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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 02/19/2026 with regard to claims 1 and 27 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Martin et al. (US 2018/0048433), Martin herein after, in view of Wu (US 2023/0209627), further in view of Zou et al. (US 2020/0128537), Zou hereinafter, does not teach or suggest “the capability message comprising an indication of a time period corresponding to preparation of a cross-carrier retransmission of a message.” Applicant argues, Remarks pp. 13, that a person of ordinary skill in the art would not have found it obvious to look to the teaching of a grant-free HARQ system and that Zou does not teach or suggest including a time parameter for cross-carrier HARQ retransmissions in a capability message.
Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Wu ¶0211 teaches “the base station 106A can implement an example method 800 to periodically transmit or receive data units or signaling via multiple cell according to a HARQ scheme. The base station 106A can implement the method 800 t[o] support semi-persistent scheduling, for example.” Zou ¶0018 teaches “The grant-free transmission may be a semi-persistently scheduled transmission. In other words, the radio device configured or configurable for the grant-free transmission may be implemented by a radio device configured or configurable for semi-persistent scheduling (SPS).” Zou ¶0030 teaches “wherein a time duration i may be equal to or greater than a processing time at the radio device for performing a HARQ retransmission.” Zou ¶0031 teaches “the radio device may indicate to the RAN its capability as to the time duration i” With this consideration, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill to look to the grant-free operation of Zou that is semi-persistently scheduled transmission to implement the semi-persistent scheduling suggested by Wu and to include the processing time for performing a HARQ retransmission in the capability message of Wu. In combination, Wu and Zu provide for minimizing latency for a variety of HARQ processing capabilities.
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 14-15, filed 02/19/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 17 and 29 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Martin in view of Wu further in view of Kim et al. (US 2022/0159568), Kim hereinafter, 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 in view of newly found prior art references.
Applicant argues Kim does dot teach or suggest that the assistance information comprising a request to enable cross-carrier hybrid automatic repeat request retransmissions is transmitted “based at least in part on a status associated with the one or more processors of the UE satisfying a threshold processor status.” Applicant additionally argues that Kim, Wu, or Martin does not teach or suggest that the network’s decision to provide a cross-carrier HARQ retransmission is made “based at least in part on the request.”
Sekar et al. (US 2021/0153159), Sekar hereinafter, teaches transmitting/receiving assistance information comprising a request to enable the cross-carrier hybrid automatic repeat request retransmissions based at least in part on a status associated with the one or more processors of the UE satisfying a threshold processor status: ¶0046: In some examples (e.g., in a carrier aggregation configuration), a carrier may also have acquisition signaling or control signaling that coordinates operations for other carriers. The carrier acquisition and control signaling coordinating the other carries permits the enabling of cross-carrier operation. ¶0077 discloses using HARQ feedback. ¶0078: The UEs 115 may store the data transmission in a retransmission buffer, and transmit a feedback request to the receiver (e.g., other UEs 115 or base stations 105) in a subsequent data transmission based on a system memory utilization threshold for the retransmission buffer being satisfied due to storage of the data transmission. The feedback request sent by the UE corresponds to the assistance information and sending the feedback request based on the memory threshold utilization corresponds to a status associated with one or more processors of the UE satisfying a threshold processor status.
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 nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 5, 12, and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Martin et al. (US 2018/0048433), Martin herein after, in view of Wu (US 2023/0209627), further in view of Zou et al. (US 2020/0128537), Zou hereinafter.
Re. Claim 1, Martin teaches
An apparatus for wireless communication at a user equipment (UE) (Martin, ¶0057: The terminal devices 406, 408 each comprise a transceiver unit 406a, 408a for transmission and reception of wireless signals and a controller unit 406b, 408b configured to control the operation of the respective devices 406, 408 in accordance with embodiments of the disclosure.), comprising:
one or more processors (Martin, ¶0057: The respective controller units 406b, 408b may each comprise a processor unit which is suitably configured/programmed to provide the desired functionality described herein using conventional programming/configuration techniques for equipment in wireless telecommunications systems.);
one or more memories coupled with the one or more processors ([A suitably configured/programmed processor is necessarily coupled to memory.]); and
instructions stored in the one or more memories and executable by the one or more processors (Martin, ¶0057: However, it will be appreciated that for each terminal device the functionality of these units can be provided in various different ways, for example using a single suitably programmed general purpose computer, or suitably configured application-specific integrated circuit(s)/circuitry, or using a plurality of discrete circuitry/processing elements for providing different elements of the desired functionality.) to cause the apparatus to:
transmit the message on a first component carrier (Martin, ¶¶0104-0105: transmitting a link control layer Packet Data Unit "PDU" from a link control module to an access control layer module for transmission, the link control layer being at a higher layer than the access control layer; transmitting first access control layer data using resources allocated within the first component carrier, wherein the first access control layer data corresponds to the PDU;); and
retransmit the message on a second component carrier different than the first component carrier (Martin, ¶¶0106-0107: identifying that transmission of data for the PDU has been unsuccessful; and upon identification that transmission of data for the PDU has been unsuccessful, the link control module re-transmitting the PDU and causing the re-transmitted PDU to be transmitted via second access control layer data using resources allocated within the second component carrier.)
based at least in part on an availability of resources for retransmitting the message (Martin, ¶0088: Generally, the causing of the PDU retransmission on another carrier is at least partly based on one or more available resources indications, separately per component carrier. … From one perspective, this can be viewed as the link control layer prioritising sending re-transmitted PDU s on the further (second) component carrier based on indications from the access control layer of available resources on each of the available component carriers.)
the capability of the UE to support the cross-carrier hybrid automatic repeat request retransmissions (Martin, ¶0063: While the PHY (physical) layer is for the modulation, coding, resource mapping, amongst other things, the MAC (Media Access Control) layer deals with HARQ, error correction, priority handling, scheduling, mapping between logical channels and transport channels, amongst other things. And ¶0090: In another example, it could also involve the MAC module 811 detecting at least one of a NACK response and a lack of an ACK or NACK response for identifying an unsuccessful MAC transmission. Once N transmissions have been unsuccessfully attempted (with
N
≥
1
), the MAC module 811 may then inform the RLC module that the transmission of the PDU SN=3 has been unsuccessful and the RLC module 812 can then attempt a retransmission as discussed previously, by sending the PDU again along with a retransmission indicator. And ¶0081: For example, when the RLC layer triggers a selection of a different carrier (or increases the likelihood of the use of a different carrier) using a retransmission indicator, the relevant MAC layer may then select a different carrier which may involve maintaining a log or record of a carrier used for transmitting data relating to a PDU or may involve a scheduling strategy which prioritises or mandates scheduling of retransmissions on one of the carriers, for example the primary component carrier. [To clarify, since the number of NACKs at the MAC module, which deals with HARQ, is used to determine that the transmission has failed, and the MAC layer is selecting the carrier for retransmission, cross-carrier HARQ retransmission is supported without being explicitly stated.]), and
one or more conditions associated with communications by the UE satisfying a threshold condition for the cross-carrier hybrid automatic repeat request retransmissions (Martin, ¶0067: On the other hand, the method can move to step S603 where it is identified that transmission of data for the PDU has been unsuccessful. This can be identified based on for example a notification from the access control layer that attempts to transmit the first data have failed at least N times, with
N
≥
1
, or based on an expiry of a timer before a positive acknowledgement for the PDU is received (for example from the link control layer of the destination or of another party) or any other suitable condition or set of conditions. … For example, if the transmission failure has been identified by N NACK messages being received for the first data, at the access control layer, this could be an indication that the first CC is suffering from a poor quality link and it can thus be decided that it is more suitable to send the re-transmission data on a different CC.).
Yet, Martin does not explicitly teach transmit a capability message that indicates a capability of the UE to support cross-carrier hybrid automatic repeat request retransmissions, the capability message comprising an indication of a time period corresponding to preparation of a cross-carrier retransmission of a message,
However, in the related art, Wu teaches transmit a capability message that indicates a capability of the UE to support cross-carrier hybrid automatic repeat request retransmissions (Wu, ¶0132: In some implementations, the base station 106A can receive a UE capability IE (e.g., UE-NR-Capability IE or UE-MRDC-Capability IE) from the UE 102, another base station (e.g., base station 104) or a core network 110 (e.g., AMF 164). … In one implementation, the UE capability IE also include a cross-carrier scheduling capability indicating that the UE 102 supports cross-carrier scheduling on a SCell for a PCell. In another implementation, the UE capability IE also include a cross-carrier scheduling capability indicating that the UE 102 supports cross-carrier scheduling on a SCell for a PCell and on a SCell for a PSCell. And ¶0183: If the base station 106A enables cross-carrier scheduling for the UE, the base station 160A can transmit a DCI command on the SCell 126A for transmitting the second HARQ transmission of the second UL MAC PDU on the PCell 125A in a similar manner as described for events 344A and 346A. [Since the base station can enable cross-carrier scheduling for the UE for HARQ (re)transmission, an indication that the UE supports cross-carrier HARQ retransmission is implicit in the indication that the UE supports cross-carrier scheduling.]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the telecommunication devices and methods of Martin with the method for the communication between network nodes via multiple cells of Wu. The resulting combination would ensure a base station transmits data units or signaling to a UE on a PCell when an SCell is configured for cross-carrier scheduling (Wu, ¶0006).
Neither Martin nor Wu explicitly teaches the capability message comprising an indication of a time period corresponding to preparation of a cross-carrier retransmission of a message; retransmit the message based at least in part on the time period,
However, in the related art, Zou teaches the capability message comprising an indication of a time period corresponding to preparation of a cross-carrier retransmission of a message (Zou, ¶¶0029-0031: The number of HARQ processes for the grant-free transmission of the radio device may be computed in accordance with M=ceil((i+j)/p), wherein a time duration i may be equal to or greater than a processing time at the radio device for performing a HARQ retransmission, a time duration j may be equal to or greater than a processing time at the RAN for transmitting a HARQ feedback and a time duration p may be the grant-free scheduling interval. Each of the time durations may be in units of the TTI (e.g., the sTTI). The time duration i may be configured by the RAN or indicated by the radio device. The radio device may indicate to the RAN its capability as to the time duration i.);
retransmit the messagebased at least in part on the time period (Zou, ¶0082: Preferably, the HARQ feedback (e.g., a UL-grant) in the step 408 is sent according to the processing capability i of the UE. For example, after receiving a HARQ transmission at TTI n in the step 406, the RAN determines the next TTI n+k that is scheduled for grant-free UL transmission and associated with the proper HARQ PID. That is, the determined TTI n+k may be used for the step 410. The HARQ feedback is sent at the TTI n+k−i in the step 408, which enables the UE to use the next TTI for the HARQ retransmission in the step 410 within the processing capabilities of the UE.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Martin as modified by the teaching of Wu with the HARQ scheduling method of Zou. The resulting invention would provide for provide for increased flexibility in asynchronous HARQ (Zou, ¶0083).
Re. Claim 5, Martin in view of Wu and Zou teaches claim 1.
Yet, Martin does not explicitly teach wherein the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to: transmit, via the capability message, an indication of a processing time associated with retransmissions by the UE.
However, in the related art, Wu teaches wherein the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to: transmit, the capability message, In some implementations, the base station 106A can receive a UE capability IE (e.g., UE-NR-Capability IE or UE-MRDC-Capability IE) from the UE 102, another base station (e.g., base station 104) or a core network 110 (e.g., AMF 164).).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the telecommunication devices and methods of Martin with the method for the communication between network nodes via multiple cells of Wu. The resulting combination would ensure a base station transmits data units or signaling to a UE on a PCell when an SCell is configured for cross-carrier scheduling (Wu, ¶0006).
Neither Martin nor Wu explicitly teaches transmit, via the capability message, an indication of a processing time associated with retransmissions by the UE.
However, in the related art, Zou teaches transmit, an indication of a processing time associated with retransmissions by the UE (Zou, ¶¶0029-0031: The number of HARQ processes for the grant-free transmission of the radio device may be computed in accordance with M=ceil((i+j)/p), wherein a time duration i may be equal to or greater than a processing time at the radio device for performing a HARQ retransmission, a time duration j may be equal to or greater than a processing time at the RAN for transmitting a HARQ feedback and a time duration p may be the grant-free scheduling interval. Each of the time durations may be in units of the TTI (e.g., the sTTI). The time duration i may be configured by the RAN or indicated by the radio device. The radio device may indicate to the RAN its capability as to the time duration i.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Martin as modified by the teaching of Wu with the HARQ scheduling method of Zou. The resulting invention would provide for provide for increased flexibility in asynchronous HARQ (Zou, ¶0083).
Re. Claim 12, Martin in view of Wu and Zou teaches claim 1.
Martin further teaches wherein the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to: receive, based at least in part on the capability of the UE and the one or more conditions satisfying the threshold condition, a grant that indicates a transmission occasion for retransmitting the message on the second component carrier (Martin, ¶¶0074-0076: In mobile networks, uplink resources are generally allocated by network elements, and often by the base station. As a result, the terminal 710 may in some cases have to request additional resources for the retransmission, if for example it does not already have resources available in the carrier it intends using for the retransmission. … In some cases, the terminal 710 may request resources on a selected carrier (e.g. on the PCell) but in other cases it may not be able to indicate which resources to use and may instead be expected to use resources selected by the base station. In the latter case, the MAC module 711 may request resources to the base station 720 so as to be allocated resources on a different carrier. … For example, if the base station receives a request for resources for a retransmission of a PDU previously transmitted on an unlicensed-spectrum SCell, the base station may try to allocate resources on a licensed-spectrum SCell or PCell. [For clarity, the threshold condition is equivalent to the lack of available resources for the transmission, and the resources allocated by the base station are equivalent to the grant that indicates a transmission occasion.]),
wherein the message is retransmitted via the transmission occasion on the second component carrier based at least in part on the grant (Martin, ¶0076: The base station can then allocate resources accordingly. For example, if the base station receives a request for resources for a retransmission of a PDU previously transmitted on an unlicensed-spectrum SCell, the base station may try to allocate resources on a licensed-spectrum SCell or PCell. Accordingly, the MAC module 711 can then transmit MAC data for the re-transmitted RLC PDU using resources in a different frequency spectrum with a view to reducing the chances of experiencing poor link quality and/or interference again.).
Re. Claim 27, Martin teaches an apparatus for wireless communication at a network entity (Martin, ¶0059: The base station 404 comprises a transceiver unit 404a for transmission and reception of wireless signals and a controller unit 404b configured to control the base station 404.), comprising:
one or more processors (Martin, ¶0059: The controller unit 404b may comprise a processor unit which is suitably configured/programmed to provide the desired functionality described herein using conventional programming/configuration techniques for equipment in wireless telecommunications systems.);
one or more memories coupled with the one or more processors ([A suitably configured/ programmed processor is necessarily coupled to memory.]); and
instructions stored in the one or more memories and executable by the one or more processors (Martin, ¶0059: However, it will be appreciated that the functionality of these units can be provided in various different ways, for example using a single suitably programmed general purpose computer, or suitably configured application-specific integrated circuit(s)/circuitry or using a plurality of discrete circuitry/processing elements for providing different elements of the desired functionality.) to cause the apparatus to:
receive the message on a first component carrier (Martin, ¶0072: FIG. 7 illustrates an example where the RLC module 712 wishes to send four PDUs to the base station 720, i.e. to the RLC module 722 of the base station. … When the base station, in particular the RLC module 722 receives the PDU SN=4, it detects that PDUs SN=1, SN=2 and SN=4 have been received and thus that PDU SN=3 is missing.); and
receive a retransmission of the message on a second component carrier different than the first component carrier (Martin, ¶0073: The PDU SN=3 can then be transmitted again, but on a different carrier compared with the previous transmission, thereby increasing the likelihood of achieving a successful transmission of the PDU.)
based at least in part on an availability of resources for retransmitting the message (Martin, ¶0088: Generally, the causing of the PDU retransmission on another carrier is at least partly based on one or more available resources indications, separately per component carrier. … From one perspective, this can be viewed as the link control layer prioritising sending re-transmitted PDU s on the further (second) component carrier based on indications from the access control layer of available resources on each of the available component carriers.) and based at least in part on the time period,
the capability of the UE to support the cross-carrier hybrid automatic repeat request retransmissions (Martin, ¶0063: While the PHY (physical) layer is for the modulation, coding, resource mapping, amongst other things, the MAC (Media Access Control) layer deals with HARQ, error correction, priority handling, scheduling, mapping between logical channels and transport channels, amongst other things. And ¶0090: In another example, it could also involve the MAC module 811 detecting at least one of a NACK response and a lack of an ACK or NACK response for identifying an unsuccessful MAC transmission. Once N transmissions have been unsuccessfully attempted (with
N
≥
1
), the MAC module 811 may then inform the RLC module that the transmission of the PDU SN=3 has been unsuccessful and the RLC module 812 can then attempt a retransmission as discussed previously, by sending the PDU again along with a retransmission indicator. And ¶0081: For example, when the RLC layer triggers a selection of a different carrier (or increases the likelihood of the use of a different carrier) using a retransmission indicator, the relevant MAC layer may then select a different carrier which may involve maintaining a log or record of a carrier used for transmitting data relating to a PDU or may involve a scheduling strategy which prioritises or mandates scheduling of retransmissions on one of the carriers, for example the primary component carrier. [To clarify, since the number of NACKs at the MAC module, which deals with HARQ, is used to determine that the transmission has failed, and the MAC layer is selecting the carrier for retransmission, cross-carrier HARQ retransmission is supported without being explicitly stated.]), and
one or more conditions associated with communications between the network entity and the UE satisfying a threshold condition for the cross-carrier hybrid automatic repeat request retransmissions (Martin, ¶0067: On the other hand, the method can move to step S603 where it is identified that transmission of data for the PDU has been unsuccessful. This can be identified based on for example a notification from the access control layer that attempts to transmit the first data have failed at least N times, with
N
≥
1
, or based on an expiry of a timer before a positive acknowledgement for the PDU is received (for example from the link control layer of the destination or of another party) or any other suitable condition or set of conditions. … For example, if the transmission failure has been identified by N NACK messages being received for the first data, at the access control layer, this could be an indication that the first CC is suffering from a poor quality link and it can thus be decided that it is more suitable to send the re-transmission data on a different CC.).
Yet, Martin does not explicitly teach receive a capability message that indicates a capability of a user equipment (UE) to support cross-carrier hybrid automatic repeat request retransmissions.
However, in the related art, Wu teaches receive a capability message that indicates a capability of a user equipment (UE) to support cross-carrier hybrid automatic repeat request retransmissions (Wu, ¶0132: In some implementations, the base station 106A can receive a UE capability IE (e.g., UE-NR-Capability IE or UE-MRDC-Capability IE) from the UE 102, another base station (e.g., base station 104) or a core network 110 (e.g., AMF 164). … In one implementation, the UE capability IE also include a cross-carrier scheduling capability indicating that the UE 102 supports cross-carrier scheduling on a SCell for a PCell. In another implementation, the UE capability IE also include a cross-carrier scheduling capability indicating that the UE 102 supports cross-carrier scheduling on a SCell for a PCell and on a SCell for a PSCell. And ¶0183: If the base station 106A enables cross-carrier scheduling for the UE, the base station 160A can transmit a DCI command on the SCell 126A for transmitting the second HARQ transmission of the second UL MAC PDU on the PCell 125A in a similar manner as described for events 344A and 346A. [Since the base station can enable cross-carrier scheduling for the UE for HARQ (re)transmission, an indication that the UE supports cross-carrier HARQ retransmission is implicit in the indication that the UE supports cross-carrier scheduling.]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the telecommunication devices and methods of Martin with the method for the communication between network nodes via multiple cells of Wu. The resulting combination would ensure a base station transmits data units or signaling to a UE on a PCell when an SCell is configured for cross-carrier scheduling (Wu, ¶0006).
Neither Martin nor Wu explicitly teaches the capability message comprising an indication of a time period corresponding to preparation of across-carrier retransmission of a message; and receive a retransmission of the message based at least in part on the time period,
However, in the related art, Zou teaches the capability message comprising an indication of a time period corresponding to preparation of across-carrier retransmission of a message (Zou, ¶¶0029-0031: The number of HARQ processes for the grant-free transmission of the radio device may be computed in accordance with M=ceil((i+j)/p), wherein a time duration i may be equal to or greater than a processing time at the radio device for performing a HARQ retransmission, a time duration j may be equal to or greater than a processing time at the RAN for transmitting a HARQ feedback and a time duration p may be the grant-free scheduling interval. Each of the time durations may be in units of the TTI (e.g., the sTTI). The time duration i may be configured by the RAN or indicated by the radio device. The radio device may indicate to the RAN its capability as to the time duration i.);
receive a retransmission of the message based at least in part on the time period, Preferably, the HARQ feedback (e.g., a UL-grant) in the step 408 is sent according to the processing capability i of the UE. For example, after receiving a HARQ transmission at TTI n in the step 406, the RAN determines the next TTI n+k that is scheduled for grant-free UL transmission and associated with the proper HARQ PID. That is, the determined TTI n+k may be used for the step 410. The HARQ feedback is sent at the TTI n+k−i in the step 408, which enables the UE to use the next TTI for the HARQ retransmission in the step 410 within the processing capabilities of the UE.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Martin as modified by the teaching of Wu with the HARQ scheduling method of Zou. The resulting invention would provide for provide for increased flexibility in asynchronous HARQ (Zou, ¶0083).
Claims 2, 3, 4, and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Martin, Wu, and Zou as applied to claims 1 and 27 above, and further in view of Bagheri et al. (WO 2023/0199291), Bagheri hereinafter.
Re. Claim 2, Martin in view of Wu and Zou teaches claim 1.
Yet, none of Martin, Wu, or Zou explicitly teaches wherein the instructions are further executable by the processor to cause the apparatus to: receive a control message indicating a threshold uplink delay budget transmit a second message indicating whether a remaining uplink delay budget of the UE satisfies the threshold uplink delay budget based at least in part on comparing the remaining uplink delay budget with the threshold uplink delay budget.
However, in the related art, Bagheri teaches wherein the instructions are further executable by the processor to cause the apparatus to: receive a control message indicating a threshold uplink delay budget (Bagheri, ¶0029: According to a first embodiment of the disclosure, a first node, referred to elsewhere as a network node, schedules a transmission for a second node, referred to elsewhere as a user device, by signaling a control message, such as downlink control information (DCI). … The control message includes a first control field with a first value. The second node determines if the transmission is associated with a first QoS or with a second QoS, which are described below as being based on one or more of seven indications. … The QoS can be defined in terms of one or more of error rate, delay budget, content type, and frame/slice nature (e.g., I-frame/slice vs. P-frame/slice) for an ADU.); and
transmit a second message indicating whether a remaining uplink delay budget of the UE satisfies the threshold uplink delay budget (Bagheri, ¶0041: Alternatively, the UCI is sent on the resources assigned for the PUSCH, but no TBs are included in uplink shared channel (UL-SCH). The gNB is notified of no UL-SCH because the delay budget is exceeded. Alternatively, the UCI is sent on the PUSCH 516, and instead of the PUSCH TB, a predetermined, dummy, medium access control (MAC) control element (CE), or buffer status report (BSR) information is included in the PUSCH 516. In some examples, the MAC-CE can indicate that no UL-SCH (TB) are included. The MAC-CE may possibly indicate the cause for the no UL-SCH such as (a) delay budget exceeded, (b) no remaining delay budget, (c) value of delay budget etc.)
based at least in part on comparing the remaining uplink delay budget with the threshold uplink delay budget (Bagheri, ¶0041: The UE transmits the UCI on the PUCCH if the UE determines or reports the delay budget is exceeded before a time "T3" before the PUCCH resource. In some examples, the PUSCH is dropped but the PUCCH and/or UCI is postponed if "T3" is not sufficient or larger than a threshold. [In comparing the delay budget to “T3” which is compared to a threshold, the delay budget is implicitly compared to a threshold delay budget.]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further combine the invention of Martin as modified by the teaching of Wu and Zou with the quality of service determination for video frame transmission of Bagheri. The resulting invention would support wireless communication with a quality of service (QoS) for packets with different reliability and/or latency requirements (Bagheri, ¶0016).
Re. Claim 3, Martin in view of Wu, Zou, further in view of Bagheri teaches claim 2.
Martin further teaches retransmitting the message on the second component carrier (Martin, ¶¶0106-0107: identifying that transmission of data for the PDU has been unsuccessful; and upon identification that transmission of data for the PDU has been unsuccessful, the link control module re-transmitting the PDU and causing the re-transmitted PDU to be transmitted via second access control layer data using resources allocated within the second component carrier.)
Yet, none of Martin, Wu, or Zou explicitly teaches the retransmission is based at least in part on the second message indicating that the remaining uplink delay budget satisfies the threshold uplink delay budget.
However, in the related art, Bagheri teaches wherein the retransmitting is based at least in part on the second message indicating that the remaining uplink delay budget satisfies the threshold uplink delay budget (Bagheri, ¶0041: The UE drops or does not transmit the PUSCH if a delay budget associated with the PUSCH is exceeded. [Bagheri’s disclosure is directed towards the timing of both transmissions and retransmissions of control and data channels (¶0027), and it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to extend the explicit teaching for transmission to retransmission.]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further combine the invention of Martin as modified by the teaching of Wu and Zou with the quality of service determination for video frame transmission of Bagheri. The resulting invention would support wireless communication with a quality of service (QoS) for packets with different reliability and/or latency requirements (Bagheri, ¶0016).
Re. Claim 4, Martin in view of Wu and Zou teaches claim 1.
Yet, none of Martin, Wu, or Zou explicitly teaches wherein retransmitting the message is based at least in part on the time period being less than a threshold time period.
However, in the related art, Bagheri teaches wherein retransmitting the message is based at least in part on the time period being less than a threshold time period (Bagheri, ¶¶0040-0041: In related embodiments, if the remaining delay budget for an UL ADU, packet, TB, or HARQ process corresponding to the scheduled PUSCH is smaller than a threshold or if the delay budget is exceeded, the UE would not multiplex the UCI into the PUSCH. The threshold value utilized depends on a UCI multiplexing timeline, a PUSCH preparation time, etc. … In an example, if the delay budget is exceeded for an ADU or IP-packet, the UE would drop the corresponding PUSCH transmissions. [For clarity, in the case that the delay budget is smaller than a threshold determined by a PUSCH preparation time, the message would only be retransmitted if the preparation time is less than the threshold time period.]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further combine the invention of Martin as modified by the teaching of Wu, and Zou with the quality of service determination for video frame transmission of Bagheri. The resulting invention would support wireless communication with a quality of service (QoS) for packets with different reliability and/or latency requirements (Bagheri, ¶0016).
Re. Claim 28, Martin in view of Wu and Zou teaches claim 27,
wherein receiving the retransmission of the message on the second component carrier (Martin, ¶¶0106-0107: identifying that transmission of data for the PDU has been unsuccessful; and upon identification that transmission of data for the PDU has been unsuccessful, the link control module re-transmitting the PDU and causing the re-transmitted PDU to be transmitted via second access control layer data using resources allocated within the second component carrier.)
Yet, none of Martin, Wu, or Zou explicitly teaches wherein the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to: transmit a control message indicating a threshold uplink delay budget; and receive a second message indicating whether a remaining uplink delay budget of the UE satisfies the threshold uplink delay budget, wherein receiving the retransmission of the message on the second component carrier is based at least in part on the second message indicating that the remaining uplink delay budget satisfies the threshold uplink delay budget.
However, in the related art, Bagheri teaches wherein the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to: transmit a control message indicating a threshold uplink delay budget (Bagheri, ¶0029: According to a first embodiment of the disclosure, a first node, referred to elsewhere as a network node, schedules a transmission for a second node, referred to elsewhere as a user device, by signaling a control message, such as downlink control information (DCI). … The control message includes a first control field with a first value. The second node determines if the transmission is associated with a first QoS or with a second QoS, which are described below as being based on one or more of seven indications. … The QoS can be defined in terms of one or more of error rate, delay budget, content type, and frame/slice nature (e.g., I-frame/slice vs. P-frame/slice) for an ADU.); and
receive a second message indicating whether a remaining uplink delay budget of the UE satisfies the threshold uplink delay budget (Bagheri, ¶0041: Alternatively, the UCI is sent on the resources assigned for the PUSCH, but no TBs are included in uplink shared channel (UL-SCH). The gNB is notified of no UL-SCH because the delay budget is exceeded. Alternatively, the UCI is sent on the PUSCH 516, and instead of the PUSCH TB, a predetermined, dummy, medium access control (MAC) control element (CE), or buffer status report (BSR) information is included in the PUSCH 516. In some examples, the MAC-CE can indicate that no UL-SCH (TB) are included. The MAC-CE may possibly indicate the cause for the no UL-SCH such as (a) delay budget exceeded, (b) no remaining delay budget, (c) value of delay budget etc.),
wherein receiving the retransmission of the message on the second component carrier is based at least in part on the second message indicating that the remaining uplink delay budget satisfies the threshold uplink delay budget (Bagheri, ¶0041: The UE drops or does not transmit the PUSCH if a delay budget associated with the PUSCH is exceeded. [Bagheri’s disclosure is directed towards the timing of both transmissions and retransmissions of control and data channels (¶0027), and it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to extend the explicit teaching for transmission to retransmission.]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further combine the invention of Martin as modified by the teaching of Wu, and Zou with the quality of service determination for video frame transmission of Bagheri. The resulting invention would support wireless communication with a quality of service (QoS) for packets with different reliability and/or latency requirements (Bagheri, ¶0016).
Claims 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Martin, Wu, and Zou as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Stefanatos et al. (US 2023/0053730), Stefanatos hereinafter.
Re. Claim 6, Martin in view of Wu and Zou teaches claim 1,
Yet, none of Martin, Wu, or Zou explicitly teaches wherein the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to: transmit assistance information that indicates one or more parameters associated with the communications by the UE, wherein the one or more conditions are based at least in part on the one or more parameters indicated via the assistance information.
However, in the related art, Stefanatos teaches wherein the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to: transmit assistance information that indicates one or more parameters associated with the communications by the UE (Stefanatos, ¶0089: The carrier selection scheme may indicate a pattern and/or criteria for determining when to transmit the TB and/or any retransmissions of the TB over an unlicensed carrier and/or a licensed carrier. And ¶0103: Optionally, as shown by reference number 610, the first UE 120-1 may transmit an indication of the carrier selection scheme to the second UE 120-2. In some aspects, the indication is transmitted via SCI transmitted prior to the TB being initially transmitted to the second UE 120-2. For example, the first UE 120-1 may transmit SCI reserving resources on the licensed carrier (e.g., the second carrier) for a retransmission of the TB.),
wherein the one or more conditions are based at least in part on the one or more parameters indicated via the assistance information (Stefanatos, ¶0090: The carrier selection scheme may indicate a pattern and/or criteria for determining when to transmit the TB and/or any retransmissions of the TB over an unlicensed carrier and/or a licensed carrier. In some aspects, the first UE 120-1 may determine to transmit the TB according to a carrier selection scheme based at least in part on a priority (e.g., a QoS priority value or a different priority) associated with the TB satisfying a priority threshold, the TB being associated with a particular type of application or service (e.g., an application or service having high reliability requirements), a packet delay budget (PDB) associated with the TB satisfying a PDB threshold, a traffic load of the licensed carrier (such as a quantity of requests for retransmissions of a non-decoded TB) satisfying a load threshold, a traffic load of the unlicensed carrier (such as a channel busy ratio or a channel occupancy ratio) satisfying a load threshold, and/or a quantity of failed transmissions over the unlicensed carrier satisfying a failure threshold, among other examples.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further combine the invention of Martin as modified by the teachings of Wu and Zou with the invention for unlicensed-licensed cross-carrier retransmission of Stefanatos. The resulting invention would increase the reliability of transmissions and reduce transmission collisions on the licensed carrier by shifting lower priority messaging to the unlicensed carrier (Stefanatos ¶¶0085-0086).
Re. Claim 7, Martin in view of Wu, Zou, and Stefanatos teaches claim 6,
None of Martin, Wu, or Zou explicitly teaches wherein the one or more parameters comprise a processing time associated with retransmissions by the UE, a status associated with a hybrid automatic repeat request buffer at the UE, a quantity of cycles loaded at the UE, a quantity of processors loaded at the UE, or any combination thereof.
However, in the related art, Stefanatos teaches wherein the one or more parameters comprise a processing time associated with retransmissions by the UE (Stefanatos, ¶¶0112-0113: For example, the second UE 120-2 may not transmit the negative acknowledgment to the first UE 120-1, and the first UE 120-1 may determine to retransmit the TB to the second UE 120-2 based at least in part on not receiving a communication (e.g., an ACK or a NACK) from the second UE 120-2 prior to an expiration of a time period. In some aspects, the first UE 120-1 may determine that the initial transmission of the TB to the second UE 120-2 was unsuccessful based at least in part on a quantity of LBT failures and the retransmission may be a blind retransmission based at least in part on the quantity of LBT failures. [The expiration of a time period without receiving an ACK or NACK and the quantity of LBT failures are processes associated with retransmission.]),
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further combine the invention of Martin as modified by the teachings of Wu and Zou with the invention for unlicensed-licensed cross-carrier retransmission of Stefanatos. The resulting invention would increase the reliability of transmissions and reduce transmission collisions on the licensed carrier by shifting lower priority messaging to the unlicensed carrier (Stefanatos ¶0085-¶0086).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Martin, Wu, Zou, and Stefanatos as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Kim et al. (US 2022/0159568), Kim hereinafter.
Re. Claim 8, Martin in view of Wu, Zou, and Stefanatos teaches claim 6.
None of Martin, Wu, Zou, or Stefanatos explicitly teaches wherein the instructions to transmit the assistance information are executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to: transmit a radio resource control message that indicates the one or more parameters associated with the communications by the UE.
However, in the related art, Kim teaches wherein the instructions to transmit the assistance information are executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to: transmit a radio resource control message that indicates the one or more parameters associated with the communications by the UE (Kim, ¶0152: A UE may transmit, to a base station, parameters related to transmission and reception preferred by the UE for a specific purpose (e.g., for the purpose of reducing the power consumption of the UE) (or a series of information that may help the base station to set parameters preferred by the UE) by using higher layer signaling (e.g., [radio resource control] RRC or MAC CE) or L1 signaling (e.g., PUCCH).).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further combine the invention of Martin as modified by the teachings Wu, Zou, and Stefanatos with the method and apparatus for transmitting and receiving terminal support information in wireless communication system of Kim. The resulting combination would provide for reducing power consumption of a terminal in a wireless communication system (Kim, ¶0006).
Claims 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Martin, Wu, and Zou as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kim.
Re. Claim 9, Martin in view of Wu and Zou teaches claim 1,
Yet, none of Martin, Wu, or Zou explicitly teaches wherein the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to: transmit an uplink control information message or a medium access control- control element that indicates one or more parameters associated with the communications by the UE, wherein the one or more conditions are based at least in part on the one or more parameters indicated via the uplink control information message or the medium access control-control element.
However, in the related art, Kim teaches wherein the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to: transmit an uplink control information message or a medium access control-control element that indicates one or more parameters associated with the communications by the UE (Kim, ¶0152: A UE may transmit, to a base station, parameters related to transmission and reception preferred by the UE for a specific purpose (e.g., for the purpose of reducing the power consumption of the UE) (or a series of information that may help the base station to set parameters preferred by the UE) by using higher layer signaling (e.g., [radio resource control] RRC or MAC CE) or L1 signaling (e.g., PUCCH).),
wherein the one or more conditions are based at least in part on the one or more parameters indicated via the uplink control information message or the medium access control-control element (Kim, ¶¶0152-0177: The UE assistance information may include, for example, one or at least one combination of the following parameters. … DRX configuration information preferred by the UE For example, DRX related timer (onDuration-Timer, Inactivity Timer, HARQ-RTT-TimerDL, HARQ-RTT-TimerUL, RetransmissionTimerDL, RetransmissionTimerUL, DRX cycle and start offset) … Carrier aggregation related configuration information preferred by the UE For example, whether specific cell is activated or deactivated, number of configured cells or cell groups, cross-carrier scheduling or not, etc. … Configured grant (CG) related configuration information preferred by the UE For example, time and frequency resource allocation information, transmission periodicity, frequency hopping, DMRS configuration, MCS, resource block group (RBG) size, number of repeated transmissions, redundancy version (RV), precoding and number of layers, antenna port, frequency hopping offset, etc. … Scheduling delay related configuration information preferred by the UE For example, delay budget related parameter values (which may be used for DRX configuration purpose), downlink buffer size values, etc. And ¶0216: The UE may transmit a message requesting cross-carrier scheduling to the base station. For example, a message requesting the base station to configure cross-carrier scheduling may be transmitted as part of a "CA related configuration preferred by the UE" among the above-described UE assistance information. [Martin ¶0067 discloses number of received HARQ-NACK (e.g. number of retransmission), expiry of a timer (e.g. HARQ-RTT-TimerUL), or other suitable conditions (e.g. request for cross-carrier scheduling.]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further combine the invention of Martin as modified by the teachings Wu and Zou with the method and apparatus for transmitting and receiving terminal support information in wireless communication system of Kim. The resulting combination would provide for reducing power consumption of a terminal in a wireless communication system (Kim, ¶0006).
Re. Claim 10, Martin in view of Wu and Zou teaches claim 1,
Yet, Martin does not explicitly teach wherein the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to: transmit assistance information comprising a request to enable the cross-carrier hybrid automatic repeat request retransmissions based at least in part on a status associated with the one or more processors of the UE satisfying a threshold processor status, wherein retransmitting the message on the second component carrier is based at least in part on the request.
However, in the related art, Wu teaches wherein retransmitting the message on the second component carrier is based at least in part on the request (Wu, ¶0183: If the base station 106A enables cross-carrier scheduling for the UE 102, the base station 106A can transmit a DCI command on the SCell 126A for transmitting the second HARQ transmission of the second UL MAC PDU on the PCell 125A in a similar manner as described for events 344A and 346A.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the telecommunication devices and methods of Martin and Zou with the method for the communication between network nodes via multiple cells of Wu. The resulting combination would ensure a base station transmits data units or signaling to a UE on a PCell when an SCell is configured for cross-carrier scheduling (Wu, ¶0006).
None of Martin, Wu, or Zou explicitly teaches transmit assistance information comprising a request to enable the cross-carrier hybrid automatic repeat request retransmissions based at least in part on a status associated with the one or more processors of the UE satisfying a threshold processor status.
However, in the related art, Kim teaches transmit assistance information comprising a request to enable the cross-carrier hybrid automatic repeat request retransmissions (Kim, ¶0040: The UE assistance information may include cross-carrier scheduling information preferred by the UE, the processor may be further configured to receive cross-carrier scheduling configuration information determined by the base station, based on the UE assistance information, and the cross-carrier scheduling configuration information may configure at least one of a primary cell or an FR1 cell as a scheduling cell.)
based at least in part on a status associated with one or more processors of the UE satisfying a threshold processor status (Kim, ¶0227: For example, the processor 1003 may differently control the method of transmitting UE assistance information, the method of transmitting and receiving the downlink buffer state, and the data transmission and reception operation according thereto.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further combine the invention of Martin as modified by the teaching of Wu and Zou with the method and apparatus for transmitting and receiving terminal support information in wireless communication system of Kim. The resulting combination would provide for reducing power consumption of a terminal in a wireless communication system (Kim, ¶0006).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Martin, Wu, and Zou as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Bagheri and Kwon et al. (US 2012/0320853), Kwon hereinafter.
Re. Claim 11, Martin in view of Wu and Zou teaches claim 1.
Yet, none of Martin, Wu, or Zou explicitly teaches wherein the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to: compare an uplink packet data convergence protocol (PDCP) queuing delay of the UE to a threshold PDCP queuing delay; transmit uplink control information indicating that the uplink PDCP queuing delay satisfies the threshold PDCP queuing delay based at least in part on the comparing, the uplink control information being multiplexed with the message on the first component carrier; and receive, on the first component carrier, a grant that indicates a transmission occasion for retransmitting the message on the second component carrier, wherein retransmitting the message is based at least in part on the grant and the uplink PDCP queuing delay satisfying the threshold PDCP queuing delay.
However, in the related art, Bagheri teaches wherein the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to: compare an uplink packet data convergence protocol (PDCP) queuing delay of the UE to a threshold PDCP queuing delay (Bagheri, ¶0033: The UE can determine an updated QoS, such as one of the first QoS and the second QoS, based on the indicated QoS in the DL DCI 202 and the time of the scheduled PDSCH ('T') from the DL DCI. For instance, the UE determines a delay budget for the TB of the PDSCH or for the ADU associated with the PDSCH based on the indicated delay budget and the time 'T'.);
transmit uplink control information indicating that the uplink PDCP queuing delay satisfies the threshold PDCP queuing delay based at least in part on the comparing (Bagheri, ¶¶0030-0031: A first indication is a previous uplink transmission, such as a scheduling request (SR) or a logical channel identifier (LCID) in a buffer status report (BSR), that indicates whether the data pending in a buffer of the second node, such as a UE 104, is at least mostly related to an I-frame or a P-frame. … A fourth indication is an additional indication in the control message or in a second control message, such as a group-common DCI, that explicitly or implicitly indicates the QoS. In an example, the implicit or explicit indication is a percentage of a data volume of an ADU that is not yet transmitted or scheduled for transmission, which may include or may not include TBs requiring/pending retransmission.),
the uplink control information being multiplexed with the message on the first component carrier (Bagheri, ¶0039: The UE multiplexes a UCI in the UL transmission based on the determined beta offset. And ¶0039: Beta offset values are also defined for multiplexing configured grant (CG) uplink control information (UCI) in a CG-PUSCH.); and
receive, a grant that indicates a transmission occasion for retransmitting the message A seventh indication is an uplink QoS report and an uplink DCI transmitted on the downlink. The DCI control message schedules an UL transmission, and the UE selects the second value for a DCI field based on the first value indicated in the DCI field.),
wherein retransmitting the message is based at least in part on the grant and the uplink PDCP queuing delay satisfying the threshold PDCP queuing delay (Bagheri, ¶¶0040-0041: In related embodiments, if the remaining delay budget for an UL ADU, packet, TB, or HARQ process corresponding to the scheduled PUSCH is smaller than a threshold or if the delay budget is exceeded, the UE would not multiplex the UCI into the PUSCH. In an example, if the delay budget is exceeded for an ADU or IP-packet, the UE would drop the corresponding PUSCH transmissions.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further combine the invention of Martin as modified by the teaching of Wu and Zou with the quality of service determination for video frame transmission of Bagheri. The resulting invention would support wireless communication with a quality of service (QoS) for packets with different reliability and/or latency requirements (Bagheri, ¶0016).
Yet, none of Martin, Wu, Zou, or Bagheri explicitly teaches receive, on the first component carrier, a grant that indicates the second component carrier,
However, in the related art, Kwon teaches receive, on the first component carrier, a grant that indicates the second component carrier (Kwon, ¶0072: Thus, second control information 230 indicating the CC #B on which the retransmission data 240 is retransmitted may be transmitted to UE through the control channel (PDCCH) of another CC #D.),
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further combine the invention of Martin as modified by the teachings of Wu, Zou, and Bagheri with the method for transmitting data and control information in a wireless communication system, a sending device therefor and a receiving device therefor of Kwon. The resulting invention could guarantee received data performance and reliability (Kwon, ¶0082).
Claims 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Martin, Wu, and Zou as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kwon.
Re. Claim 13, Martin in view of Wu and Zou teaches claim 1.
Yet, none of Martin, Wu, or Zou explicitly teaches wherein the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to: receive a control message that configures a set of configured grant resources for hybrid automatic repeat request retransmissions on the first component carrier and the second component carrier, the set of configured grant resources comprising at least a first resource on the first component carrier for transmission of the message and a second resource on the second component carrier for at least one retransmission of the message, and wherein, to retransmit the message, the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to: retransmit the message via the second resource of the set of configured grant resources based at least in part on the capability of the UE and the one or more conditions satisfying the threshold condition.
However, in the related art, Kwon teaches wherein the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to: receive a control message that configures a set of configured grant resources for hybrid automatic repeat request retransmissions on the first component carrier and the second component carrier (Kwon, ¶¶0061-0066: Referring to FIG. 3, control information 300 about a CC that stores information related to an HARQ process includes HARQ information 310, resource allocation information 320, and CC information 330. The HARQ information 310 includes an HARQ Process Set (hereinafter referred to as an HPS), an HARQ Process Number (hereinafter referred to as an HPN), and a Redundancy Version (hereinafter referred to as an RV). … That is, the resource allocation information 320 includes information about resources allocated on the predetermined time when UE may use the resources. The resource allocation information 320 may mean information about a frequency band available in a relevant CC. Finally, the CC information 330 includes information that directly indicates a Carrier Indicator (CI) regarding that data is actually transmitted and retransmitted.),
the set of configured grant resources comprising at least a first resource on the first component carrier for transmission of the message (Kwon, ¶0080: As described already, CI=C and CI=B may be set so that the first CC CC #C on which data is primarily transmitted and the second CC CC #B on which data is retransmitted when the data is retransmitted are different from each other.) and
a second resource on the second component carrier for at least one retransmission of the message (Kwon, ¶0080: As described already, CI=C and CI=B may be set so that the first CC CC #C on which data is primarily transmitted and the second CC CC #B on which data is retransmitted when the data is retransmitted are different from each other.), and
wherein, to retransmit the message, the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to: retransmit the message via the second resource of the set of configured grant resources (Kwon, ¶0079: Accordingly, the data transmitted through the CC #C is retransmitted through the CC #B.)
based at least in part on the capability of the UE (Kwon, ¶0041: Hereinafter, in this specification, a transmission apparatus and a reception apparatus may be the UE 10 or the eNB 20. And ¶0084-¶0087: Referring to FIG. 5, the transmission apparatus 500 includes a scheduler 510, a multiplexer 520, and a soft HARQ block 530. … For example, the scheduler 510 may perform control so that new transmission (New Tx) is performed through a CC3 and retransmission (Re Tx) is performed through a CC2.) and
the one or more conditions satisfying the threshold condition (Kwon, ¶0088: Meanwhile, the scheduler 510 allocates a CC so that retransmission data according to an HARQ algorithm is transmitted through a CC different from a previous transmitted CC when at least one of conditions i) that the number of retransmissions exceeds a maximum number of retransmissions, ii) that link performance indices, such as reception power, interference power, and an SINR are a threshold or lower, iii) that the position of UE gets out of the service range of data through a CC, iv) that the amount of an available CC is a threshold or lower, and v) that a specific CC must be changed according to the requirements of a network system is satisfied or when a combination of the conditions is satisfied).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further combine the invention of Martin as modified by the teachings of Wu and Zou with the method for transmitting data and control information in a wireless communication system, a sending device therefor and a receiving device therefor of Kwon. The resulting invention could guarantee received data performance and reliability (Kwon, ¶0082).
Re. Claim 14, Martin in view of Wu and Zou teaches claim 1.
Yet, none of Martin, Wu, or Zou explicitly teaches wherein the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to: receive a control message that configures a semi-static switching pattern for switching between the first component carrier and the second component carrier for at least one retransmission, wherein retransmitting the message on the second component carrier is based at least in part on the semi-static switching pattern.
However, in the related art, Kwon teaches wherein the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to: receive a control message that configures a semi-static switching pattern (Kwon, ¶¶0066-0067: The resource allocation information 320 may mean information about a frequency band available in a relevant CC. Finally, the CC information 330 includes information that directly indicates a Carrier Indicator (CI) regarding that data is actually transmitted and retransmitted. Alternatively, the CC information 330 may include first ID information about a CC that indicates the use of another carrier when cross-carrier scheduling is used.)
for switching between the first component carrier and the second component carrier for at least one retransmission (Kwon, ¶0072: Referring back to FIG. 2, retransmission data 240 may be transmitted through a CC #B 240 different from the previously transmitted CC #C 220.),
wherein retransmitting the message on the second component carrier is based at least in part on the semi-static switching pattern (Kwon, ¶0074: In summary, first ID information to identify the first CC #C on which new data is transmitted and second ID information to identify the second CC #B on which retransmission data is transmitted can be differently set and transmitted.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further combine the invention of Martin as modified by the teachings of Wu and Zou with the method for transmitting data and control information in a wireless communication system, a sending device therefor and a receiving device therefor of Kwon. The resulting invention could guarantee received data performance and reliability (Kwon, ¶0082).
Re. Claim 15, Martin in view of Wu, Zou, and Kwon teaches claim 14.
None of Martin, Wu, or Zou explicitly teaches wherein the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to: receive, based at least in part on transmitting the message, downlink control information that indicates a request for a retransmission of the message, wherein retransmitting the message is based at least in part on the request, and wherein a carrier indication field in the downlink control information comprises information for the UE that is different than a carrier indication based at least in part on the semi-static switching pattern.
However, in the related art, Kwon teaches wherein the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to: receive, based at least in part on transmitting the message, downlink control information that indicates a request for a retransmission of the message (Kwon, ¶0070: If NACK is received from a reception apparatus or if ACK is not reached for a specific time, a wireless communication system retransmits data stored in a data buffer according to an HARQ algorithm. [HARQ-NACK indicates a request for retransmission.]),
wherein retransmitting the message is based at least in part on the request (Kwon, ¶0070: If NACK is received from a reception apparatus or if ACK is not reached for a specific time, a wireless communication system retransmits data stored in a data buffer according to an HARQ algorithm.), and
wherein a carrier indication field in the downlink control information comprises information for the UE that is different than a carrier indication based at least in part on the semi-static switching pattern (Kwon, ¶¶0066-0072: The resource allocation information 320 may mean information about a frequency band available in a relevant CC. Finally, the CC information 330 includes information that directly indicates a Carrier Indicator (CI) regarding that data is actually transmitted and retransmitted. Alternatively, the CC information 330 may include first ID information about a CC that indicates the use of another carrier when cross-carrier scheduling is used. … Thus, second control information 230 indicating the CC #B on which the retransmission data 240 is retransmitted may be transmitted to UE through the control channel (PDCCH) of another CC #D.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further combine the invention of Martin as modified by the teachings of Wu and Zou with the method for transmitting data and control information in a wireless communication system, a sending device therefor and a receiving device therefor of Kwon. The resulting invention could guarantee received data performance and reliability (Kwon, ¶0082).
Re. Claim 16, Martin in view of Wu and Zou teaches claim 1.
Yet, none of Martin, Wu, or Zou explicitly teaches wherein the one or more conditions comprise a packet error rate, a reference signal received power, or both measured by the UE.
However, in the related art, Kwon teaches wherein the one or more conditions comprise a packet error rate, a reference signal received power (Kwon, ¶0088: Meanwhile, the scheduler 510 allocates a CC so that retransmission data according to an HARQ algorithm is transmitted through a CC different from a previous transmitted CC when at least one of conditions i) that the number of retransmissions exceeds a maximum number of retransmissions, ii) that link performance indices, such as reception power, interference power, and an SINR are a threshold or lower, iii) that the position of UE gets out of the service range of data through a CC, iv) that the amount of an available CC is a threshold or lower, and v) that a specific CC must be changed according to the requirements of a network system is satisfied or when a combination of the conditions is satisfied.), or both measured by the UE.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further combine the invention of Martin as modified by the teachings of Wu and Zou with the method for transmitting data and control information in a wireless communication system, a sending device therefor and a receiving device therefor of Kwon. The resulting invention could guarantee received data performance and reliability (Kwon, ¶0082).
Claims 17 and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Martin in view of Wu further in view of Sekar.
Re. Claim 17, Martin teaches an apparatus for wireless communication at a user equipment (UE) (Martin, ¶0057: The terminal devices 406, 408 each comprise a transceiver unit 406a, 408a for transmission and reception of wireless signals and a controller unit 406b, 408b configured to control the operation of the respective devices 406, 408 in accordance with embodiments of the disclosure.), comprising:
one or more processors (Martin, ¶0057: The respective controller units 406b, 408b may each comprise a processor unit which is suitably configured/programmed to provide the desired functionality described herein using conventional programming/configuration techniques for equipment in wireless telecommunications systems.);
one or more memories coupled with the one or more processors ([A suitably configured/ programmed processor is necessarily coupled to memory.]); and
instructions stored in the one or more memories and executable by the one or more processors (Martin, ¶0057: However, it will be appreciated that for each terminal device the functionality of these units can be provided in various different ways, for example using a single suitably programmed general purpose computer, or suitably configured application-specific integrated circuit(s)/circuitry, or using a plurality of discrete circuitry/processing elements for providing different elements of the desired functionality.). Martin implicitly teaches (Martin, ¶¶0077-0078: Likewise, the teachings of the present disclosure may be applied to the transmission of PDU on the downlink. For example, it can be used for PDUs from the path from a base station to a terminal, such as from a base station or relay node to a relay node or terminal. … In this case, the principles discussed in respect of the uplink apply equally to the downlink. In particular, the RLC module of the base station may attempt to send one or more PDU s to the RLC module of the terminal and, if a PDU has to be retransmitted, the PDU module of the base station can send a retransmission indicator to the MAC module of the base station or the MAC module can indicate the resources available to the RLC per carrier.) to cause the apparatus to:
receive a message on a first component carrier (Martin, ¶¶0104-0105: transmitting a link control layer Packet Data Unit "PDU" from a link control module to an access control layer module for transmission, the link control layer being at a higher layer than the access control layer; transmitting first access control layer data using resources allocated within the first component carrier, wherein the first access control layer data corresponds to the PDU;); and
receive, , a retransmission of the message on a second component carrier different than the first component carrier (Martin, ¶¶0104-0105: transmitting a link control layer Packet Data Unit "PDU" from a link control module to an access control layer module for transmission, the link control layer being at a higher layer than the access control layer; transmitting first access control layer data using resources allocated within the first component carrier, wherein the first access control layer data corresponds to the PDU;),
wherein receiving the retransmission of the message on the second component carrier is based at least in part on the capability of the UE to support the cross-carrier hybrid automatic repeat request retransmissions (Martin, ¶0063: While the PHY (physical) layer is for the modulation, coding, resource mapping, amongst other things, the MAC (Media Access Control) layer deals with HARQ, error correction, priority handling, scheduling, mapping between logical channels and transport channels, amongst other things. And ¶0090: In another example, it could also involve the MAC module 811 detecting at least one of a NACK response and a lack of an ACK or NACK response for identifying an unsuccessful MAC transmission. Once N transmissions have been unsuccessfully attempted (with
N
≥
1
), the MAC module 811 may then inform the RLC module that the transmission of the PDU SN=3 has been unsuccessful and the RLC module 812 can then attempt a retransmission as discussed previously, by sending the PDU again along with a retransmission indicator. And ¶0081: For example, when the RLC layer triggers a selection of a different carrier (or increases the likelihood of the use of a different carrier) using a retransmission indicator, the relevant MAC layer may then select a different carrier which may involve maintaining a log or record of a carrier used for transmitting data relating to a PDU or may involve a scheduling strategy which prioritises or mandates scheduling of retransmissions on one of the carriers, for example the primary component carrier. [To clarify, since the number of NACKs at the MAC module, which deals with HARQ, is used to determine that the transmission has failed, and the MAC layer is selecting the carrier for retransmission, cross-carrier HARQ retransmission is supported without being explicitly stated.]) and
one or more conditions associated with communications by the UE satisfying a threshold condition for the cross-carrier hybrid automatic repeat request retransmissions (Martin, ¶0067: On the other hand, the method can move to step S603 where it is identified that transmission of data for the PDU has been unsuccessful. This can be identified based on for example a notification from the access control layer that attempts to transmit the first data have failed at least N times, with
N
≥
1
, or based on an expiry of a timer before a positive acknowledgement for the PDU is received (for example from the link control layer of the destination or of another party) or any other suitable condition or set of conditions. … For example, if the transmission failure has been identified by N NACK messages being received for the first data, at the access control layer, this could be an indication that the first CC is suffering from a poor quality link and it can thus be decided that it is more suitable to send the re-transmission data on a different CC.).
Yet, Martin does not explicitly teach transmit a capability message that indicates a capability of the UE to support cross-carrier hybrid automatic repeat request retransmissions.
However, in the related art, Wu teaches transmit a capability message that indicates a capability of the UE to support cross-carrier hybrid automatic repeat request retransmissions (Wu, ¶0132: In some implementations, the base station 106A can receive a UE capability IE (e.g., UE-NR-Capability IE or UE-MRDC-Capability IE) from the UE 102, another base station (e.g., base station 104) or a core network 110 (e.g., AMF 164). … In one implementation, the UE capability IE also include a cross-carrier scheduling capability indicating that the UE 102 supports cross-carrier scheduling on a SCell for a PCell. In another implementation, the UE capability IE also include a cross-carrier scheduling capability indicating that the UE 102 supports cross-carrier scheduling on a SCell for a PCell and on a SCell for a PSCell. And ¶0183: If the base station 106A enables cross-carrier scheduling for the UE, the base station 160A can transmit a DCI command on the SCell 126A for transmitting the second HARQ transmission of the second UL MAC PDU on the PCell 125A in a similar manner as described for events 344A and 346A. [Since the base station can enable cross-carrier scheduling for the UE for HARQ (re)transmission, an indication that the UE supports cross-carrier HARQ retransmission is implicit in the indication that the UE supports cross-carrier scheduling.]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the telecommunication devices and methods of Martin with the method for the communication between network nodes via multiple cells of Wu. The resulting combination would ensure a base station transmits data units or signaling to a UE on a PCell when an SCell is configured for cross-carrier scheduling (Wu, ¶0006).
Neither Martin nor Wu explicitly teaches transmit assistance information comprising a request to enable the cross-carrier hybrid automatic repeat request retransmissions based at least in part on a status associated with the one or more processors of the UE satisfying a threshold processor status.
However, in the related art, Sekar teaches transmit assistance information comprising a request to enable the cross-carrier hybrid automatic repeat request retransmissions (Sekar, ¶0046: In some examples (e.g., in a carrier aggregation configuration), a carrier may also have acquisition signaling or control signaling that coordinates operations for other carriers. And ¶0078: The UEs 115 may store the data transmission in a retransmission buffer, and transmit a feedback request to the receiver (e.g., other UEs 115 or base stations 105) in a subsequent data transmission based on a system memory utilization threshold for the retransmission buffer being satisfied due to storage of the data transmission. [Transmitting a feedback request corresponds to transmitting assistance information, ¶0077 discloses using HARQ feedback.])
based at least in part on a status associated with the one or more processors of the UE satisfying a threshold processor status (Sekar, ¶0078: The UEs 115 may store the data transmission in a retransmission buffer, and transmit a feedback request to the receiver (e.g., other UEs 115 or base stations 105) in a subsequent data transmission based on a system memory utilization threshold for the retransmission buffer being satisfied due to storage of the data transmission.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further combine the invention of Martin as modified by the teaching of Wu with the system memory flow management of Sekar. The resulting invention would provide for improvements to power consumption and promote more reliable and lower latency operations (Sekar, ¶0005).
Re. Claim 29, Martin teaches an apparatus for wireless communication at a network entity (Martin, ¶0059: The base station 404 comprises a transceiver unit 404a for transmission and reception of wireless signals and a controller unit 404b configured to control the base station 404.), comprising:
one or more processors (Martin, ¶0059: The controller unit 404b may comprise a processor unit which is suitably configured/programmed to provide the desired functionality described herein using conventional programming/configuration techniques for equipment in wireless telecommunications systems.);
one or more memories coupled with the one or more processors ([A suitably configured/ programmed processor is necessarily coupled to memory.]); and
instructions stored in the one or more memories and executable by the one or more processors (Martin, ¶0059: However, it will be appreciated that the functionality of these units can be provided in various different ways, for example using a single suitably programmed general purpose computer, or suitably configured application-specific integrated circuit(s)/circuitry or using a plurality of discrete circuitry/processing elements for providing different elements of the desired functionality.). Martin implicitly teaches (Martin, ¶0077-¶0078: Likewise, the teachings of the present disclosure may be applied to the transmission of PDU on the downlink. For example, it can be used for PDUs from the path from a base station to a terminal, such as from a base station or relay node to a relay node or terminal. … In this case, the principles discussed in respect of the uplink apply equally to the downlink. In particular, the RLC module of the base station may attempt to send one or more PDU s to the RLC module of the terminal and, if a PDU has to be retransmitted, the PDU module of the base station can send a retransmission indicator to the MAC module of the base station or the MAC module can indicate the resources available to the RLC per carrier.) to cause the apparatus to:
transmit a message on a first component carrier (Martin, ¶¶0104-0105: transmitting a link control layer Packet Data Unit "PDU" from a link control module to an access control layer module for transmission, the link control layer being at a higher layer than the access control layer; transmitting first access control layer data using resources allocated within the first component carrier, wherein the first access control layer data corresponds to the PDU;); and
retransmit, the message on a second component carrier different than the first component carrier (Martin, ¶¶0106-0107: identifying that transmission of data for the PDU has been unsuccessful; and upon identification that transmission of data for the PDU has been unsuccessful, the link control module re-transmitting the PDU and causing the re-transmitted PDU to be transmitted via second access control layer data using resources allocated within the second component carrier.),
wherein retransmitting the message on the second component carrier is based at least in part on the capability of the UE to support the cross-carrier hybrid automatic repeat request retransmissions (Martin, ¶0063: While the PHY (physical) layer is for the modulation, coding, resource mapping, amongst other things, the MAC (Media Access Control) layer deals with HARQ, error correction, priority handling, scheduling, mapping between logical channels and transport channels, amongst other things. And ¶0090: In another example, it could also involve the MAC module 811 detecting at least one of a NACK response and a lack of an ACK or NACK response for identifying an unsuccessful MAC transmission. Once N transmissions have been unsuccessfully attempted (with
N
≥
1
), the MAC module 811 may then inform the RLC module that the transmission of the PDU SN=3 has been unsuccessful and the RLC module 812 can then attempt a retransmission as discussed previously, by sending the PDU again along with a retransmission indicator. And ¶0081: For example, when the RLC layer triggers a selection of a different carrier (or increases the likelihood of the use of a different carrier) using a retransmission indicator, the relevant MAC layer may then select a different carrier which may involve maintaining a log or record of a carrier used for transmitting data relating to a PDU or may involve a scheduling strategy which prioritises or mandates scheduling of retransmissions on one of the carriers, for example the primary component carrier. [To clarify, since the number of NACKs at the MAC module, which deals with HARQ, is used to determine that the transmission has failed, and the MAC layer is selecting the carrier for retransmission, cross-carrier HARQ retransmission is supported without being explicitly stated.]) and
one or more conditions associated with communications between the network entity and the UE satisfying a threshold condition for the cross-carrier hybrid automatic repeat request retransmissions (Martin, ¶0067: On the other hand, the method can move to step S603 where it is identified that transmission of data for the PDU has been unsuccessful. This can be identified based on for example a notification from the access control layer that attempts to transmit the first data have failed at least N times, with
N
≥
1
, or based on an expiry of a timer before a positive acknowledgement for the PDU is received (for example from the link control layer of the destination or of another party) or any other suitable condition or set of conditions. … For example, if the transmission failure has been identified by N NACK messages being received for the first data, at the access control layer, this could be an indication that the first CC is suffering from a poor quality link and it can thus be decided that it is more suitable to send the re-transmission data on a different CC.).
Yet, Martin does not explicitly teach receive a capability message that indicates a capability of a user equipment (UE) to support cross-carrier hybrid automatic repeat request retransmissions.
However, in the related art, Wu teaches receive a capability message that indicates a capability of a user equipment (UE) to support cross-carrier hybrid automatic repeat request retransmissions (Wu, ¶0132: In some implementations, the base station 106A can receive a UE capability IE (e.g., UE-NR-Capability IE or UE-MRDC-Capability IE) from the UE 102, another base station (e.g., base station 104) or a core network 110 (e.g., AMF 164). … In one implementation, the UE capability IE also include a cross-carrier scheduling capability indicating that the UE 102 supports cross-carrier scheduling on a SCell for a PCell. In another implementation, the UE capability IE also include a cross-carrier scheduling capability indicating that the UE 102 supports cross-carrier scheduling on a SCell for a PCell and on a SCell for a PSCell. And ¶0183: If the base station 106A enables cross-carrier scheduling for the UE, the base station 160A can transmit a DCI command on the SCell 126A for transmitting the second HARQ transmission of the second UL MAC PDU on the PCell 125A in a similar manner as described for events 344A and 346A. [Since the base station can enable cross-carrier scheduling for the UE for HARQ (re)transmission, an indication that the UE supports cross-carrier HARQ retransmission is implicit in the indication that the UE supports cross-carrier scheduling.]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the telecommunication devices and methods of Martin with the method for the communication between network nodes via multiple cells of Wu. The resulting combination would ensure a base station transmits data units or signaling to a UE on a PCell when an SCell is configured for cross-carrier scheduling (Wu, ¶0006).
Neither Martin or Wu explicitly teaches receive assistance information comprising a request to enable the cross-carrier hybrid automatic repeat request retransmissions based at least in part on a status associated with the one or more processors of the UE satisfying a threshold processor status.
However, in the related art, Sekar teaches receive assistance information comprising a request to enable the cross-carrier hybrid automatic repeat request retransmissions (Sekar, ¶0046: In some examples (e.g., in a carrier aggregation configuration), a carrier may also have acquisition signaling or control signaling that coordinates operations for other carriers. And ¶0078: The UEs 115 may store the data transmission in a retransmission buffer, and transmit a feedback request to the receiver (e.g., other UEs 115 or base stations 105) in a subsequent data transmission based on a system memory utilization threshold for the retransmission buffer being satisfied due to storage of the data transmission. [Transmitting a feedback request corresponds to transmitting assistance information, ¶0077 discloses using HARQ feedback.])
based at least in part on a status associated with the one or more processors of the UE satisfying a threshold processor status (Sekar, ¶0078: The UEs 115 may store the data transmission in a retransmission buffer, and transmit a feedback request to the receiver (e.g., other UEs 115 or base stations 105) in a subsequent data transmission based on a system memory utilization threshold for the retransmission buffer being satisfied due to storage of the data transmission.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further combine the invention of Martin as modified by the teaching of Wu with the system memory flow management of Sekar. The resulting invention would provide for improvements to power consumption and promote more reliable and lower latency operations (Sekar, ¶0005).
Claims 18 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Martin in view of Wu and Sekar as applied to claims 17 and 29 above, and further in view of Zou.
Re. Claim 18, Martin in view of Wu and Sekar teaches claim 17.
None of Martin, Wu, or Sekar explicitly teaches wherein the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to: transmit, via the capability message, an indication of a processing time associated with retransmissions by the UE.
However, in the related art, Zou teaches wherein the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to: transmit, via the capability message, an indication of a processing time associated with retransmissions by the UE (Zou, ¶¶0029-0031: The number of HARQ processes for the grant-free transmission of the radio device may be computed in accordance with M=ceil((i+j)/p), wherein a time duration i may be equal to or greater than a processing time at the radio device for performing a HARQ retransmission, a time duration j may be equal to or greater than a processing time at the RAN for transmitting a HARQ feedback and a time duration p may be the grant-free scheduling interval. Each of the time durations may be in units of the TTI (e.g., the sTTI). The time duration i may be configured by the RAN or indicated by the radio device. The radio device may indicate to the RAN its capability as to the time duration i.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Martin as modified by the teaching of Wu and Sekar with the HARQ scheduling method of Zou. The resulting invention would provide for provide for increased flexibility in asynchronous HARQ (Zou, ¶0083).
Re. Claim 30, Martin in view of Wu and Sekar teaches claim 29.
None of Martin, Wu, or Sekar explicitly teaches wherein the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to: receive, via the capability message, an indication of a processing time associated with retransmissions by the UE.
However, in the related art, Zou teaches wherein the instructions are further executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to: receive, via the capability message, an indication of a processing time associated with retransmissions by the UE (Zou, ¶¶0029-0031: The number of HARQ processes for the grant-free transmission of the radio device may be computed in accordance with M=ceil((i+j)/p), wherein a time duration i may be equal to or greater than a processing time at the radio device for performing a HARQ retransmission, a time duration j may be equal to or greater than a processing time at the RAN for transmitting a HARQ feedback and a time duration p may be the grant-free scheduling interval. Each of the time durations may be in units of the TTI (e.g., the sTTI). The time duration i may be configured by the RAN or indicated by the radio device. The radio device may indicate to the RAN its capability as to the time duration i.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Martin as modified by the teaching of Wu and Sekar with the HARQ scheduling method of Zou. The resulting invention would provide for provide for increased flexibility in asynchronous HARQ (Zou, ¶0083).
Claims 19 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Martin in view of Wu and Sekar as applied to claim 17 above, further in view of Kim, and further in view of Stefanatos.
Re. Claim 19, Martin in view of Wu and Sekar teaches claim 17.
None of Martin, Wu, or Sekar explicitly teaches wherein the instructions to transmit the assistance information are executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to: transmit, via the assistance information, an indication of one or more parameters associated with communications by the UE.
However, in the related art, Kim teaches wherein the instructions to transmit the assistance information are executable by the one or more processors to cause the apparatus to: transmit, via the assistance information, an indication of one or more parameters associated with communications by the UE (Kim, ¶¶0038-0040: The UE assistance information may include information about a sleep mode time pattern preferred by the UE, and the processor may be further configured to receive sleep mode pattern configuration information of the UE determined by the base station based on the information about the sleep mode time pattern preferred by the UE. The UE assistance information may include downlink data buffer size information preferred by the UE, and the processor may be further configured to receive a threshold value determined by the base station based on the downlink data buffer size information preferred by the UE. The UE assistance information may include cross-carrier scheduling information preferred by the UE, the processor may be further configured to receive cross-carrier scheduling configuration information determined by the base station, based on the UE assistance information, and the cross-carrier scheduling configuration information may configure at least one of a primary cell or an FR1 cell as a scheduling cell.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further combine the invention of Martin as modified by the teachings Wu and Sekar with the method and apparatus for transmitting and receiving terminal support information in wireless communication system of Kim. The resulting combination would provide for reducing power consumption of a terminal in a wireless communication system (Kim, ¶0006).
None of Martin, Wu, Sekar, or Kim explicitly teaches wherein the one or more conditions are based at least in part on the one or more parameters indicated via the assistance information.
However, in the related art, Stefanatos teaches wherein the one or more conditions are based at least in part on the one or more parameters indicated via the assistance information (Stefanatos, ¶0090: The carrier selection scheme may indicate a pattern and/or criteria for determining when to transmit the TB and/or any retransmissions of the TB over an unlicensed carrier and/or a licensed carrier. In some aspects, the first UE 120-1 may determine to transmit the TB according to a carrier selection scheme based at least in part on a priority (e.g., a QoS priority value or a different priority) associated with the TB satisfying a priority threshold, the TB being associated with a particular type of application or service (e.g., an application or service having high reliability requirements), a packet delay budget (PDB) associated with the TB satisfying a PDB threshold, a traffic load of the licensed carrier (such as a quantity of requests for retransmissions of a non-decoded TB) satisfying a load threshold, a traffic load of the unlicensed carrier (such as a channel busy ratio or a channel occupancy ratio) satisfying a load threshold, and/or a quantity of failed transmissions over the unlicensed carrier satisfying a failure threshold, among other examples.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further combine the invention of Martin as modified by the teachings of Wu, Sekar, and Kim with the invention for unlicensed-licensed cross-carrier retransmission of Stefanatos. The resulting invention would increase the reliability of transmissions and reduce transmission collisions on the licensed carrier by shifting lower priority messaging to the unlicensed carrier (Stefanatos ¶¶0085-0086).
Re. Claim 21, Martin in view of Wu, Sekar, Kim, and Stefanatos teaches claim 19.
None of Martin, Wu, or Sekar explicitly teaches wherein the instructions to transmit the assistance information are executable by the processor to cause the apparatus to: transmit a radio resource control message that indicates the one or more parameters associated with the communications by the UE.
However, in the related art, Kim teaches wherein the instructions to transmit the assistance information are executable by the processor to cause the apparatus to: transmit a radio resource control message that indicates the one or more parameters associated with the communications by the UE (Kim, ¶0152: A UE may transmit, to a base station, parameters related to transmission and reception preferred by the UE for a specific purpose (e.g., for the purpose of reducing the power consumption of the UE) (or a series of information that may help the base station to set parameters preferred by the UE) by using higher layer signaling (e.g., [radio resource control] RRC or MAC CE) or L1 signaling (e.g., PUCCH).).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further combine the invention of Martin as modified by the teachings Wu, Sekar, and Stefanatos with the method and apparatus for transmitting and receiving terminal support information in wireless communication system of Kim. The resulting combination would provide for reducing power consumption of a terminal in a wireless communication system (Kim, ¶0006).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Martin in view of Wu, Sekar, Kim, and Stefanatos as applied to claim 19 above, and further in view of Zou.
Re. Claim 20, Martin in view of Wu, Sekar, Kim, and Stefanatos teaches claim 19.
None Martin, Wu, Sekar, Kim or Stefanatos explicitly teaches wherein the one or more parameters comprise a processing time associated with retransmissions by the UE, a status associated with a hybrid automatic repeat request buffer at the UE, a quantity of cycles loaded at the UE, a quantity of processors loaded at the UE, or any combination thereof.
However, in the related art, Zou teaches wherein the one or more parameters comprise a processing time associated with retransmissions by the UE (Zou, ¶¶0029-0031: The number of HARQ processes for the grant-free transmission of the radio device may be computed in accordance with M=ceil((i+j)/p), wherein a time duration i may be equal to or greater than a processing time at the radio device for performing a HARQ retransmission, a time duration j may be equal to or greater than a processing time at the RAN for transmitting a HARQ feedback and a time duration p may be the grant-free scheduling interval. Each of the time durations may be in units of the TTI (e.g., the sTTI). The time duration i may be configured by the RAN or indicated by the radio device. The radio device may indicate to the RAN its capability as to the time duration i.), a status associated with a hybrid automatic repeat request buffer at the UE, a quantity of cycles loaded at the UE, a quantity of processors loaded at the UE, or any combination thereof.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Martin as modified by the teaching of Wu, Sekar, Kim, and Stefanatos with the HARQ scheduling method of Zou. The resulting invention would provide for provide for increased flexibility in asynchronous HARQ (Zou, ¶0083).
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Martin in view of Wu and Sekar as applied to claim 17 above, and further in view of Kim.
Re. Claim 22, Martin in view of Wu and Sekar teaches claim 17.
None of Martin, Wu or Sekar explicitly teaches wherein the instructions are further executable by the processor to cause the apparatus to: transmit an uplink control information message or a medium access control-control element that indicates one or more parameters associated with the communications by the UE, wherein the one or more conditions are based at least in part on the one or more parameters indicated via the uplink control information message or the medium access control-control element.
However, in the related art, Kim teaches wherein the instructions are further executable by the processor to cause the apparatus to: transmit an uplink control information message or a medium access control-control element that indicates one or more parameters associated with the communications by the UE (Kim, ¶¶0152-0177: The UE assistance information may include, for example, one or at least one combination of the following parameters. … DRX configuration information preferred by the UE For example, DRX related timer (onDuration-Timer, Inactivity Timer, HARQ-RTT-TimerDL, HARQ-RTT-TimerUL, RetransmissionTimerDL, RetransmissionTimerUL, DRX cycle and start offset) … Carrier aggregation related configuration information preferred by the UE For example, whether specific cell is activated or deactivated, number of configured cells or cell groups, cross-carrier scheduling or not, etc. … Configured grant (CG) related configuration information preferred by the UE For example, time and frequency resource allocation information, transmission periodicity, frequency hopping, DMRS configuration, MCS, resource block group (RBG) size, number of repeated transmissions, redundancy version (RV), precoding and number of layers, antenna port, frequency hopping offset, etc. … Scheduling delay related configuration information preferred by the UE For example, delay budget related parameter values (which may be used for DRX configuration purpose), downlink buffer size values, etc. And ¶0216: The UE may transmit a message requesting cross-carrier scheduling to the base station. For example, a message requesting the base station to configure cross-carrier scheduling may be transmitted as part of a "CA related configuration preferred by the UE" among the above-described UE assistance information. [Martin ¶0067 discloses number of received HARQ-NACK (e.g. number of retransmission), expiry of a timer (e.g. HARQ-RTT-TimerUL), or other suitable conditions (e.g. request for cross-carrier scheduling.]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further combine the invention of Martin as modified by the teachings Wu and Sekar with the method and apparatus for transmitting and receiving terminal support information in wireless communication system of Kim. The resulting combination would provide for reducing power consumption of a terminal in a wireless communication system (Kim, ¶0006).
Claims 24-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Martin in view of Wu and Sekar as applied to claim 17 above, and further in view of Kwon.
Re. Claim 24, Martin in view of Wu, and Sekar teaches claim 17.
None of Martin, Wu, or Sekar explicitly teaches wherein the instructions are further executable by the processor to cause the apparatus to: receive a grant that schedules a transmission occasion on the second component carrier for the retransmission of the message based at least in part on the one or more conditions satisfying the threshold condition, wherein the retransmission of the message is received via the transmission occasion on the second component carrier based at least in part on the grant.
However, in the related art, Kwon teaches wherein the instructions are further executable by the processor to cause the apparatus to: receive a grant that schedules a transmission occasion on the second component carrier (Kwon, ¶¶0061-0066: Referring to FIG. 3, control information 300 about a CC that stores information related to an HARQ process includes HARQ information 310, resource allocation information 320, and CC information 330. The HARQ information 310 includes an HARQ Process Set (hereinafter referred to as an HPS), an HARQ Process Number (hereinafter referred to as an HPN), and a Redundancy Version (hereinafter referred to as an RV). … That is, the resource allocation information 320 includes information about resources allocated on the predetermined time when UE may use the resources. The resource allocation information 320 may mean information about a frequency band available in a relevant CC. Finally, the CC information 330 includes information that directly indicates a Carrier Indicator (CI) regarding that data is actually transmitted and retransmitted.)
for the retransmission of the message based at least in part on the one or more conditions satisfying the threshold condition (Kwon, ¶0088: Meanwhile, the scheduler 510 allocates a CC so that retransmission data according to an HARQ algorithm is transmitted through a CC different from a previous transmitted CC when at least one of conditions i) that the number of retransmissions exceeds a maximum number of retransmissions, ii) that link performance indices, such as reception power, interference power, and an SINR are a threshold or lower, iii) that the position of UE gets out of the service range of data through a CC, iv) that the amount of an available CC is a threshold or lower, and v) that a specific CC must be changed according to the requirements of a network system is satisfied or when a combination of the conditions is satisfied),
wherein the retransmission of the message is received via the transmission occasion on the second component carrier based at least in part on the grant (Kwon, ¶0168: After receiving the scheduling control information, a CC on which data will be transmitted is checked by checking a CI within the control information (S1020). For example, from FIG. 2, it can be seen that the CC information 330 is CC at the time of new transmission (New Tx) and the CC information 330 is CI=B at the time of retransmission (Re Tx) and thus CCs on which data is transmitted are different from each other at the time of the new transmission and the retransmission.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further combine the invention of Martin as modified by the teachings of Wu, and Sekar with the method for transmitting data and control information in a wireless communication system, a sending device therefor and a receiving device therefor of Kwon. The resulting invention could guarantee received data performance and reliability (Kwon, ¶0082).
Re. Claim 25, Martin in view of Wu and Sekar teaches claim 17.
None of Martin, Wu, or Sekar explicitly teaches wherein the instructions are further executable by the processor to cause the apparatus to: receive a control message that configures a semi-static switching pattern for switching between the first component carrier and the second component carrier for at least one retransmission, wherein receiving the retransmission of the message on the second component carrier is based at least in part on the semi-static switching pattern.
However, in the related art, Kwon teaches wherein the instructions are further executable by the processor to cause the apparatus to: receive a control message that configures a semi-static switching pattern (Kwon, ¶¶0066-0067: The resource allocation information 320 may mean information about a frequency band available in a relevant CC. Finally, the CC information 330 includes information that directly indicates a Carrier Indicator (CI) regarding that data is actually transmitted and retransmitted. Alternatively, the CC information 330 may include first ID information about a CC that indicates the use of another carrier when cross-carrier scheduling is used. And ¶0168: For example, from FIG. 2, it can be seen that the CC information 330 is [CI=C] at the time of new transmission (New Tx) and the CC information 330 is CI=B at the time of retransmission (Re Tx) and thus CCs on which data is transmitted are different from each other at the time of the new transmission and the retransmission.)
for switching between the first component carrier and the second component carrier for at least one retransmission (Kwon, ¶0072: Referring back to FIG. 2, retransmission data 240 may be transmitted through a CC #B 240 different from the previously transmitted CC #C 220.),
wherein receiving the retransmission of the message on the second component carrier is based at least in part on the semi-static switching pattern (Kwon, ¶0074: In summary, first ID information to identify the first CC #C on which new data is transmitted and second ID information to identify the second CC #B on which retransmission data is transmitted can be differently set and transmitted. And ¶0169: Data is received through the relevant CC based on the CC information 330 checked at step S1020 (S1050).).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further combine the invention of Martin as modified by the teachings of Wu, and Sekar with the method for transmitting data and control information in a wireless communication system, a sending device therefor and a receiving device therefor of Kwon. The resulting invention could guarantee received data performance and reliability (Kwon, ¶0082).
Re. Claim 26, Martin in view of Wu, Sekar, and Kwon teaches claim 25.
None of Martin, Wu, or Sekar explicitly teaches wherein the instructions are further executable by the processor to cause the apparatus to: receive, based at least in part on the message, downlink control information that indicates the retransmission of the message, wherein receiving the retransmission of the message is based at least in part on the downlink control information, and wherein a carrier indication field in the downlink control information comprises information for the UE that is different than a carrier indication based at least in part on the semi-static switching pattern.
However, in the related art, Kwon teaches wherein the instructions are further executable by the processor to cause the apparatus to: receive, based at least in part on the message, downlink control information that indicates the retransmission of the message (Kwon, ¶0168: Referring to FIG. 10, the reception apparatus 800, 900 first receives scheduling control information (S1010). After receiving the scheduling control information, a CC on which data will be transmitted is checked by checking a CI within the control information (S1020). For example, from FIG. 2, it can be seen that the CC information 330 is [CI=C] at the time of new transmission (New Tx) and the CC information 330 is CI=B at the time of retransmission (Re Tx) and thus CCs on which data is transmitted are different from each other at the time of the new transmission and the retransmission. Accordingly, the reception apparatus 800, 900 can identify CCs according to the initial transmission and the retransmission based on the scheduling control information.),
wherein receiving the retransmission of the message is based at least in part on the downlink control information (Kwon, ¶¶0169-0170: After checking information about the CC, information about resources allocated within the relevant CC is checked (S1030). Next, pieces of HARQ-related information including an HPN and an HPS are checked (S1040). Data is received through the relevant CC based on the CC information 330 checked at step S1020 (S1050).), and
wherein a carrier indication field in the downlink control information comprises information for the UE that is different than a carrier indication based at least in part on the semi-static switching pattern (Kwon, ¶¶0167-0168: After receiving the scheduling control information, a CC on which data will be transmitted is checked by checking CI within the control information (S1020). … For example, from FIG. 2, it can be seen that the CC information 330 is [CI=C] at the time of new transmission (New Tx) and the CC information 330 is CI=B at the time of retransmission (Re Tx) and thus CCs on which data is transmitted are different from each other at the time of the new transmission and the retransmission.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further combine the invention of Martin as modified by the teachings of Wu and Sekar with the method for transmitting data and control information in a wireless communication system, a sending device therefor and a receiving device therefor of Kwon. The resulting invention could guarantee received data performance and reliability (Kwon, ¶0082).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CASON H MORSE whose telephone number is (571)270-5235. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30-6:00 Mon.-Thurs., Fri. varies.
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, Rebecca Song can be reached at (571) 270-3667. 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.
/C.H.M./Examiner, Art Unit 2417
/REBECCA E SONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2417