where Zewail teaches the “BS method” (method performed by BS [0053]-[0064]; Fig. 4), the UE comprising a transceiver and a controller (UE comprising transceivers and controller/processor [0038]-[0042]; Fig. 2) and the “BS apparatus” (BS comprising transceivers and controller/processor [0038]-[0042]; Fig. 2).
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148
USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 2, 4, 6, 9, 11, 13 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zewail in view of Matsuda et al. (US 20220294569 A1) hereinafter Matsuda.
Regarding claim 2,
Zewail teaches all the features of claim 1, as outlined above.
Zewail does not explicitly teach wherein the number of increased HARQ processes is 32.
Matsuda teaches wherein the number of increased HARQ processes is 32 (the number of HARQ processes may be switched to 32 [0269]-[0271]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Matsuda to the teachings of Zewail. One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would enhance performance for non-terrestrial networks, NTNs (Matsuda [0003]).
Regarding claim 4,
Zewail teaches all the features of claim 1, as outlined above.
Zewail does not explicitly teach wherein the number of increased HARQ processes is for non-terrestrial network (NTN) communication.
Matsuda teaches wherein the number of increased HARQ processes is for non-terrestrial network (NTN) communication (increasing the number of HARQ processes for NTN [0254]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Matsuda to the teachings of Zewail. One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would enhance performance for non-terrestrial networks, NTNs (Matsuda [0003]).
Claims [6] “BS method”, [9 and 11] “UE apparatus” and [13 and 15] “BS apparatus” are rejected under the same reasoning as claims [2 and 4] “UE method”, where Zewail teaches the “BS method” (method performed by BS [0053]-[0064]; Fig. 4), the UE comprising a transceiver and a controller (UE comprising transceivers and controller/processor [0038]-[0042]; Fig. 2) and the “BS apparatus” (BS comprising transceivers and controller/processor [0038]-[0042]; Fig. 2).
Claims 3, 7, 10 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zewail and Matsuda in view of Zhang et al. (US 20220247520 A1) hereinafter Zhang.
Regarding claim 3,
Zewail teaches all the features of claim 1, as outlined above.
Zewail does not explicitly teach wherein the performing of communication comprises, based on the HARQ process ID, transmitting a plurality of physical uplink shared channels (PUSCH) or receiving a plurality of physical downlink shared channels (PDSCH), wherein an HARQ process ID for the plurality of PUSCHs is allocated while being increased by 1 sequentially according to a modulo operation based on the number of increased HARQ processes, and wherein an HARQ process ID for the plurality of PDSCHs is allocated while being increased by 1 sequentially according to a modulo operation based on the number of increased HARQ processes.
Matsuda teaches wherein the performing of communication comprises, based on the HARQ process ID, transmitting a plurality of physical uplink shared channels (PUSCH) or receiving a plurality of physical downlink shared channels (PDSCH) (based on HARQ process ID, transmitting PUSCHs or receiving PDSCHs [0125]-[0138]; Figs. 10-12), wherein an HARQ process ID for the plurality of PUSCHs is allocated while being increased by 1 sequentially according to a modulo operation based on the number of increased HARQ processes, and wherein an HARQ process ID for the plurality of PDSCHs is allocated while being increased by 1 sequentially (HARQ process ID for the PDSCH increases incrementally [0125]-[0138]; Figs. 10-12)
Zewail and Matsuda do not explicitly teach the HARQ process ID being increased according to a modulo operation based on the number of increased HARQ processes.
Zhang teaches the HARQ process ID being increased according to a modulo operation based on the number of increased HARQ processes (at least one HARQ process ID, H_ID, is determined according to mod operation based on the maximum ID indicated [0137]-[0138]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Zhang to the teachings of Zewail and Matsuda. One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would enhance parallel transmission for NTNs (Zhang [0003]-[0004]).
Claims 7 “BS method”, 10 “UE apparatus” and 14 “BS apparatus” are rejected under the same reasoning as claim 3 “UE method”, where Zewail teaches the “BS method” (method performed by BS [0053]-[0064]; Fig. 4), the UE comprising a transceiver and a controller (UE comprising transceivers and controller/processor [0038]-[0042]; Fig. 2) and the “BS apparatus” (BS comprising transceivers and controller/processor [0038]-[0042]; Fig. 2).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABDUL AZIZ SANTARISI whose telephone number is (703)756-4586. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 AM - 5:00 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, Ayman Abaza can be reached on (571)270-0422. 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.
/ABDUL AZIZ SANTARISI/Examiner, Art Unit 2465
/AYMAN A ABAZA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2465