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 .
Claims 1-30 are pending and rejected.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 05/23/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 188 in Fig. 1. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
The limitations “means for sending” and “means for obtaining” in claim 27 are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Because these claim limitations are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, they are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. For the limitation “means for sending”, there is support for the structure at least in the Applicant’s specification in Fig. 9 and par. [0106] and support for the functional language in the Applicant’s specification at least in Fig. 8 and pars. [0090-0099]. For the limitation ” means for obtaining”, there is support for the structure at least in the Applicant’s specification in Fig. 9 and par. [0106] and support for the functional language in the Applicant’s specification at least in Fig. 8 and pars. [0090-0099].
If applicant does not intend to have these limitations interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitations to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitations recite sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential steps, such omission amounting to a gap between the steps. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted steps are: receiving a non-acknowledgment of the code block group. Each of independent claims 1, 14, 27, and 30 recite a limitation for “obtain[ing], in response to a non-acknowledgement of the code block group”. In order to perform the obtaining step “in response to a non-acknowledgement of the code block group” as claimed, a non-acknowledgement must be received or obtained prior to the obtaining step, making this an essential step. Without this step, the metes and bounds of the independent claims are not clear. Dependent claims 2-13 are rejected due to their dependency on independent claim 1. Dependent claims 15-26 are rejected due to their dependency on independent claim 14. Dependent claims 28 and 29 are rejected due to their dependency on independent claim 27.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-3, 6, 12-16, 19, and 25-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu (US 2020/0059325), hereinafter “Wu”, in view of Zhang et al. (US 2020/0259599), hereinafter “Zhang”.
Regarding claim 1, Wu teaches:
An apparatus for wireless communication, comprising:
one or more memories (see Wu, Fig. 1, par. [0029]: The base station device 1 includes a buffer-information managing unit 11, a buffer 12, a scheduler 13, a downlink-signal-baseband processing unit 14, an uplink-signal-baseband processing unit 15, a wireless communication unit 16, and a feedback table 17. The feedback table 17 is an example of a storage unit that is stored in a predetermined storage device); and
one or more processors each communicatively coupled with at least one of the one or more memories (see Wu, Fig. 1, par. [0029]: The base station device 1 includes a buffer-information managing unit 11, a buffer 12, a scheduler 13, a downlink-signal-baseband processing unit 14, an uplink-signal-baseband processing unit 15, a wireless communication unit 16, and a feedback table 17), the one or more processors, individually or in any combination, operable to cause the apparatus to:
send, to a wireless device, a message indicating a partial code block group, the partial code block group being indicated via a quantity representing a fraction of a code block group (see Wu, Fig. 9, par. [0137]: The base station device 1 generates a new TB (including a retransmission CBG and a new CBG) based on the CBG information, and performs retransmission and new transmission. Moreover, at the same time, the base station device 1 transmits a state of the retransmission CBG and the new CBG, for example, by the PDCCH, and see par. [0093]: in the feedback tables 17-3, 26-3, for example, in a TB corresponding to “Index 3-6” of “Level-3” indicated in the nineteenth row in FIG. 9, CB-1 to CB-8 are “NAK”, “ACK”, . . . , “ACK”, “NAK”, “ACK”, “ACK”, respectively. When it is in this ACK/NAK pattern, because CB-1 and adjacent CB-6 to CB-8 are grouped as a CBG subject to retransmission, CB-1 and CB-6 to CB-8 are retransmitted; in this case, the CBG information such as feedback tables which indicate parts of CBGs corresponds to a message indicating a fraction of a code block group); and
obtain, retransmitted data in the partial code block group and additional data in a remainder of the code block group (see Wu, Fig. 9, par. [0138]: The terminal device 2 newly generates a TB (including retransmission CBG and new CBG) based on the CBG information, and performs retransmission and new transmission. At the same time, the terminal device 2 transmits a state of the retransmission CBG and the new CBG by the PUCCH. In short, because the retransmission and the new transmission are both present mixedly, it is notified from the terminal device 2 to the base station device 1, and see par. [0093]: in the feedback tables 17-3, 26-3, for example, in a TB corresponding to “Index 3-6” of “Level-3” indicated in the nineteenth row in FIG. 9, CB-1 to CB-8 are “NAK”, “ACK”, . . . , “ACK”, “NAK”, “ACK”, “ACK”, respectively. When it is in this ACK/NAK pattern, because CB-1 and adjacent CB-6 to CB-8 are grouped as a CBG subject to retransmission, CB-1 and CB-6 to CB-8 are retransmitted; in this case, CBG information about retransmission and new transmission is obtained, corresponding to retransmitted data and additional data).
However, Wu does not explicitly teach:
obtaining data in response to a non-acknowledgement of the code block group,
Zhang, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
obtaining data in response to a non-acknowledgement of the code block group (see Zhang, par. [0120]: The DFI 230 may also include CBG-level feedback (e.g., a bitmap indicating an acknowledgement status) for each CBG in at least one of the transport blocks in the first AUL transmission 220. In some examples, the DFI 230 may include CBG-level feedback for each transport block. In some examples, the DFI 230 may include CBG-level feedback for each transport block for which a negative acknowledgement is indicated (e.g., to provide more granular feedback which may indicate, for a transport block for which a negative acknowledgement is indicated, which CBGs of the transport block were successfully received and which CBGs of the transport block may be retransmitted by the UE 115-a)),
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the obtaining data of Wu with the obtaining data in response to a non-acknowledgement of Zhang with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of improving efficiency of the system (see Zhang, par. [0066]).
Regarding claims 2, 15, the combination of Wu in view of Zhang teaches the apparatus or method. Wu further teaches:
wherein the partial code block group is based on mutual information between the apparatus and the wireless device which is observed from code block groups transmitted or received (see Wu, pars. [0137-0138]: the case of retransmission from the base station device 1 to the terminal device 2 has been described. To summarize, new transmission is transmitted in TB unit from the base station device 1 to the terminal device 2. The terminal device 2 receives the TB, and detects whether there is an error in CB unit. Meanwhile, the feedback table (CBG information) is searched, and the CBG information is transmitted from the terminal device 2 to the base station device 1. The CBG information is transmitted, for example, by using the control channel (PUCCH). The base station device 1 generates a new TB (including a retransmission CBG and a new CBG) based on the CBG information, and performs retransmission and new transmission. Moreover, at the same time, the base station device 1 transmits a state of the retransmission CBG and the new CBG, for example, by the PDCCH. In short, because the retransmission and the new transmission are both present mixedly, it is notified from the terminal device 2 to the base station device 1. Moreover, the present invention is applicable also to a case in which retransmission is performed from the terminal device to the base station device 1. This case will be described briefly. First, new transmission is transmitted in TB unit from the terminal device 2 to the base station. The base station device 1 receives the TB, performs detection per CB, and determined whether there is an error. Meanwhile, the feedback table (CBG information) is searched, and the CBG information is transmitted from the base station device 1 to the terminal device 2. The CBG information is transmitted, for example, by using the control channel (PDCCH). The terminal device 2 newly generates a TB (including retransmission CBG and new CBG) based on the CBG information, and performs retransmission and new transmission. At the same time, the terminal device 2 transmits a state of the retransmission CBG and the new CBG by the PUCCH. In short, because the retransmission and the new transmission are both present mixedly, it is notified from the terminal device 2 to the base station device 1; in this case, CBG information for parts of the CBGs is communicated between the devices)
Wu does not teach, but Zhang teaches:
wherein the code block groups are transmitted or received in a historical window of one or more slots (see Zhang, par. [0131]: in a scenario where transport block-level HARQ ACK/NACK is configured (e.g., where DFI includes one bit per transport block) for an AUL HARQ process, the DFI bit may be set to ACK(1) only if all CB(G)s in the transport block are successfully received. In the same scenario, if the uplink slot is SUL, the base station may set the DFI bit to ACK(1) if some fraction of CB(G)s in the slot pass (e.g., if 10% or more of the CB(G)s in the slot are successfully received, else send DFI=0). In some cases, if any CB(G) passes for an SUL slot the base station may indicate an ACK in DFI for the SUL slot. That is, as such SUL feedback may be used for CW updating, the SUL feedback may be determined based on CW updating considerations (e.g., based on whether or not the CW should be updated given the information obtained for the reference slot or reference duration). AUL feedback may be determined based on whether certain AUL information of the slot was received, or whether the AUL information is to be retransmitted by the UE; in this case, the information is indicated in slots).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the code block group transmission or reception of Wu with the historical window of one or more slots of Zhang with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of improving efficiency of the system (see Zhang, par. [0066]).
Regarding claims 3, 16, the combination of Wu in view of Zhang teaches the apparatus or method.
Wu does not teach, but Zhang teaches:
wherein the mutual information represents an average spectral efficiency observed in the historical window (see Zhang, par. [0131]: in a scenario where transport block-level HARQ ACK/NACK is configured (e.g., where DFI includes one bit per transport block) for an AUL HARQ process, the DFI bit may be set to ACK(1) only if all CB(G)s in the transport block are successfully received. In the same scenario, if the uplink slot is SUL, the base station may set the DFI bit to ACK(1) if some fraction of CB(G)s in the slot pass (e.g., if 10% or more of the CB(G)s in the slot are successfully received, else send DFI=0). In some cases, if any CB(G) passes for an SUL slot the base station may indicate an ACK in DFI for the SUL slot. That is, as such SUL feedback may be used for CW updating, the SUL feedback may be determined based on CW updating considerations (e.g., based on whether or not the CW should be updated given the information obtained for the reference slot or reference duration); in this case, the fraction of CBGs passing corresponds to a spectral efficiency).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the apparatus or method of Wu with the average spectral efficiency of Zhang with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of improving efficiency of the system (see Zhang, par. [0066]).
Regarding claims 6, 19, the combination of Wu in view of Zhang teaches the apparatus or method. Wu further teaches:
wherein the one or more processors, individually or in any combination, are operable to cause the apparatus to:
receive, from the wireless device, a transmission having a plurality of code block groups including the code block group (see Wu, Fig. 9, par. [0137]: To summarize, new transmission is transmitted in TB unit from the base station device 1 to the terminal device 2. The terminal device 2 receives the TB, and detects whether there is an error in CB unit. Meanwhile, the feedback table (CBG information) is searched, and the CBG information is transmitted from the terminal device 2 to the base station device 1. The CBG information is transmitted, for example, by using the control channel (PUCCH)); and
transmit an acknowledgment (ACK) / non-acknowledgement (NACK) report including an ACK or a NACK for each of the plurality of the code block groups, wherein the message indicating the partial code block group is sent in the ACK / NACK report with the non-acknowledgement of the code block group (see Wu, Fig. 9, par. [0137]: The base station device 1 generates a new TB (including a retransmission CBG and a new CBG) based on the CBG information, and performs retransmission and new transmission. Moreover, at the same time, the base station device 1 transmits a state of the retransmission CBG and the new CBG, for example, by the PDCCH, and see par. [0093]: in the feedback tables 17-3, 26-3, for example, in a TB corresponding to “Index 3-6” of “Level-3” indicated in the nineteenth row in FIG. 9, CB-1 to CB-8 are “NAK”, “ACK”, . . . , “ACK”, “NAK”, “ACK”, “ACK”, respectively. When it is in this ACK/NAK pattern, because CB-1 and adjacent CB-6 to CB-8 are grouped as a CBG subject to retransmission, CB-1 and CB-6 to CB-8 are retransmitted; in this case, signaling between the devices including acknowledgement and non-acknowledgement corresponds to transmitting an ACK/NACK report).
Regarding claims 12, 25, the combination of Wu in view of Zhang teaches the apparatus or method. Wu further teaches:
wherein the apparatus is a user equipment (UE), the wireless device is a network entity (see Wu, Figs. 1 and 2, par. [0027]: FIG. 1 illustrates an example of a base station device. FIG. 2 illustrates an example of a terminal device. In a wireless communication system, a base station device 1 and a terminal device 2 communicate data by wireless communication), and the retransmitted data is downlink data (see Wu, par. [0045]: The buffer-information managing unit 11 notifies the downlink-signal-baseband processing unit 14 about the “information of CBG subject to retransmission” read from the feedback table 17. The downlink-signal-baseband processing unit 14 refers to the buffer 12 based on the “information about CBG subject to retransmission” notified by the buffer-information managing unit 11, to acquire the CBG subject to retransmission, and retransmits it to the terminal device 2 through the wireless communication unit 16, and see par. [0137]: the case of retransmission from the base station device 1 to the terminal device 2 has been described).
Regarding claims 13, 26, the combination of Wu in view of Zhang teaches the apparatus or method. Wu further teaches:
wherein the apparatus is a network entity, the wireless device is a user equipment (UE) (see Wu, Figs. 1 and 2, par. [0027]: FIG. 1 illustrates an example of a base station device. FIG. 2 illustrates an example of a terminal device. In a wireless communication system, a base station device 1 and a terminal device 2 communicate data by wireless communication), and the retransmitted data is uplink data (see Wu, par. [0044]: The buffer-information managing unit 11 refers to the feedback table 17 based on the “HARQ-ACK bit” received from the uplink-signal-baseband processing unit 15. That is, the buffer-information managing unit 11 acquires “information of CBG subject to retransmission” corresponding to the “HARQ-ACK bit” from the feedback table 17, and see par. [0138]: the present invention is applicable also to a case in which retransmission is performed from the terminal device to the base station device 1).
Regarding claim 27, Wu teaches:
An apparatus for wireless communication, comprising:
means for sending (see Wu, Fig. 1, par. [0029]: The base station device 1 includes a buffer-information managing unit 11, a buffer 12, a scheduler 13, a downlink-signal-baseband processing unit 14, an uplink-signal-baseband processing unit 15, a wireless communication unit 16, and a feedback table 17. The feedback table 17 is an example of a storage unit that is stored in a predetermined storage device), to a wireless device, a message indicating a partial code block group, the partial code block group being indicated via a quantity representing a fraction of a code block group (see Wu, Fig. 9, par. [0137]: The base station device 1 generates a new TB (including a retransmission CBG and a new CBG) based on the CBG information, and performs retransmission and new transmission. Moreover, at the same time, the base station device 1 transmits a state of the retransmission CBG and the new CBG, for example, by the PDCCH, and see par. [0093]: in the feedback tables 17-3, 26-3, for example, in a TB corresponding to “Index 3-6” of “Level-3” indicated in the nineteenth row in FIG. 9, CB-1 to CB-8 are “NAK”, “ACK”, . . . , “ACK”, “NAK”, “ACK”, “ACK”, respectively. When it is in this ACK/NAK pattern, because CB-1 and adjacent CB-6 to CB-8 are grouped as a CBG subject to retransmission, CB-1 and CB-6 to CB-8 are retransmitted; in this case, the CBG information such as feedback tables which indicate parts of CBGs corresponds to a message indicating a fraction of a code block group); and
means for obtaining (see Wu, Fig. 1, par. [0029]: The base station device 1 includes a buffer-information managing unit 11, a buffer 12, a scheduler 13, a downlink-signal-baseband processing unit 14, an uplink-signal-baseband processing unit 15, a wireless communication unit 16, and a feedback table 17. The feedback table 17 is an example of a storage unit that is stored in a predetermined storage device), retransmitted data in the partial code block group and additional data in a remainder of the code block group (see Wu, Fig. 9, par. [0138]: The terminal device 2 newly generates a TB (including retransmission CBG and new CBG) based on the CBG information, and performs retransmission and new transmission. At the same time, the terminal device 2 transmits a state of the retransmission CBG and the new CBG by the PUCCH. In short, because the retransmission and the new transmission are both present mixedly, it is notified from the terminal device 2 to the base station device 1, and see par. [0093]: in the feedback tables 17-3, 26-3, for example, in a TB corresponding to “Index 3-6” of “Level-3” indicated in the nineteenth row in FIG. 9, CB-1 to CB-8 are “NAK”, “ACK”, . . . , “ACK”, “NAK”, “ACK”, “ACK”, respectively. When it is in this ACK/NAK pattern, because CB-1 and adjacent CB-6 to CB-8 are grouped as a CBG subject to retransmission, CB-1 and CB-6 to CB-8 are retransmitted; in this case, CBG information about retransmission and new transmission is obtained, corresponding to retransmitted data and additional data).
However, Wu does not explicitly teach:
obtaining data in response to a non-acknowledgement of the code block group,
Zhang, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
obtaining data in response to a non-acknowledgement of the code block group (see Zhang, par. [0120]: The DFI 230 may also include CBG-level feedback (e.g., a bitmap indicating an acknowledgement status) for each CBG in at least one of the transport blocks in the first AUL transmission 220. In some examples, the DFI 230 may include CBG-level feedback for each transport block. In some examples, the DFI 230 may include CBG-level feedback for each transport block for which a negative acknowledgement is indicated (e.g., to provide more granular feedback which may indicate, for a transport block for which a negative acknowledgement is indicated, which CBGs of the transport block were successfully received and which CBGs of the transport block may be retransmitted by the UE 115-a)),
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the obtaining data of Wu with the obtaining data in response to a non-acknowledgement of Zhang with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of improving efficiency of the system (see Zhang, par. [0066]).
Regarding claim 28, the combination of Wu in view of Zhang teaches the apparatus. Wu further teaches:
wherein the apparatus is a user equipment (UE), the wireless device is a network entity (see Wu, Figs. 1 and 2, par. [0027]: FIG. 1 illustrates an example of a base station device. FIG. 2 illustrates an example of a terminal device. In a wireless communication system, a base station device 1 and a terminal device 2 communicate data by wireless communication), and the retransmitted data is downlink data (see Wu, par. [0045]: The buffer-information managing unit 11 notifies the downlink-signal-baseband processing unit 14 about the “information of CBG subject to retransmission” read from the feedback table 17. The downlink-signal-baseband processing unit 14 refers to the buffer 12 based on the “information about CBG subject to retransmission” notified by the buffer-information managing unit 11, to acquire the CBG subject to retransmission, and retransmits it to the terminal device 2 through the wireless communication unit 16, and see par. [0137]: the case of retransmission from the base station device 1 to the terminal device 2 has been described).
Regarding claim 29, the combination of Wu in view of Zhang teaches the apparatus. Wu further teaches:
wherein the apparatus is a network entity, the wireless device is a user equipment (UE) (see Wu, Figs. 1 and 2, par. [0027]: FIG. 1 illustrates an example of a base station device. FIG. 2 illustrates an example of a terminal device. In a wireless communication system, a base station device 1 and a terminal device 2 communicate data by wireless communication), and the retransmitted data is uplink data (see Wu, par. [0044]: The buffer-information managing unit 11 refers to the feedback table 17 based on the “HARQ-ACK bit” received from the uplink-signal-baseband processing unit 15. That is, the buffer-information managing unit 11 acquires “information of CBG subject to retransmission” corresponding to the “HARQ-ACK bit” from the feedback table 17, and see par. [0138]: the present invention is applicable also to a case in which retransmission is performed from the terminal device to the base station device 1).
Regarding claim 30, Wu teaches:
One or more non-transitory, computer-readable media comprising computer executable code, the code when executed by one or more processors causes the one or more processors to (see Wu, Fig. 1, par. [0029]: The base station device 1 includes a buffer-information managing unit 11, a buffer 12, a scheduler 13, a downlink-signal-baseband processing unit 14, an uplink-signal-baseband processing unit 15, a wireless communication unit 16, and a feedback table 17. The feedback table 17 is an example of a storage unit that is stored in a predetermined storage device, and see Fig. 14, pars. [0147-0150]: in FIG. 14, a computer 300 includes a CPU 310, a hard disk drive (HDD) 320, and a random access memory (RAM) 340. These components 310 to 340 are connected with one another through a bus 400. The HDD 320 stores an optimal multilevel-CBG-search program 320a in advance. Note that respective functions of the optimal multilevel-CBG-search program 320a may be separated to modules appropriately. Moreover, the HDD 320 stores various kinds of data. For example, the HDD 320 stores an operating system (OS) and various kinds of data. The CPU 310 reads the optimal multilevel-CBG-search program 320a from the HDD 320, to execute it. The optimal multilevel-CBG-search program 320a is not necessarily required to be stored in the HDD 320 from the beginning. For example, the program is stored in a “portable physical medium” to be inserted into the computer 300, such as a flexible disk (FD), a compact disk read-only memory (CD-ROM), a digital versatile disk (DVD), a magneto-optical disk, and an IC card. The computer 300 may be configured to read the program from these media, to execute it), individually or in combination:
send, to a wireless device, a message indicating a partial code block group, the partial code block group being indicated via a quantity representing a fraction of a code block group (see Wu, Fig. 9, par. [0137]: The base station device 1 generates a new TB (including a retransmission CBG and a new CBG) based on the CBG information, and performs retransmission and new transmission. Moreover, at the same time, the base station device 1 transmits a state of the retransmission CBG and the new CBG, for example, by the PDCCH, and see par. [0093]: in the feedback tables 17-3, 26-3, for example, in a TB corresponding to “Index 3-6” of “Level-3” indicated in the nineteenth row in FIG. 9, CB-1 to CB-8 are “NAK”, “ACK”, . . . , “ACK”, “NAK”, “ACK”, “ACK”, respectively. When it is in this ACK/NAK pattern, because CB-1 and adjacent CB-6 to CB-8 are grouped as a CBG subject to retransmission, CB-1 and CB-6 to CB-8 are retransmitted; in this case, the CBG information such as feedback tables which indicate parts of CBGs corresponds to a message indicating a fraction of a code block group); and
obtain, retransmitted data in the partial code block group and additional data in a remainder of the code block group (see Wu, Fig. 9, par. [0138]: The terminal device 2 newly generates a TB (including retransmission CBG and new CBG) based on the CBG information, and performs retransmission and new transmission. At the same time, the terminal device 2 transmits a state of the retransmission CBG and the new CBG by the PUCCH. In short, because the retransmission and the new transmission are both present mixedly, it is notified from the terminal device 2 to the base station device 1, and see par. [0093]: in the feedback tables 17-3, 26-3, for example, in a TB corresponding to “Index 3-6” of “Level-3” indicated in the nineteenth row in FIG. 9, CB-1 to CB-8 are “NAK”, “ACK”, . . . , “ACK”, “NAK”, “ACK”, “ACK”, respectively. When it is in this ACK/NAK pattern, because CB-1 and adjacent CB-6 to CB-8 are grouped as a CBG subject to retransmission, CB-1 and CB-6 to CB-8 are retransmitted; in this case, CBG information about retransmission and new transmission is obtained, corresponding to retransmitted data and additional data).
However, Wu does not explicitly teach:
obtaining data in response to a non-acknowledgement of the code block group,
Zhang, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
obtaining data in response to a non-acknowledgement of the code block group (see Zhang, par. [0120]: The DFI 230 may also include CBG-level feedback (e.g., a bitmap indicating an acknowledgement status) for each CBG in at least one of the transport blocks in the first AUL transmission 220. In some examples, the DFI 230 may include CBG-level feedback for each transport block. In some examples, the DFI 230 may include CBG-level feedback for each transport block for which a negative acknowledgement is indicated (e.g., to provide more granular feedback which may indicate, for a transport block for which a negative acknowledgement is indicated, which CBGs of the transport block were successfully received and which CBGs of the transport block may be retransmitted by the UE 115-a)),
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the obtaining data of Wu with the obtaining data in response to a non-acknowledgement of Zhang with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of improving efficiency of the system (see Zhang, par. [0066]).
Claims 4-5 and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu in view of Zhang, as applied to claims 1-3, 6, 12-16, 19, and 25-30 above, and further in view of Wan et al. (US 7,697,948), hereinafter “Wan”.
Regarding claims 4, 17, the combination of Wu in view of Zhang teaches the apparatus or method.
However, the combination of Wu in view of Zhang does not teach:
wherein the partial code block group is based on a first spectral efficiency (SE) threshold and a second SE threshold corresponding to a target block error rate (BLER),
wherein the first SE threshold corresponds to a minimum amount of spectral efficiency observed from code block groups transmitted or received in a historical window of one or more slots, and
wherein the second SE threshold corresponds to an amount of spectral efficiency under which a percentage of the one or more slots or the code block groups, equal to the target BLER, experienced reception failure during the historical window.
Wan, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
wherein the partial code block group is based on a first spectral efficiency (SE) threshold and a second SE threshold corresponding to a target block error rate (BLER) (see Wan, Fig. 5, col. 12, lines 17-28: FIG. 5 contains a diagram exemplifying the power allocation for an HARQ-CC system. An RBI vs. SIR mapping function is shown. SIRE,1~t-1 is the effective combined SIR of the previous 1~(t-1) transmissions, and SIRE,1~t is the desired effective combined SIR of all the t transmissions. SIRE,t is the SIR target of the t-th transmission, based on which the allocated power is decided. RBItarget gives the requirement of the final combined SIRtarget. The combined SIR can be obtained based on the measurements of all the received transmissions. The differences between SIRtarget and the measurements, together with the channel quality prediction, give the power requirement, and see col. 3, lines 11-17: The quality of service requirement can be expressed by different quality indicators: BLER (block error rate), throughput, delay, as well as through one or more new indicators defined in accordance with the invention. These indicators can be obtained by statistics or based on link information measurements, such as SIR and rawBER; in this case, thresholds for efficiency for minimum and to meet target quality are used),
wherein the first SE threshold corresponds to a minimum amount of spectral efficiency observed from code block groups transmitted or received in a historical window of one or more slots (see Wan, Fig. 5, col. 12, lines 17-28: FIG. 5 contains a diagram exemplifying the power allocation for an HARQ-CC system. An RBI vs. SIR mapping function is shown. SIRE,1~t-1 is the effective combined SIR of the previous 1~(t-1) transmissions, and SIRE,1~t is the desired effective combined SIR of all the t transmissions. SIRE,t is the SIR target of the t-th transmission, based on which the allocated power is decided. RBItarget gives the requirement of the final combined SIRtarget. The combined SIR can be obtained based on the measurements of all the received transmissions. The differences between SIRtarget and the measurements, together with the channel quality prediction, give the power requirement; in this case, thresholds for efficiency for minimum and to meet target quality are used), and
wherein the second SE threshold corresponds to an amount of spectral efficiency under which a percentage of the one or more slots or the code block groups, equal to the target BLER, experienced reception failure during the historical window (see Wan, Fig. 5, col. 12, lines 17-28: FIG. 5 contains a diagram exemplifying the power allocation for an HARQ-CC system. An RBI vs. SIR mapping function is shown. SIRE,1~t-1 is the effective combined SIR of the previous 1~(t-1) transmissions, and SIRE,1~t is the desired effective combined SIR of all the t transmissions. SIRE,t is the SIR target of the t-th transmission, based on which the allocated power is decided. RBItarget gives the requirement of the final combined SIRtarget. The combined SIR can be obtained based on the measurements of all the received transmissions. The differences between SIRtarget and the measurements, together with the channel quality prediction, give the power requirement, and see col. 3, lines 11-17: The quality of service requirement can be expressed by different quality indicators: BLER (block error rate), throughput, delay, as well as through one or more new indicators defined in accordance with the invention. These indicators can be obtained by statistics or based on link information measurements, such as SIR and rawBER, and see col. 13, lines 24-33: The quality mapping unit 70 is provided with or has access to a number of coding performance lookup tables (e.g. RBI-BLER or RBIR-BLER for a number of coding modes). The inputs to the quality mapping unit 70 include at least one quality requirement, such as BLERtarget and information about the coding mode, e.g. coding rate and block size. By means of these inputs the quality mapping unit can check out the information requirement/quality indicator for each coding block; in this case, thresholds for efficiency for minimum and to meet target quality are used).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the partial code block group of the combination of Wu in view of Zhang with the efficiency thresholds of Wan with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of more reliable and efficient packet transmission (see Wan, col. 6, lines 40-46).
Regarding claims 5, 18, the combination of Wu in view of Zhang, and further in view of Wan, teaches the apparatus or method.
The combination of Wu in view of Zhang does not teach, but Wan teaches:
wherein the quantity indicating the partial code block group is a function of the first SE threshold and a difference between the second SE threshold and the first SE threshold (see Wan, Fig. 5, col. 12, lines 17-28: FIG. 5 contains a diagram exemplifying the power allocation for an HARQ-CC system. An RBI vs. SIR mapping function is shown. SIRE,1~t-1 is the effective combined SIR of the previous 1~(t-1) transmissions, and SIRE,1~t is the desired effective combined SIR of all the t transmissions. SIRE,t is the SIR target of the t-th transmission, based on which the allocated power is decided. RBItarget gives the requirement of the final combined SIRtarget. The combined SIR can be obtained based on the measurements of all the received transmissions. The differences between SIRtarget and the measurements, together with the channel quality prediction, give the power requirement, and see col. 3, lines 11-17: The quality of service requirement can be expressed by different quality indicators: BLER (block error rate), throughput, delay, as well as through one or more new indicators defined in accordance with the invention. These indicators can be obtained by statistics or based on link information measurements, such as SIR and rawBER, and see col. 13, lines 24-47: The quality mapping unit 70 is provided with or has access to a number of coding performance lookup tables (e.g. RBI-BLER or RBIR-BLER for a number of coding modes). The inputs to the quality mapping unit 70 include at least one quality requirement, such as BLERtarget and information about the coding mode, e.g. coding rate and block size. By means of these inputs the quality mapping unit can check out the information requirement/quality indicator for each coding block. In FIG. 7, the target value of the quality indicator RBI, RBItarget, is output from the quality mapping unit 70. Turning to the line containing transceiver functionality and where the channel measurements take place, an information bit sequence is input to a transmitter unit 71. The transmitter unit 71 normally has means for first transmission as well as for retransmissions and includes a code/modulation/buffer subunit 71A and a power allocation subunit 71B. The cod/mod/buffer unit 71A receives inputs comprising the information bit sequence and MCS signals (modulation mode, coding rate, etc.) and outputs a modulated symbol sequence. The modulated symbol sequence is forwarded to the power allocation unit 71B, to which the current transmitted power is also provided. The unit 71B provides the transmitted symbol sequence with the allocated power level; in this case, retransmissions are controlled based on the difference of thresholds).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the partial code block group of the combination of Wu in view of Zhang with the efficiency thresholds of Wan with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of more reliable and efficient packet transmission (see Wan, col. 6, lines 40-46).
Claims 7 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu in view of Zhang, as applied to claims 1-3, 6, 12-16, 19, and 25-30 above, and further in view of Pedersen et al. (US 2025/0070949), hereinafter “Pedersen”.
Regarding claims 7, 20, the combination of Wu in view of Zhang teaches the apparatus or method.
However, the combination of Wu in view of Zhang does not teach:
wherein the one or more processors, individually or in any combination, are operable to cause the apparatus to:
transmit, to the wireless device, a channel state feedback (CSF) report recommending or indicating a modulation and coding scheme (MCS) associated with a target BLER, wherein the message indicating the partial code block group is sent in the CSF report.
Pedersen, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
wherein the one or more processors, individually or in any combination, are operable to cause the apparatus to:
transmit, to the wireless device, a channel state feedback (CSF) report recommending or indicating a modulation and coding scheme (MCS) associated with a target BLER, wherein the message indicating the partial code block group is sent in the CSF report (see Pedersen, par. [0077]: The gNB configures the UE to use eCQI (CBG optimized) reporting where the UE shall estimate highest supported MCS (expressed via a CQI index), assuming that downlink transmissions occupy a group of downlink physical resource blocks termed the CSI reference resource with M code block groups, while the error probability of at most N failed code block groups does not exceed P. Parameters M, N, and P are configured by the network; [0079] 2) The UE performs measurements on the CSI reference resources to determine the received post detection SINR. Based on these measurements, the UE estimates the effective SINR for the M-different CBGs. The UE thereafter determine the highest MCS that it can support, while at most N of the M CBGs are in error with probability P. To conduct its estimation, it may include observations on previous CBG transmissions (ex. burst error probabilities, correlations, etc.) to improve its estimate of the effective SINR. This may be implemented in the UE may having a table with CBG error rate vs effective SINR for the different MCS's; [0080] 3) The reporting of the eCQI may be in the form of an eCQI index that points to a new eCQI table that enumerates the supported modulation scheme, effective code rate, and overall efficiency that it recommends the gNB to use for its PDSCH transmissions, and see par. [0049]: the UE is typically configured to measure its channel quality on the CSI-RS resources to determine which MCS index it can support, subject to its first transmission BLER constraint (which by default is 10%); in this case, the CQI corresponds to a CSF report).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the apparatus or method of the combination of Wu in view of Zhang with the report of MCS of Pedersen with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of improved spectral efficiency and higher system capacity (see Pedersen, par. [0086]).
Claims 8 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu in view of Zhang, as applied to claims 1-3, 6, 12-16, 19, and 25-30 above, and further in view of Akkarakaran et al. (US 2021/0321389), hereinafter “Akkarakaran”.
Regarding claims 8, 21, the combination of Wu in view of Zhang teaches the apparatus or method.
However, the combination of Wu in view of Zhang does not teach:
wherein the one or more processors, individually or in any combination, are operable to cause the apparatus to:
transmit, to the wireless device, uplink control information (UCI), wherein the message indicating the partial code block group is sent in the UCI.
Akkarakaran, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
wherein the one or more processors, individually or in any combination, are operable to cause the apparatus to:
transmit, to the wireless device, uplink control information (UCI), wherein the message indicating the partial code block group is sent in the UCI (see Akkarakaran, par. [0079]: the identification of the subset of CBGs may be carried in a PUCCH transmission or a PUSCH transmission. In some aspects, the identification of the subset of CBGs may include CBG transmission information (CBGTI). In some aspects, the identification of the subset of CBGs may be carried in UCI. The UCI may be carried in a transmission that is different than an initial data transmission containing the subset of CBGs. In some aspects, the UCI may be carried in a PUSCH transmission that carries the subset of CBGs).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the apparatus or method of the combination of Wu in view of Zhang with the UCI of Akkarakaran with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of saving transmission resources and operating power (see Akkarakaran, par. [0069]).
Claims 9, 11, 22, and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu in view of Zhang, as applied to claims 1-3, 6, 12-16, 19, and 25-30 above, and further in view of Kim et al. (US 2018/0278368), hereinafter “Kim”.
Regarding claims 9, 22, the combination of Wu in view of Zhang teaches the apparatus or method.
However, the combination of Wu in view of Zhang does not teach:
wherein the one or more processors, individually or in any combination, are operable to cause the apparatus to:
transmit, to the wireless device, capability information indicating support for link adaptation based on the partial code block group; and
receive an acknowledgement of the support prior to establishment of a radio resource control (RRC) connection with the wireless device, the message indicating the partial code block group being sent after the establishment of the RRC connection.
Kim, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
wherein the one or more processors, individually or in any combination, are operable to cause the apparatus to:
transmit, to the wireless device, capability information indicating support for link adaptation based on the partial code block group (see Kim, par. [0152]: the number of CBG HARQ ACK bits for a TB is at least equal to the number of CBGs indicated or implied for transmission. The UE may not need to transmit HARQ ACK bits for CBGs that are not indicated or implied for transmission. The indication or implication of CBGs may be performed using RRC signaling, MAC signaling, L1 signaling, or may be implicitly derived, for example. For DL CBG based (re)transmission, the DCI may include information indicating which CBGs are transmitted or retransmitted and how CBGs are to be handled for soft-buffer/HARQ combining (e.g., whether some of part of the soft buffer of indicated CBG(s) is flushed). In some implementations, the preemption indication indicates DL physical resources preempted and is transmitted using a PDCCH); and
receive an acknowledgement of the support prior to establishment of a radio resource control (RRC) connection with the wireless device (see Kim, par. [0152]: the UE 106 is separately configured for uplink (UL) and downlink (DL) transmissions (e.g., CBG-based retransmission may be used for UL but not DL or vice versa and/or different CBG-based retransmission configurations may be used for UL and DL). In some implementations, CBG-based retransmission is only allowed for the same transport block (TB) of a HARQ process. In some implementations, a CBG is allowed to include all code blocks (CBs) of a TB, regardless of the size of the TB. In this case, the UE 106 may report a single HARQ ACK bit for the entire TB; in this case, a report after configuration corresponds to receiving an acknowledgement. This is performed before further configuration via RRC (i.e. prior to RRC establishment)), the message indicating the partial code block group being sent after the establishment of the RRC connection (see Kim, par. [0158]: a parameter N_CBG_max indicates the maximum number of CBGs per transport block for a given UE/base station pair. This parameter may depend on UE geometry, e.g., this parameter may relate to signal to interference plus noise ratio (SINR) for the UE and may be larger with a better SINR. The number of distinct ACKs supported may also be limited by the capacity of the corresponding PUCCH channel. Also, if carrier aggregation is enabled, ACKs from multiple carriers may be multiplexed into a single PUCCH in one UL carrier, which may limit the N_CBG_max per DL carrier. Therefore, in some embodiments, the base station is configured to select N_CBG_max (and may indicate this parameter to the UE using RRC signaling)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the apparatus or method of the combination of Wu in view of Zhang with the capability information of Kim with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of improving decoding performance and reducing power consumption (see Kim, par. [0126]).
Regarding claims 11, 24, the combination of Wu in view of Zhang teaches the apparatus or method.
Wu does not teach, but Zhang teaches:
wherein the one or more processors, individually or in any combination, are operable to cause the apparatus to:
receive or transmit an indication of a granularity of the partial code block (see Zhang, par. [0109]: the second DFI partition may include explicit CW commands (e.g., and may not necessarily include SUL HARQ feedback information). That is, DFI may be partitioned into a first partition comprising AUL HARQ feedback information and a second partition comprising one or more CW commands (e.g., CW update information), and NDI may be used for SUL HARQ feedback. In such cases, the number of bits in the second partition may be based on a number of CW commands for the UE and a CW command granularity (e.g., a number of bits for each CW command), and see Zhang, par. [0120]: The DFI 230 may also include CBG-level feedback (e.g., a bitmap indicating an acknowledgement status) for each CBG in at least one of the transport blocks in the first AUL transmission 220. In some examples, the DFI 230 may include CBG-level feedback for each transport block. In some examples, the DFI 230 may include CBG-level feedback for each transport block for which a negative acknowledgement is indicated (e.g., to provide more granular feedback which may indicate, for a transport block for which a negative acknowledgement is indicated, which CBGs of the transport block were successfully received and which CBGs of the transport block may be retransmitted by the UE 115-a)), the granularity being a number of bits corresponding to the quantity representing the fraction of the partial code block group (see Zhang, par. [0120]: The DFI 230 may also include CBG-level feedback (e.g., a bitmap indicating an acknowledgement status) for each CBG in at least one of the transport blocks in the first AUL transmission 220. In some examples, the DFI 230 may include CBG-level feedback for each transport block. In some examples, the DFI 230 may include CBG-level feedback for each transport block for which a negative acknowledgement is indicated (e.g., to provide more granular feedback which may indicate, for a transport block for which a negative acknowledgement is indicated, which CBGs of the transport block were successfully received and which CBGs of the transport block may be retransmitted by the UE 115-a)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the apparatus or method of Wu with the granularity of Zhang with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of improving efficiency of the system (see Zhang, par. [0066]).
However, the combination of Wu in view of Zhang does not teach:
wherein the indication is prior to establishment of a radio resource control (RRC) connection with the wireless device,
Kim, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
wherein the indication is prior to establishment of a radio resource control (RRC) connection with the wireless device (see Kim, par. [0152]: the UE 106 is separately configured for uplink (UL) and downlink (DL) transmissions (e.g., CBG-based retransmission may be used for UL but not DL or vice versa and/or different CBG-based retransmission configurations may be used for UL and DL). In some implementations, CBG-based retransmission is only allowed for the same transport block (TB) of a HARQ process. In some implementations, a CBG is allowed to include all code blocks (CBs) of a TB, regardless of the size of the TB. In this case, the UE 106 may report a single HARQ ACK bit for the entire TB; in this case, a report after configuration corresponds to receiving an acknowledgement. This is performed before further configuration via RRC (i.e. prior to RRC establishment))),
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the apparatus or method of the combination of Wu in view of Zhang with the indication prior to RRC establishment of Kim with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of improving decoding performance and reducing power consumption (see Kim, par. [0126]).
Claims 10 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu in view of Zhang, as applied to claims 1-3, 6, 12-16, 19, and 25-30 above, and further in view of Sun et al. (US 2020/0295875), hereinafter “Sun”, and further in view of Kim.
Regarding claims 10, 23, the combination of Wu in view of Zhang teaches the apparatus or method.
However, the combination of Wu in view of Zhang does not teach:
wherein the one or more processors, individually or in any combination, are operable to cause the apparatus to:
receive, from the wireless device, capability information indicating support for link adaptation based on the partial code block group; and
transmit an acknowledgement of the support prior to establishment of a radio resource control (RRC) connection with the wireless device, the message indicating the partial code block group being sent after the establishment of the RRC connection.
Sun, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
wherein the one or more processors, individually or in any combination, are operable to cause the apparatus to:
receive, from the wireless device, capability information indicating support for link adaptation based on the partial code block group (see Sun, Fig. 9, par. [0099]: At 904, the UE 952 transmits CBG ACK/NACK feedback to the BS 950 including ACK/NACK bitmap “111100010111”. Each ‘1’ in the bitmap indicates an ACK and each ‘0’ indicates a NACK for the corresponding CBG. In this example, the bitmap indicates that CBGs 5, 6, 7, and 9 were not correctly decoded by the UE. In this case, the ACK/NACK bitmap is correctly decoded by the BS 950); and
transmit an acknowledgement of the support (see Sun, Fig. 9, par. [0099]: At 906, the BS 950 transmits a result of the decoding including a bitmap “111100010111” as part of a second TX. The BS 950 also retransmits CBGs 5, 6, 7 and 9 based on the correctly decoded bitmap)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the apparatus or method of the combination of Wu in view of Zhang with the capability information of Sun with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of reducing resource wastage (see Sun, par. [0104]).
However, the combination of Wu in view of Zhang, and further in view of Sun, does not teach:
wherein the acknowledgement of the support is prior to establishment of a radio resource control (RRC) connection with the wireless device, the message indicating the partial code block group being sent after the establishment of the RRC connection.
Kim, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
wherein the acknowledgement of the support is prior to establishment of a radio resource control (RRC) connection with the wireless device (see Kim, par. [0152]: the UE 106 is separately configured for uplink (UL) and downlink (DL) transmissions (e.g., CBG-based retransmission may be used for UL but not DL or vice versa and/or different CBG-based retransmission configurations may be used for UL and DL). In some implementations, CBG-based retransmission is only allowed for the same transport block (TB) of a HARQ process. In some implementations, a CBG is allowed to include all code blocks (CBs) of a TB, regardless of the size of the TB. In this case, the UE 106 may report a single HARQ ACK bit for the entire TB; in this case, a report after configuration corresponds an acknowledgement. This is performed before further configuration via RRC (i.e. prior to RRC establishment)), the message indicating the partial code block group being sent after the establishment of the RRC connection (see Kim, par. [0158]: a parameter N_CBG_max indicates the maximum number of CBGs per transport block for a given UE/base station pair. This parameter may depend on UE geometry, e.g., this parameter may relate to signal to interference plus noise ratio (SINR) for the UE and may be larger with a better SINR. The number of distinct ACKs supported may also be limited by the capacity of the corresponding PUCCH channel. Also, if carrier aggregation is enabled, ACKs from multiple carriers may be multiplexed into a single PUCCH in one UL carrier, which may limit the N_CBG_max per DL carrier. Therefore, in some embodiments, the base station is configured to select N_CBG_max (and may indicate this parameter to the UE using RRC signaling)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the apparatus or method of the combination of Wu in view of Zhang, and further in view of Sun, with the acknowledgement of support of Kim with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of improving decoding performance and reducing power consumption (see Kim, par. [0126]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Li et al. (US 2023/0208772) teaches a contention window size determining method and apparatus.
Low et al. (US 2022/0368494) teaches embodiments of apparatuses and methods for uplink data transmission preparation.
Nammi et al. (US 2016/0006539) teaches a method of operating a mobile device that is configured to receive multi-antenna downlink transmissions from a network node.
Soldati et al. (US 2024/0204910) teaches systems and method for inter-node exchange of link adaptation assistance information.
Paymard, Pouria, et al. ("Enhanced link adaptation for extended reality code block group based HARQ transmissions") teaches algorithms that significantly improve the downlink system capacity in terms of satisfied XR users.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CALEB J BALLOWE whose telephone number is (571)270-0410. The examiner can normally be reached MON-FRI 7:30-5.
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, Nishant B. Divecha can be reached at (571) 270-3125. 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.J.B./Examiner, Art Unit 2419
/Nishant Divecha/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2419