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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after allowance or after an Office action under Ex Parte Quayle, 25 USPQ 74, 453 O.G. 213 (Comm'r Pat. 1935). Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, prosecution in this application has been reopened pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 20 July 2026 has been entered.
Introduction
This is a non-final office action in response to remarks filed on 20 July 2026. Claims 1, 7-8, 15-16, 22-23, and 30 are amended. No claims are canceled or added. Claims 1-30 are pending.
Claim Interpretation
The claims have been considered according to the latest Patent Eligibility Guidelines and are considered eligible.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 15 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sengupta et al. (U.S. Patent Publication 2021/0376966).
Regarding claim 15, the claim contains the limitations, substantially as claimed as described in claim 1 below; examiner notes that the apparatus of claim 15 is described from the opposite perspective and does not include claim 1’s more-than-one-NACK-only-mode. Sengupta disclosed, as recited in claim 15: An apparatus for wireless communication at a network node (see Sengupta [0228], Fig. 13: base station), comprising:
one or more memories (see Sengupta [0228], Fig. 13 #1330 memory); and
one or more processors coupled to the one or more memories (see Sengupta [0228], Fig. 13 #1340 processor, #1330 memory), the one or more processors individually or collectively configured to:
transmit, to a user equipment (UE), an indication (see Sengupta [0134]: “For example, base station 105-b may identify or otherwise select the set of resources 315 and configure the UEs with the set of resources 315 via a configuration message (e.g., a higher layer signal, such as an RRC signal, MCCH signal, etc.). Each UE may then determine that a feedback indication (e.g., a NACK indication) is to be provided to base station 105-b in response to a multicast communication, and then select a subset of resources from the configured set of resources 315 based on its channel metric.”) of one of: a quantity of physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) resources in a PUCCH slot for negative acknowledgement (NACK)-only-based multicast feedback, or a quantity of transport blocks (TBs) with the NACK-only-based multicast feedback to be multiplexed in the PUCCH slot (see Sengupta [0115]: base station identifies a set of multicast feedback resources associated with a variety or thresholds and channel metrics; [0120]: an amount of PUCCH resources is used to limit the payload size of feedback message, e.g., [0121]: multicast NACK-only feedback; [0120]: number of multicast TBs in a given uplink control channel occasion are also used in the determination about the feedback message); and
receive, from the UE, the NACK-only-based multicast feedback (see Sengupta [0110]: “…The UEs 115 in this scenario may be configured for a NACK-based or an ACK/NACK-based approach…In the NACK-based approach, only UEs 115 that are unable to successfully receive and decode the multicast communications 210 provide the multicast feedback message 220 feedback information (e.g., NACK indication) to base station 105-a. In the example of FIG. 2, second UE 115-b may not successfully receive and decode the multicast communication 210, and may transmit multicast feedback 220 that indicates the NACK, while the third UE 115-a may successfully decode the multicast communication 210 and thus not transmit a corresponding feedback indication.”) based at least in part on the quantity of PUCCH resources (see Sengupta [0115]: base station identifies a set of multicast feedback resources associated with a variety or thresholds and channel metrics; [0120]: an amount of PUCCH resources is used to limit the payload size of feedback message, e.g., [0121]: multicast NACK-only feedback | [0107]: configuring multicast feedback resources based on a (sub)set of resources based on UE channel metrics), wherein the quantity of PUCCH resources is based at least in part on the indication (see Sengupta [0134]: “For example, base station 105-b may identify or otherwise select the set of resources 315 and configure the UEs with the set of resources 315 via a configuration message (e.g., a higher layer signal, such as an RRC signal, MCCH signal, etc.). Each UE may then determine that a feedback indication (e.g., a NACK indication) is to be provided to base station 105-b in response to a multicast communication, and then select a subset of resources from the configured set of resources 315 based on its channel metric.”).
Regarding claim 30, the claim contains the limitations, substantially as claimed, as described in claim 15 above; examiner notes that claim 30 is the method corresponding to the apparatus of claim 15. Sengupta-Yin disclosed, as recited in claim 30: A method of wireless communication performed by a network node (see Sengupta [0228], Fig. 13: base station; Fig. 5: method), comprising:
transmitting, to a user equipment (UE), an indication (see Sengupta [0134]: “For example, base station 105-b may identify or otherwise select the set of resources 315 and configure the UEs with the set of resources 315 via a configuration message (e.g., a higher layer signal, such as an RRC signal, MCCH signal, etc.). Each UE may then determine that a feedback indication (e.g., a NACK indication) is to be provided to base station 105-b in response to a multicast communication, and then select a subset of resources from the configured set of resources 315 based on its channel metric.”) of one of: a quantity of physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) resources in a PUCCH slot for negative acknowledgement (NACK)-only-based multicast feedback, or a quantity of transport blocks (TBs) with the NACK-only-based multicast feedback to be multiplexed in the PUCCH slot (see Sengupta [0115]: base station identifies a set of multicast feedback resources associated with a variety or thresholds and channel metrics; [0120]: an amount of PUCCH resources is used to limit the payload size of feedback message, e.g., [0121]: multicast NACK-only feedback; [0120]: number of multicast TBs in a given uplink control channel occasion are also used in the determination about the feedback message); and
receiving, from the UE, the NACK-only-based multicast feedback (see Sengupta [0110]: “…The UEs 115 in this scenario may be configured for a NACK-based or an ACK/NACK-based approach…In the NACK-based approach, only UEs 115 that are unable to successfully receive and decode the multicast communications 210 provide the multicast feedback message 220 feedback information (e.g., NACK indication) to base station 105-a. In the example of FIG. 2, second UE 115-b may not successfully receive and decode the multicast communication 210, and may transmit multicast feedback 220 that indicates the NACK, while the third UE 115-a may successfully decode the multicast communication 210 and thus not transmit a corresponding feedback indication.”) based at least in part on the quantity of PUCCH resources (see Sengupta [0115]: base station identifies a set of multicast feedback resources associated with a variety or thresholds and channel metrics; [0120]: an amount of PUCCH resources is used to limit the payload size of feedback message, e.g., [0121]: multicast NACK-only feedback | [0107]: configuring multicast feedback resources based on a (sub)set of resources based on UE channel metrics), wherein the quantity of PUCCH resources is based at least in part on the indication (see Sengupta [0134]: “For example, base station 105-b may identify or otherwise select the set of resources 315 and configure the UEs with the set of resources 315 via a configuration message (e.g., a higher layer signal, such as an RRC signal, MCCH signal, etc.). Each UE may then determine that a feedback indication (e.g., a NACK indication) is to be provided to base station 105-b in response to a multicast communication, and then select a subset of resources from the configured set of resources 315 based on its channel metric.”).
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.
Claims 1-5, 9, 12, 14, 16-20, 24, 27, 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sengupta et al. (U.S. Patent Publication 2021/0376966) in view of Lee et al. (U.S. Patent Publication 2023/0345481, U.S. Provisional Application 63/334,057).
Examiner notes that the provisional application citations for Lee et al. indicate support for the quoted language taken from the US Patent Publication.
Regarding claim 1, Sengupta disclosed an apparatus for wireless communication at a user equipment (UE) (see Sengupta Fig. 9, [0188]: UE), comprising:
one or more memories (see Sengupta [0188], Fig. 9 #930 memory); and
one or more processors coupled to the one or more memories (see Sengupta [0188], Fig. 9 #940 processor, #930 memory), the one or more processors individually or collectively configured to:
receive, from a network node, an indication (see Sengupta [0134]: “For example, base station 105-b may identify or otherwise select the set of resources 315 and configure the UEs with the set of resources 315 via a configuration message (e.g., a higher layer signal, such as an RRC signal, MCCH signal, etc.). Each UE may then determine that a feedback indication (e.g., a NACK indication) is to be provided to base station 105-b in response to a multicast communication, and then select a subset of resources from the configured set of resources 315 based on its channel metric.”) of one of:
a quantity of physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) resources in a PUCCH slot for negative acknowledgement (NACK)-only-based multicast feedback, or
a quantity of transport blocks (TBs) with the NACK-only-based multicast feedback to be multiplexed in the PUCCH slot (see Sengupta [0115]: base station identifies a set of multicast feedback resources associated with a variety or thresholds and channel metrics; [0120]: an amount of PUCCH resources is used to limit the payload size of feedback message, e.g., [0121]: multicast NACK-only feedback; [0120]: number of multicast TBs in a given uplink control channel occasion are also used in the determination about the feedback message),
wherein a more-than-one-NACK-only-mode is configured for the UE (see Lee combination below);
determine, based at least in part on the indication, the quantity of PUCCH resources in the PUCCH slot for the NACK-only-based multicast feedback (see Sengupta [0115]: base station identifies a set of multicast feedback resources associated with a variety or thresholds and channel metrics; [0120]: an amount of PUCCH resources is used to limit the payload size of feedback message, e.g., [0121]: multicast NACK-only feedback | [0107]: configuring multicast feedback resources based on a (sub)set of resources based on UE channel metrics);
transmit, to the network node, the NACK-only-based multicast feedback using the quantity of PUCCH resources (see Sengupta [0110]: “…The UEs 115 in this scenario may be configured for a NACK-based or an ACK/NACK-based approach…In the NACK-based approach, only UEs 115 that are unable to successfully receive and decode the multicast communications 210 provide the multicast feedback message 220 feedback information (e.g., NACK indication) to base station 105-a. In the example of FIG. 2, second UE 115-b may not successfully receive and decode the multicast communication 210, and may transmit multicast feedback 220 that indicates the NACK, while the third UE 115-a may successfully decode the multicast communication 210 and thus not transmit a corresponding feedback indication.”; [0115]: base station identifies a set of multicast feedback resources associated with a variety or thresholds and channel metrics; [0120]: an amount of PUCCH resources is used to limit the payload size of feedback message, e.g., [0121]: multicast NACK-only feedback | [0107]: “…a UE 115 may multiplex the unicast feedback and multicast feedback and transmit the multiplexed feedback to the base station 105…”).
Although Sengupta disclosed multiplexing NACK information (see Sengupta [0127]), Sengupta did not explicitly disclose “wherein a more-than-one-NACK-only-mode is configured for the UE”. However in a related art, Lee disclosed:
[0134], provisional p. 79 next to last paragraph: “For a second HARQ-ACK reporting mode, when the number of HARQ-ACK information bits is 2, 3, or 4, a terminal may be indicated by a higher layer parameter indicating a mode which supports more than one NACK only feedbacks on the same PUCCH (e.g., moreThanOneNackOnly-Mode)…”; [0137], provisional p. 81 “Detailed Description of the Invention” first paragraph: “In the present disclosure, a case is assumed that one PUCCH resource is selected and transmitted among a set of a plurality of PUCCH resources to multiplex a plurality of NACK only-based HARQ-ACK (e.g., a moreThanOneNackOnly-Mode parameter indicates mode 2)…”
[0180], provisional p. 83 second bullet: “Additionally or alternatively, when a PUCCH resource selected for N NACK-only-based HARQ-ACK bits with the same priority is positioned in the same slot as PUSCH transmission, a terminal may re-select (N-K) NACK-only-based HARQ-ACK bits among N NACK-only-based HARQ-ACK bits and re-select a PUCCH resource to multiplex them. If there is no other UCI or PUSCH transmission in a slot of a reselected PUCCH resource, a terminal may multiplex and transmit (N-K) NACK-only-based HARQ-ACK bits through a reselected PUCCH resource. A terminal may determine a lowest K value that a PUCCH resource reselected for K=1, 2, 3, ... and other UCI or PUSCH transmission are not overlapped in the same slot. A terminal may transmit HARQ-ACK information multiplexing (N-K) NACK-only-based HARQ-ACK bits through a PUCCH resource reselected for a determined K value.”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Sengupta and Lee to further clarify NACK-only modes. Incorporating Lee’s teachings regarding configuring a more-than-one-NACK-only-mode into Sengupta’s system that multiplexes NACKs would accommodate increases in data traffic and number of devices while providing very low end-to-end latency and high energy efficiency (see Lee [0004]; provisional p. 2 “Disclosure of the Invention” second paragraph) and also resolve the issue about whether and how to multiplex NACK only-based HARQ-ACK and other uplink transmissions (see Lee [0136], provisional p. 81 last paragraph before “2. Detailed Description of the Invention”).
Regarding claim 2, Sengupta-Lee disclosed the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the more-than-one-NACK-only-mode, configured for the UE, comprises a radio resource control (RRC) parameter (see Lee [0163], provisional p. 81 last paragraph: “In the present embodiment, a case is assumed that it is configured by RRC to select one PUCCH resource according to a value of HARQ-ACK bits for a plurality of NACK-only-based HARQ-ACK among multiple PUCCH resources…”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Sengupta and Lee to further clarify NACK-only modes. Incorporating Lee’s teachings regarding configuring a more-than-one-NACK-only-mode into Sengupta’s system that multiplexes NACKs would accommodate increases in data traffic and number of devices while providing very low end-to-end latency and high energy efficiency (see Lee [0004]; provisional p. 2 “Disclosure of the Invention” second paragraph) and also resolve the issue about whether and how to multiplex NACK only-based HARQ-ACK and other uplink transmissions (see Lee [0136], provisional p. 81 last paragraph before “2. Detailed Description of the Invention”).
Regarding claim 3, Sengupta-Lee disclosed the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the quantity of PUCCH resources is one based at least in part on the quantity of TBs being less than or equal to a predefined value (see Sengupta [0120]: “In some cases, a payload size that is able to be transmitted in the multiplexed feedback message 215 may be limited based on an amount of PUCCH resources available for the feedback transmission…In some examples, one or more threshold values may be provided or determined for the multiplexed feedback message 215 (e.g., provided with configuration information or determined based on an amount of resources of an uplink grant)…if the multiplexed feedback message 215 has a payload that is less than the second threshold value (e.g., if UCI payload <T.sub.2), the first UE 115-a may transmit all multicast feedback (e.g., 1+log.sub.2 M bits). In some cases, such determinations may be based on a number of multicast TBs that have feedback in a given uplink control channel occasion.” | examiner notes that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the relationship of a particular number of resources, e.g., “one PUCCH resource”, to the number of TBs, e.g., “less than or equal to a predefined value”, is a matter of implementation choice).
Regarding claim 4, Sengupta-Lee disclosed the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the quantity of PUCCH resources is more than one based at least in part on the quantity of TBs being larger than a predefined value (see Sengupta [0120]: “In some cases, a payload size that is able to be transmitted in the multiplexed feedback message 215 may be limited based on an amount of PUCCH resources available for the feedback transmission…In some examples, one or more threshold values may be provided or determined for the multiplexed feedback message 215 (e.g., provided with configuration information or determined based on an amount of resources of an uplink grant). In some cases, if the payload size of the multiplexed feedback message 215 meets or exceeds a first threshold value (e.g., if UCI payload size ≥T.sub.1), the first UE 115-a may provide only a single feedback bit per TB corresponding to multicast…In some cases, such determinations may be based on a number of multicast TBs that have feedback in a given uplink control channel occasion.” | examiner notes that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the relationship of a particular number of resources, e.g., “more than one PUCCH resource”, to the number of TBs, e.g., “larger than a predefined value”, is a matter of implementation choice).
Regarding claim 5, Sengupta-Lee disclosed the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are individually or collectively configured to receive the indication via a unicast radio resource control signaling (see Sengupta [0134]: “…For example, base station 105-b may identify or otherwise select the set of resources 315 and configure the UEs with the set of resources 315 via a configuration message (e.g., a higher layer signal, such as an RRC signal, MCCH signal, etc.). Each UE may then determine that a feedback indication (e.g., a NACK indication) is to be provided to base station 105-b in response to a multicast communication, and then select a subset of resources from the configured set of resources 315 based on its channel metric.” | [0139]: “…As discussed herein, in some cases the DCI that schedules the unicast PDSCH 410 may also provide a resource allocation or an indication (e.g., a unicast K1 value that indicates when HARQ feedback is to be provided) of uplink resources for feedback transmission…”).
Regarding claim 9, Sengupta-Lee disclosed the apparatus of claim 1, wherein PUCCH resources for the NACK-only-based multicast feedback are associated with frequency domain resources and time domain resources (see Sengupta 0076: communication in FDD mode, in TDD mode; 0078: frequency resources, time resources), and wherein the quantity of TBs with the NACK-only-based multicast feedback to be multiplexed in the PUCCH slot is associated with more than one PUCCH resource (see Sengupta [0124]: “…For example, if there are two multicast TBs to be NACK-ed in one uplink occasion, cyclic shift values 0,1,2 may be used to initialize PUCCH sequence (in the appropriate RSRP-based subset of resources) and indicate the feedback….” | examiner notes that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the number of PUCCH resources, e.g., “more than one PUCCH resource”, associated with a quantity of TBs is a matter of implementation choice).
Regarding claim 12, Sengupta-Lee disclosed the apparatus of claim 1, wherein a frequency hopping associated with PUCCH resources for the NACK-only-based multicast feedback is based at least in part on one or more frequency hopping parameters per PUCCH resource, and wherein the one or more frequency hopping parameters include one or more of an intra-slot frequency hopping parameter, a second hop physical resource block parameter, or an inter-slot frequency hopping parameter (see Sengupta 0074: wireless communication over a set of radio frequency spectrum resources, communication using carrier aggregation or multi-carrier operation; 0076: communication in FDD mode, in TDD mode; 0078: frequency resources, time resources, OFDM, multi-carrier modulation techniques | examiner notes that frequency hopping and its parameters are well-known and commonly used when communicating over a set of frequency resources).
Regarding claim 14, Sengupta-Lee disclosed the apparatus of claim 1, wherein PUCCH resources for the NACK-only-based multicast feedback are associated with one or more symbol quantities (see Sengupta [0078]: resources are associated with symbol(s)) and one or more PUCCH formats (see Sengupta [0121]: UEs are configured with a set of parameters, e.g., PUCCH format), and wherein the PUCCH resources are associated with a same quantity of symbols and a same PUCCH format, the quantity of PUCCH resources are associated with a same quantity of symbols and different PUCCH formats, or the quantity of PUCCH resources are associated with different quantities of symbols and different PUCCH formats (examiner notes that the relationship for PUCCH resources with respect to the quantity of symbols and PUCCH formats (e.g., same/same, same/different, or different/different) is a matter of implementation choice | see Sengupta [0078]: resources are associated with symbol(s); [0121]: UEs are configured with a set of parameters, e.g., PUCCH format).
Regarding claim 16, the claim contains the limitations, substantially as claimed, as described in claim 1 above; examiner notes that claim 16 is the method corresponding to the apparatus of claim 1. Sengupta disclosed, as recited in claim 16:
A method of wireless communication performed by a user equipment (UE) (see Sengupta Fig. 9, [0188]: UE; Fig. 5: method), comprising:
receiving, from a network node, an indication (see Sengupta [0134]: “For example, base station 105-b may identify or otherwise select the set of resources 315 and configure the UEs with the set of resources 315 via a configuration message (e.g., a higher layer signal, such as an RRC signal, MCCH signal, etc.). Each UE may then determine that a feedback indication (e.g., a NACK indication) is to be provided to base station 105-b in response to a multicast communication, and then select a subset of resources from the configured set of resources 315 based on its channel metric.”) of one of: a quantity of physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) resources in a PUCCH slot for negative acknowledgement (NACK)-only-based multicast feedback, or a quantity of transport blocks (TBs) with the NACK-only-based multicast feedback to be multiplexed in the PUCCH slot (see Sengupta [0115]: base station identifies a set of multicast feedback resources associated with a variety or thresholds and channel metrics; [0120]: an amount of PUCCH resources is used to limit the payload size of feedback message, e.g., [0121]: multicast NACK-only feedback; [0120]: number of multicast TBs in a given uplink control channel occasion are also used in the determination about the feedback message), wherein a more-than-one-NACK-only-mode is configured for the UE (see Lee combination below);
determining, based at least in part on the indication, the quantity of PUCCH resources in the PUCCH slot for the NACK-only-based multicast feedback (see Sengupta [0115]: base station identifies a set of multicast feedback resources associated with a variety or thresholds and channel metrics; [0120]: an amount of PUCCH resources is used to limit the payload size of feedback message, e.g., [0121]: multicast NACK-only feedback | [0107]: configuring multicast feedback resources based on a (sub)set of resources based on UE channel metrics); and
transmitting, to the network node, the NACK-only-based multicast feedback (see Sengupta [0110]: “…The UEs 115 in this scenario may be configured for a NACK-based or an ACK/NACK-based approach…In the NACK-based approach, only UEs 115 that are unable to successfully receive and decode the multicast communications 210 provide the multicast feedback message 220 feedback information (e.g., NACK indication) to base station 105-a. In the example of FIG. 2, second UE 115-b may not successfully receive and decode the multicast communication 210, and may transmit multicast feedback 220 that indicates the NACK, while the third UE 115-a may successfully decode the multicast communication 210 and thus not transmit a corresponding feedback indication.”) using the quantity of PUCCH resources (see Sengupta [0115]: base station identifies a set of multicast feedback resources associated with a variety or thresholds and channel metrics; [0120]: an amount of PUCCH resources is used to limit the payload size of feedback message, e.g., [0121]: multicast NACK-only feedback | [0107]: “…a UE 115 may multiplex the unicast feedback and multicast feedback and transmit the multiplexed feedback to the base station 105…”).
Although Sengupta disclosed multiplexing NACK information (see Sengupta [0127]), Sengupta did not explicitly disclose “wherein a more-than-one-NACK-only-mode is configured for the UE”. However in a related art, Lee disclosed:
[0134], provisional p. 79 next to last paragraph: “For a second HARQ-ACK reporting mode, when the number of HARQ-ACK information bits is 2, 3, or 4, a terminal may be indicated by a higher layer parameter indicating a mode which supports more than one NACK only feedbacks on the same PUCCH (e.g., moreThanOneNackOnly-Mode)…”; [0137], provisional p. 81 “Detailed Description of the Invention” first paragraph: “In the present disclosure, a case is assumed that one PUCCH resource is selected and transmitted among a set of a plurality of PUCCH resources to multiplex a plurality of NACK only-based HARQ-ACK (e.g., a moreThanOneNackOnly-Mode parameter indicates mode 2)…”
[0180], provisional p. 83 second bullet: “Additionally or alternatively, when a PUCCH resource selected for N NACK-only-based HARQ-ACK bits with the same priority is positioned in the same slot as PUSCH transmission, a terminal may re-select (N-K) NACK-only-based HARQ-ACK bits among N NACK-only-based HARQ-ACK bits and re-select a PUCCH resource to multiplex them. If there is no other UCI or PUSCH transmission in a slot of a reselected PUCCH resource, a terminal may multiplex and transmit (N-K) NACK-only-based HARQ-ACK bits through a reselected PUCCH resource. A terminal may determine a lowest K value that a PUCCH resource reselected for K=1, 2, 3, ... and other UCI or PUSCH transmission are not overlapped in the same slot. A terminal may transmit HARQ-ACK information multiplexing (N-K) NACK-only-based HARQ-ACK bits through a PUCCH resource reselected for a determined K value.”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Sengupta and Lee to further clarify NACK-only modes. Incorporating Lee’s teachings regarding configuring a more-than-one-NACK-only-mode into Sengupta’s system that multiplexes NACKs would accommodate increases in data traffic and number of devices while providing very low end-to-end latency and high energy efficiency (see Lee [0004]; provisional p. 2 “Disclosure of the Invention” second paragraph) and also resolve the issue about whether and how to multiplex NACK only-based HARQ-ACK and other uplink transmissions (see Lee [0136], provisional p. 81 last paragraph before “2. Detailed Description of the Invention”).
Regarding claim 17, the claim contains the limitations, substantially as claimed, as described in claim 2 above. Sengupta-Lee disclosed, as recited in claim 17: The method of claim 16, wherein the more-than-one-NACK-only-mode, configured for the UE, comprises a radio resource control (RRC) parameter (see Lee [0163], provisional p. 81 last paragraph: “In the present embodiment, a case is assumed that it is configured by RRC to select one PUCCH resource according to a value of HARQ-ACK bits for a plurality of NACK-only-based HARQ-ACK among multiple PUCCH resources…”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Sengupta and Lee to further clarify NACK-only modes. Incorporating Lee’s teachings regarding configuring a more-than-one-NACK-only-mode into Sengupta’s system that multiplexes NACKs would accommodate increases in data traffic and number of devices while providing very low end-to-end latency and high energy efficiency (see Lee [0004]; provisional p. 2 “Disclosure of the Invention” second paragraph) and also resolve the issue about whether and how to multiplex NACK only-based HARQ-ACK and other uplink transmissions (see Lee [0136], provisional p. 81 last paragraph before “2. Detailed Description of the Invention”).
Regarding claim 18, the claim contains the limitations, substantially as claimed, as described in claim 3 above. Sengupta-Lee disclosed, as recited in claim 18: The method of claim 16, wherein the quantity of PUCCH resources is one based at least in part on the quantity of TBs being less than or equal to a predefined value (see Sengupta [0120]: “In some cases, a payload size that is able to be transmitted in the multiplexed feedback message 215 may be limited based on an amount of PUCCH resources available for the feedback transmission…In some examples, one or more threshold values may be provided or determined for the multiplexed feedback message 215 (e.g., provided with configuration information or determined based on an amount of resources of an uplink grant)…if the multiplexed feedback message 215 has a payload that is less than the second threshold value (e.g., if UCI payload <T.sub.2), the first UE 115-a may transmit all multicast feedback (e.g., 1+log.sub.2 M bits). In some cases, such determinations may be based on a number of multicast TBs that have feedback in a given uplink control channel occasion.” | examiner notes that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the relationship of a particular number of resources, e.g., “one PUCCH resource”, to the number of TBs, e.g., “less than or equal to a predefined value”, is a matter of implementation choice).
Regarding claim 19, the claim contains the limitations, substantially as claimed, as described in claim 4 above. Sengupta-Lee disclosed, as recited in claim 19: The method of claim 16, wherein the quantity of PUCCH resources is more than one based at least in part on the quantity of TBs being larger than a predefined value (see Sengupta [0120]: “In some cases, a payload size that is able to be transmitted in the multiplexed feedback message 215 may be limited based on an amount of PUCCH resources available for the feedback transmission…In some examples, one or more threshold values may be provided or determined for the multiplexed feedback message 215 (e.g., provided with configuration information or determined based on an amount of resources of an uplink grant). In some cases, if the payload size of the multiplexed feedback message 215 meets or exceeds a first threshold value (e.g., if UCI payload size ≥T.sub.1), the first UE 115-a may provide only a single feedback bit per TB corresponding to multicast…In some cases, such determinations may be based on a number of multicast TBs that have feedback in a given uplink control channel occasion.” | examiner notes that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the relationship of a particular number of resources, e.g., “more than one PUCCH resource”, to the number of TBs, e.g., “larger than a predefined value”, is a matter of implementation choice).
Regarding claim 20, the claim contains the limitations, substantially as claimed, as described in claim 5 above. Sengupta-Lee disclosed, as recited in claim 20: The method of claim 16, wherein the indication is received via a unicast radio resource control signaling (see Sengupta [0134]: “…For example, base station 105-b may identify or otherwise select the set of resources 315 and configure the UEs with the set of resources 315 via a configuration message (e.g., a higher layer signal, such as an RRC signal, MCCH signal, etc.). Each UE may then determine that a feedback indication (e.g., a NACK indication) is to be provided to base station 105-b in response to a multicast communication, and then select a subset of resources from the configured set of resources 315 based on its channel metric.” | [0139]: “…As discussed herein, in some cases the DCI that schedules the unicast PDSCH 410 may also provide a resource allocation or an indication (e.g., a unicast K1 value that indicates when HARQ feedback is to be provided) of uplink resources for feedback transmission…”).
Regarding claim 24, the claim contains the limitations, substantially as claimed, as described in claim 9 above. Sengupta-Lee disclosed, as recited in claim 24: The method of claim 16, wherein PUCCH resources for the NACK-only-based multicast feedback are associated with frequency domain resources and time domain resources (see Sengupta 0076: communication in FDD mode, in TDD mode; 0078: frequency resources, time resources), and wherein the quantity of TBs with the NACK-only-based multicast feedback to be multiplexed in the PUCCH slot is associated with more than one PUCCH resource (see Sengupta [0124]: “…For example, if there are two multicast TBs to be NACK-ed in one uplink occasion, cyclic shift values 0,1,2 may be used to initialize PUCCH sequence (in the appropriate RSRP-based subset of resources) and indicate the feedback….” | examiner notes that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the number of PUCCH resources, e.g., “more than one PUCCH resource”, associated with a quantity of TBs is a matter of implementation choice).
Regarding claim 27, the claim contains the limitations, substantially as claimed, as described in claim 12 above. Sengupta-Lee disclosed, as recited in claim 27: The method of claim 16, wherein a frequency hopping associated with PUCCH resources for the NACK-only-based multicast feedback is based at least in part on one or more frequency hopping parameters per PUCCH resource, and wherein the one or more frequency hopping parameters include one or more of an intra-slot frequency hopping parameter, a second hop physical resource block parameter, or an inter-slot frequency hopping parameter (see Sengupta 0074: wireless communication over a set of radio frequency spectrum resources, communication using carrier aggregation or multi-carrier operation; 0076: communication in FDD mode, in TDD mode; 0078: frequency resources, time resources, OFDM, multi-carrier modulation techniques | examiner notes that frequency hopping and its parameters are well-known and commonly used when communicating over a set of frequency resources).
Regarding claim 29, the claim contains the limitations, substantially as claimed, as described in claim 14 above. Sengupta-Lee disclosed, as recited in claim 29: The method of claim 16, wherein PUCCH resources for the NACK-only-based multicast feedback are associated with one or more symbol quantities (see Sengupta [0078]: resources are associated with symbol(s)) and one or more PUCCH formats (see Sengupta [0121]: UEs are configured with a set of parameters, e.g., PUCCH format), and wherein the PUCCH resources are associated with a same quantity of symbols and a same PUCCH format, the quantity of PUCCH resources are associated with a same quantity of symbols and different PUCCH formats, or the quantity of PUCCH resources are associated with different quantities of symbols and different PUCCH formats(examiner notes that the relationship for PUCCH resources with respect to the quantity of symbols and PUCCH formats (e.g., same/same, same/different, or different/different) is a matter of implementation choice | see Sengupta [0078]: resources are associated with symbol(s); [0121]: UEs are configured with a set of parameters, e.g., PUCCH format).
Claims 6-8, 10-11, 13, 21-23, 25-26, 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sengupta-Lee as applied to claims 1 and 16 above, and further in view of Yin et al. (WO 2020/031918 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Sengupta-Lee disclosed the invention, substantially as claimed, as described in the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are individually or collectively configured to receive the indication via downlink control information (DCI) (see Sengupta [0134]: “…For example, base station 105-b may identify or otherwise select the set of resources 315 and configure the UEs with the set of resources 315 via a configuration message (e.g., a higher layer signal, such as an RRC signal, MCCH signal, etc.)…” | [0139]: “…As discussed herein, in some cases the DCI that schedules the unicast PDSCH 410 may also provide a resource allocation or an indication (e.g., a unicast K1 value that indicates when HARQ feedback is to be provided) of uplink resources for feedback transmission…”) based at least in part on repurposing a PUCCH resource identifier field in a DCI format that is associated with a group radio network temporary identifier (RNTI) or group configured scheduling RNTI configured with the NACK-only-based multicast feedback (see Yin combination below).
Sengupta did not explicitly disclose that the indication received via DCI is “based at least in part on repurposing a PUCCH resource identifier field in a DCI format that is associated with a group radio network temporary identifier (RNTI) or group configured scheduling RNTI configured with the NACK-only-based multicast feedback”. However in a related art, Yin disclosed that the configured PUCCH resources and whether or not NACK-only feedback is performed are based on the RNTI in the DCI, e.g., old vs new RNTI (see Yin [0120]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Sengupta and Yin to further clarify different types of DL/UL scheduling timelines, resources, and situations when NACK-only feedback is provided. Including Yin’s teachings would provide increased flexibility and efficiency during wireless communication (see Yin [0004]).
Regarding claim 7, Sengupta-Lee disclosed the invention, substantially as claimed, as described in the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to:
determine a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) processing timeline (see Sengupta [0140]: determining a feedback timeline associated with the multicast transmissions and using this timeline when deciding whether or not to include feedback for multicast transmissions, e.g., feedback for a second multicast transmission may be included, dropped, sent in a subsequent multiplexed feedback transmission based on whether or not the feedback will be ready within the feedback timeline | [0121]: multicast NACK-only feedback) based at least in part on the quantity of PUCCH resources for the NACK-only-based multicast feedback (see Yin combination below), wherein the PDSCH processing timeline is a PDSCH processing timeline used for acknowledgement (ACK) or NACK based feedback based at least in part on the quantity of PUCCH resources being one (see Sengupta [0124]: “In some cases, the multicast feedback 220 may be associated with one multicast communication 210…” | [0140]: determining a feedback timeline associated with the multicast transmissions and using this timeline when deciding whether or not to include feedback for multicast transmissions, e.g., feedback for a second multicast transmission may be included, dropped, sent in a subsequent multiplexed feedback transmission based on whether or not the feedback will be ready within the feedback timeline | examiner notes that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that basing the PDSCH processing timeline on a particular number of resources, e.g., “one PUCCH resource”, is a matter of implementation choice).
Sengupta did not explicitly disclose that the PDSCH processing timeline for the NACK-only-based multicast feedback is “based at least in part on the quantity of PUCCH resources”. Examiner notes that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the quantity of resources would affect the processing timeline and that “the quantity of PUCCH resources” can be one, however in a related art, Yin disclosed NACK-only feedback uses allocated PUCCH resources (see [0013]) and Yin’s Fig. 12 illustrates a variety of examples of scheduling timelines in which the DL shared channel’s uplink feedback (e.g., NACK-only feedback – [0013]) is sent via UL channels in a later slot based on the DL scheduling timeline (see Fig. 12, [0171]), i.e. PDSCH processing timeline for NACK-only feedback is “based at least in part on the quantity of PUCCH resources”.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Sengupta and Yin to further clarify different types of DL/UL scheduling timelines, resources, and situations when NACK-only feedback is provided. Including Yin’s teachings would provide increased flexibility and efficiency during wireless communication (see Yin [0004]).
Regarding claim 8, Sengupta-Lee disclosed the invention, substantially as claimed, as described in the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are further individually or collectively configured to:
determine a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) processing timeline (see Sengupta [0140]: determining a feedback timeline associated with the multicast transmissions and using this timeline when deciding whether or not to include feedback for multicast transmissions, e.g., feedback for a second multicast transmission may be included, dropped, sent in a subsequent multiplexed feedback transmission based on whether or not the feedback will be ready within the feedback timeline | [0121]: multicast NACK-only feedback) based at least in part on the quantity of PUCCH resources for the NACK-only-based multicast feedback (see Yin combination below); and
receive, from the network node, an indication that the PDSCH processing timeline is to be an extended PDSCH processing timeline (see Sengupta [0082]: variable transmission time interval || Yin [0110]: DCI includes PDSCH-to-HARQ-timing indicator field that indicates which one of multiple different possible timings is to be followed), wherein the indication is a one-bit flag indicated via a unicast radio resource control signaling, via downlink control information (DCI) by repurposing a PUCCH resource identifier field in a DCI format, or via an optional field in a DCI format associated with a group radio network temporary identifier (RNTI) or group configured scheduling RNTI configured with the NACK-only-based multicast feedback (see Yin combination below).
Sengupta did not explicitly disclose that the PDSCH processing timeline for the NACK-only-based multicast feedback is “based at least in part on the quantity of PUCCH resources”. Examiner notes that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the quantity of resources would affect the processing timeline and that “the quantity of PUCCH resources” can be one, however in a related art, Yin disclosed NACK-only feedback uses allocated PUCCH resources (see [0013]) and Yin’s Fig. 12 illustrates a variety of examples of scheduling timelines in which the DL shared channel’s uplink feedback (e.g., NACK-only feedback – [0013]) is sent via UL channels in a later slot based on the DL scheduling timeline (see Fig. 12, [0171]), i.e. PDSCH processing timeline for NACK-only feedback is “based at least in part on the quantity of PUCCH resources”.
Sengupta also did not explicitly disclose “wherein the indication is a one-bit flag indicated via a unicast radio resource control signaling, via downlink control information (DCI) by repurposing a PUCCH resource identifier field in a DCI format, or via an optional field in a DCI format associated with a group radio network temporary identifier (RNTI) or group configured scheduling RNTI configured with the NACK-only-based multicast feedback”.
However in a related art, Yin disclosed an RRC configured timing table in which “0” indicates that only NACK is reported (see Yin [0111]) and a new field with the length of one bit is added to the DCI such that “0” indicates that only NACK is reported (see Yin [0112]), i.e. “wherein the indication is a one-bit flag indicated via a unicast radio resource control signaling”. The configured PUCCH resources and whether or not HARQ ACK/NACK or NACK-only feedback is performed is based on the RNTI in the DCI, e.g., old vs new RNTI (see Yin [0120]), i.e. “via an optional field in a DCI format associated with a group radio network temporary identifier (RNTI) or group configured scheduling RNTI configured with the NACK-only-based multicast feedback”.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Sengupta and Yin to further clarify different types of DL/UL scheduling timelines, resources, and situations when NACK-only feedback is provided. Including Yin’s teachings would provide increased flexibility and efficiency during wireless communication (see Yin [0004]).
Regarding claim 10, Sengupta-Lee disclosed the invention, substantially as claimed, as described in the apparatus of claim 1, wherein a resource allocation for frequency domain PUCCH resources for the NACK-only-based multicast feedback using a PUCCH format 0 (see Sengupta [0090]: URLLC communications; examiner notes that PUCCH format 0 is commonly used in URLLC communications || Yin [0038]: PUCCH format 0 includes a variety of different transmit power settings) or (examiner notes that the claim language allows for a variety of interpretations with respect to the multiple choices, e.g., (1) format 0 OR (2) format 1 + no interlaced mapping associated with one of three options; (a) format 0 or format 1 AND (b) no interlaced mapping associated with one of three options) a PUCCH format 1 and no interlaced mapping is associated with one of: same or adjacent resource blocks and a same PUCCH transmission power, non-adjacent resource blocks and the same PUCCH transmission power, or non-adjacent resource blocks with different PUCCH transmission powers (see Yin combination below).
Sengupta did not explicitly disclose “no interlaced mapping is associated with one of: same or adjacent resource blocks and a same PUCCH transmission power, non-adjacent resource blocks and the same PUCCH transmission power, or non-adjacent resource blocks with different PUCCH transmission powers”.
Examiner notes that whether or not the resource blocks are adjacent is a matter of implementation choice and that whether or not interlaced mapping is used is also a matter of implementation choice. However in a related art, Yin disclosed PUCCH format 0 includes a variety of different transmit power settings (see Yin [0038]). The PUCCH resource subset includes multiple PUCCH resources with different/multiple starting symbols and a PUCCH resource may be configured with a PUCCH format and periodicity (see Yin [0056]). A PUCCH for URLLC PDSCH feedback punctures, i.e. no interlaced mapping, another UL channel supported by the same symbol and that UL transmit power is allocated to the PUCCH for URLLC traffic first (see Yin [0090]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Sengupta and Yin to further clarify different types of DL/UL scheduling timelines, resources, and situations when NACK-only feedback is provided. Including Yin’s teachings would provide increased flexibility and efficiency during wireless communication (see Yin [0004]).
Regarding claim 11, Sengupta-Lee-Yin disclosed the apparatus of claim 10, wherein the same PUCCH transmission power is associated with a same maximum power reduction (MPR), and the different PUCCH transmission powers are associated with different MPRs (see Sengupta [0089]: employing operating modes to reduce power consumption, e.g. narrowband communication | [0114]: “the channel metric may refer to the RSRP” || Yin [0090]: allocating UL transmit power to the PUCCH for URLLC traffic first and allocating the remaining power to other REs in the same UL symbol while also ensuring that the Pcmax limit on the given BWP is satisfied).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Sengupta and Yin to further clarify different types of DL/UL scheduling timelines, resources, and situations when NACK-only feedback is provided. Including Yin’s teachings would provide increased flexibility and efficiency during wireless communication (see Yin [0004]).
Regarding claim 13, Sengupta-Lee disclosed the invention, substantially as claimed, as described in the apparatus of claim 1, wherein a resource allocation for time domain PUCCH resources for the NACK-only-based multicast feedback is based at least in part on starting symbols for different PUCCH resources (see Sengupta [0079]: supporting multiple numerologies; examiner notes that the starting symbol is a matter of implementation choice || Yin [0012]: a PUCCH resource for NACK is configured with different parameters in terms of number of symbols in the time domain, transmit diversity configurations, etc. | [0056]: PUCCH resource subset includes multiple PUCCH resources with multiple/different starting symbols and a PUCCH resource may be configured with a PUCCH format and periodicity), and wherein the different PUCCH resources are associated with a same starting symbol in the PUCCH slot, or the different PUCCH resources are associated with different starting symbols in the PUCCH slot with a common starting symbol, an earlier starting symbol or a first symbol of the PUCCH slot counted as a reference point (see Yin combination below).
Sengupta did not explicitly disclose “wherein the different PUCCH resources are associated with a same starting symbol in the PUCCH slot, or the different PUCCH resources are associated with different starting symbols in the PUCCH slot with a common starting symbol, an earlier starting symbol or a first symbol of the PUCCH slot counted as a reference point”.
However in a related art, Yin disclosed a PUCCH resource subset includes multiple PUCCH resources with different/multiple starting symbols and a PUCCH resource may be configured with a PUCCH format and periodicity (see Yin [0056]). The first and second SCS may be configured for the same BWP and/or the same timing, slots, and/or symbols (see Yin [0086]). The sub-slot starts at any symbol within the slot, e.g., second symbol within slot, and Fig. 11 illustrates that multiple sub-slots can also have a same starting position (see Yin Fig. 11, [0169]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Sengupta and Yin to further clarify different types of DL/UL scheduling timelines, resources, and situations when NACK-only feedback is provided. Including Yin’s teachings would provide increased flexibility and efficiency during wireless communication (see Yin [0004]).
Regarding claim 21, the claim contains the limitations, substantially as claimed, as described in claim 6 above. Sengupta-Lee disclosed, as recited in claim 21: The method of claim 16, wherein the indication is received via downlink control information (DCI) (see Sengupta [0134]: “…For example, base station 105-b may identify or otherwise select the set of resources 315 and configure the UEs with the set of resources 315 via a configuration message (e.g., a higher layer signal, such as an RRC signal, MCCH signal, etc.)…” | [0139]: “…As discussed herein, in some cases the DCI that schedules the unicast PDSCH 410 may also provide a resource allocation or an indication (e.g., a unicast K1 value that indicates when HARQ feedback is to be provided) of uplink resources for feedback transmission…”) based at least in part on repurposing a PUCCH resource identifier field in a DCI format that is associated with a group radio network temporary identifier (RNTI) or group configured scheduling RNTI configured with the NACK-only-based multicast feedback (see Yin combination below).
Sengupta did not explicitly disclose that the indication received via DCI is “based at least in part on repurposing a PUCCH resource identifier field in a DCI format that is associated with a group radio network temporary identifier (RNTI) or group configured scheduling RNTI configured with the NACK-only-based multicast feedback”. However in a related art, Yin disclosed that the configured PUCCH resources and whether or not NACK-only feedback is performed are based on the RNTI in the DCI, e.g., old vs new RNTI (see Yin [0120]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Sengupta and Yin to further clarify different types of DL/UL scheduling timelines, resources, and situations when NACK-only feedback is provided. Including Yin’s teachings would provide increased flexibility and efficiency during wireless communication (see Yin [0004]).
Regarding claim 22, the claim contains the limitations, substantially as claimed, as described in claim 7 above. Sengupta-Lee disclosed, as recited in claim 22: The method of claim 16, further comprising:
determining a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) processing timeline (see Sengupta [0140]: determining a feedback timeline associated with the multicast transmissions and using this timeline when deciding whether or not to include feedback for multicast transmissions, e.g., feedback for a second multicast transmission may be included, dropped, sent in a subsequent multiplexed feedback transmission based on whether or not the feedback will be ready within the feedback timeline | [0121]: multicast NACK-only feedback) based at least in part on the quantity of PUCCH resources for the NACK-only-based multicast feedback (see Yin combination below),
wherein the PDSCH processing timeline is a PDSCH processing timeline used for acknowledgement (ACK) or NACK based feedback based at least in part on the quantity of PUCCH resources being one (see Sengupta [0124]: “In some cases, the multicast feedback 220 may be associated with one multicast communication 210…” | [0140]: determining a feedback timeline associated with the multicast transmissions and using this timeline when deciding whether or not to include feedback for multicast transmissions, e.g., feedback for a second multicast transmission may be included, dropped, sent in a subsequent multiplexed feedback transmission based on whether or not the feedback will be ready within the feedback timeline | examiner notes that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that basing the PDSCH processing timeline on a particular number of resources, e.g., “one PUCCH resource”, is a matter of implementation choice).
Sengupta did not explicitly disclose that the PDSCH processing timeline for the NACK-only-based multicast feedback is “based at least in part on the quantity of PUCCH resources”. Examiner notes that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the quantity of resources would affect the processing timeline and that “the quantity of PUCCH resources” can be one, however in a related art, Yin disclosed NACK-only feedback uses allocated PUCCH resources (see [0013]) and Yin’s Fig. 12 illustrates a variety of examples of scheduling timelines in which the DL shared channel’s uplink feedback (e.g., NACK-only feedback – [0013]) is sent via UL channels in a later slot based on the DL scheduling timeline (see Fig. 12, [0171]), i.e. PDSCH processing timeline for NACK-only feedback is “based at least in part on the quantity of PUCCH resources”.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Sengupta and Yin to further clarify different types of DL/UL scheduling timelines, resources, and situations when NACK-only feedback is provided. Including Yin’s teachings would provide increased flexibility and efficiency during wireless communication (see Yin [0004]).
Regarding claim 23, the claim contains the limitations, substantially as claimed, as described in claim 8 above. Sengupta-Lee disclosed, as recited in claim 23: The method of claim 16, further comprising:
determining a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) processing timeline (see Sengupta [0140]: determining a feedback timeline associated with the multicast transmissions and using this timeline when deciding whether or not to include feedback for multicast transmissions, e.g., feedback for a second multicast transmission may be included, dropped, sent in a subsequent multiplexed feedback transmission based on whether or not the feedback will be ready within the feedback timeline | [0121]: multicast NACK-only feedback) based at least in part on the quantity of PUCCH resources for the NACK-only-based multicast feedback (see Yin combination below),
receiving, from the network node, an indication that the PDSCH processing timeline is to be an extended PDSCH processing timeline (see Sengupta [0082]: variable transmission time interval || Yin [0110]: DCI includes PDSCH-to-HARQ-timing indicator field that indicates which one of multiple different possible timings is to be followed), wherein the indication is a one-bit flag indicated via a unicast radio resource control signaling, via downlink control information (DCI) by repurposing a PUCCH resource identifier field in a DCI format, or via an optional field in a DCI format associated with a group radio network temporary identifier (RNTI) or group configured scheduling RNTI configured with the NACK-only-based multicast feedback (see Yin combination below).
Sengupta did not explicitly disclose that the PDSCH processing timeline for the NACK-only-based multicast feedback is “based at least in part on the quantity of PUCCH resources”. Examiner notes that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the quantity of resources would affect the processing timeline and that “the quantity of PUCCH resources” can be one, however in a related art, Yin disclosed NACK-only feedback uses allocated PUCCH resources (see [0013]) and Yin’s Fig. 12 illustrates a variety of examples of scheduling timelines in which the DL shared channel’s uplink feedback (e.g., NACK-only feedback – [0013]) is sent via UL channels in a later slot based on the DL scheduling timeline (see Fig. 12, [0171]), i.e. PDSCH processing timeline for NACK-only feedback is “based at least in part on the quantity of PUCCH resources”.
Sengupta also did not explicitly disclose “wherein the indication is a one-bit flag indicated via a unicast radio resource control signaling, via downlink control information (DCI) by repurposing a PUCCH resource identifier field in a DCI format, or via an optional field in a DCI format associated with a group radio network temporary identifier (RNTI) or group configured scheduling RNTI configured with the NACK-only-based multicast feedback”.
However in a related art, Yin disclosed an RRC configured timing table in which “0” indicates that only NACK is reported (see Yin [0111]) and a new field with the length of one bit is added to the DCI such that “0” indicates that only NACK is reported (see Yin [0112]), i.e. “wherein the indication is a one-bit flag indicated via a unicast radio resource control signaling”. The configured PUCCH resources and whether or not HARQ ACK/NACK or NACK-only feedback is performed is based on the RNTI in the DCI, e.g., old vs new RNTI (see Yin [0120]), i.e. “via an optional field in a DCI format associated with a group radio network temporary identifier (RNTI) or group configured scheduling RNTI configured with the NACK-only-based multicast feedback”.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Sengupta and Yin to further clarify different types of DL/UL scheduling timelines, resources, and situations when NACK-only feedback is provided. Including Yin’s teachings would provide increased flexibility and efficiency during wireless communication (see Yin [0004]).
Regarding claim 25, the claim contains the limitations, substantially as claimed, as described in claim 10 above. Sengupta-Lee disclosed, as recited in claim 25: The method of claim 16, wherein a resource allocation for frequency domain PUCCH resources for the NACK-only-based multicast feedback using a PUCCH format 0 (see Sengupta [0090]: URLLC communications; examiner notes that PUCCH format 0 is commonly used in URLLC communications || Yin [0038]: PUCCH format 0 includes a variety of different transmit power settings) or (examiner notes that the claim language allows for a variety of interpretations with respect to the multiple choices, e.g., (1) format 0 OR (2) format 1 + no interlaced mapping associated with one of three options; (a) format 0 or format 1 AND (b) no interlaced mapping associated with one of three options) a PUCCH format 1 and no interlaced mapping is associated with one of: same or adjacent resource blocks and a same PUCCH transmission power, non-adjacent resource blocks and the same PUCCH transmission power, or non-adjacent resource blocks with different PUCCH transmission powers (see Yin combination below).
Sengupta did not explicitly disclose “no interlaced mapping is associated with one of: same or adjacent resource blocks and a same PUCCH transmission power, non-adjacent resource blocks and the same PUCCH transmission power, or non-adjacent resource blocks with different PUCCH transmission powers”.
Examiner notes that whether or not the resource blocks are adjacent is a matter of implementation choice and that whether or not interlaced mapping is used is also a matter of implementation choice. However in a related art, Yin disclosed PUCCH format 0 includes a variety of different transmit power settings (see Yin [0038]). The PUCCH resource subset includes multiple PUCCH resources with different/multiple starting symbols and a PUCCH resource may be configured with a PUCCH format and periodicity (see Yin [0056]). A PUCCH for URLLC PDSCH feedback punctures, i.e. no interlaced mapping, another UL channel supported by the same symbol and that UL transmit power is allocated to the PUCCH for URLLC traffic first (see Yin [0090]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Sengupta and Yin to further clarify different types of DL/UL scheduling timelines, resources, and situations when NACK-only feedback is provided. Including Yin’s teachings would provide increased flexibility and efficiency during wireless communication (see Yin [0004]).
Regarding claim 26, the claim contains the limitations, substantially as claimed, as described in claim 11 above. Sengupta-Lee-Yin disclosed, as recited in claim 26: The method of claim 25, wherein the same PUCCH transmission power is associated with a same maximum power reduction (MPR), and the different PUCCH transmission powers are associated with different MPRs (see Sengupta [0089]: employing operating modes to reduce power consumption, e.g. narrowband communication | [0114]: “the channel metric may refer to the RSRP” || Yin [0090]: allocating UL transmit power to the PUCCH for URLLC traffic first and allocating the remaining power to other REs in the same UL symbol while also ensuring that the Pcmax limit on the given BWP is satisfied).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Sengupta and Yin to further clarify different types of DL/UL scheduling timelines, resources, and situations when NACK-only feedback is provided. Including Yin’s teachings would provide increased flexibility and efficiency during wireless communication (see Yin [0004]).
Regarding claim 28, the claim contains the limitations, substantially as claimed, as described in claim 13 above. Sengupta-Lee disclosed, as recited in claim 28: The method of claim 16, wherein a resource allocation for time domain PUCCH resources for the NACK-only-based multicast feedback is based at least in part on starting symbols for different PUCCH resources (see Sengupta [0079]: supporting multiple numerologies; examiner notes that the starting symbol is a matter of implementation choice || Yin [0012]: a PUCCH resource for NACK is configured with different parameters in terms of number of symbols in the time domain, transmit diversity configurations, etc. | [0056]: PUCCH resource subset includes multiple PUCCH resources with multiple/different starting symbols and a PUCCH resource may be configured with a PUCCH format and periodicity), and wherein the different PUCCH resources are associated with a same starting symbol in the PUCCH slot, or the different PUCCH resources are associated with different starting symbols in the PUCCH slot with a common starting symbol, an earlier starting symbol or a first symbol of the PUCCH slot counted as a reference point (see Yin combination below).
Sengupta did not explicitly disclose “wherein the different PUCCH resources are associated with a same starting symbol in the PUCCH slot, or the different PUCCH resources are associated with different starting symbols in the PUCCH slot with a common starting symbol, an earlier starting symbol or a first symbol of the PUCCH slot counted as a reference point”.
However in a related art, Yin disclosed a PUCCH resource subset includes multiple PUCCH resources with different/multiple starting symbols and a PUCCH resource may be configured with a PUCCH format and periodicity (see Yin [0056]). The first and second SCS may be configured for the same BWP and/or the same timing, slots, and/or symbols (see Yin [0086]). The sub-slot starts at any symbol within the slot, e.g., second symbol within slot, and Fig. 11 illustrates that multiple sub-slots can also have a same starting position (see Yin Fig. 11, [0169]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Sengupta and Yin to further clarify different types of DL/UL scheduling timelines, resources, and situations when NACK-only feedback is provided. Including Yin’s teachings would provide increased flexibility and efficiency during wireless communication (see Yin [0004]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Angela Widhalm de Rodriguez whose telephone number is (571)272-1035. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 6am-2:30pm EST.
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, Nicholas Taylor can be reached at (571)272-3889. 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.
/ANGELA WIDHALM DE RODRIGUEZ/Examiner, Art Unit 2443
Prosecution Insights