TAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Cross Reference to Related Applications
2. This application is a continuation of International Application No. PCT/CN2022/108264 filed on July 27, 2022, which claims priority of Chinese Patent Application No. 202110875526.4 filed on July 30, 2021, which are incorporated by reference in their entireties.
Priority
3. Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Claims status
4. This office action is a response to an application filed on January 23, 2024 in which claims 1-20 are pending for examination.
Drawings
5. The Examiner contends that the drawings submitted on January 23, 2024 are acceptable for examination proceedings.
Information Disclosure Statement
6. The Examiner has considered the reference(s) listed on the Information Disclosure Statement submitted on October 21, 2024.
Claim Objection (minor informalities)
7. Claims 5, 8, 12, 13 and 20 were objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 5, the claim recites “…the one or more type 3 codebooks are triggerd…”. It appears that “triggerd” is a typological error for “triggered”.
Regarding claim 8, the claim recites “…and other HARQ-ACK codebook(s)…” in line 4. Claim 8 depends on claim 3 and it appears that “other HARQ-ACK codebook(s)” of claim 8 is referring back to “other HARQ-ACK codebook(s)” from claim 3. In order to avoid the insufficient antecedent basis, it is suggested to amend “…and other HARQ-ACK codebook(s)…” to “…and the other HARQ-ACK codebook(s)…”.
If applicant is of the opinion that “…other HARQ-ACK codebook(s)…” from claim 8 is not referring back to “other HARQ-ACK codebook(s)” from claim 3, further clarification is requested and it is suggested to fix antecedent basis issues.
Regarding claim 12, the claim recites:
“…..wherein the first codebook feedback method comprises one of the following: separately processing codebook(s) corresponding to each physical layer priority; and in a case that transmissions carrying codebooks corresponding to different physical layer priorities overlap in time domain, only feeding back the target codebook with a high physical layer priority;
allowing codebook multiplexing across physical layer priorities, or allowing simultaneous transmission of codebooks corresponding to different physical layer priorities; and
directly feeding back the basic type 3 codebook”.
Claim 13 depends on claim 12 and the claim recites:
“…allowing simultaneous transmission of codebooks corresponding to different physical layer priorities comprises…”.
A clear interpretation of the limitation (according to claim 12) is that which states the following alternatives:
“…..the first codebook feedback method comprises one of the following:
(a) separately processing codebook(s) corresponding to each physical layer priority; and in a case that transmissions carrying codebooks corresponding to different physical layer priorities overlap in time domain, only feeding back the target codebook with a high physical layer priority;
(b) allowing codebook multiplexing across physical layer priorities, or
(c) allowing simultaneous transmission of codebooks corresponding to different physical layer priorities; and
(d) directly feeding back the basic type 3 codebook.
According to the above claim structure (according to claim language “one of the following”), claims 13 requires only one alternative and in a case that the cited prior art has been disclosed the teaching of only one from the choice, the claim limitation(s) is/are still met.
As such, questions are raised about the inconsistencies noted herein and that its respectfully observed applicant’s objective for the claim limitation i.e. further clarification is requested whether the dependent claim 13 is optional in case the cited prior arts only discloses (a) or (b) or (d).
Regarding claim 20, the claim recites “A network side device ,comprising… the method according to claim 15 are implemented”. For clarity and consistency, it is suggested to incorporate steps/processes recited in claim 15 into claim 20.
For the purpose of examinations, the examiner will interpret the claims as best understood.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
8. 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.
9. 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.
10. There are two separate requirements under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b). MPEP § 2171. The first is subjective and requires that the claims must set forth the subject matter that the Applicants regard as their invention. Id. The second is objective and requires that the claims must particularly point out and distinctively define the metes and bounds of the subject matter that will be protected by the patent grant (i.e., whether the scope of the claim is clear to one of ordinary skill in the art). Id.
11. Claim 2, 6, 7 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 2, the claim recites “….the multiple type 3 codebooks…” in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding claim 6, the claim recites “….the first type 3 codebook…” in line 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding claim 7, the claim recites “….the first type 3 codebook…” in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding claim 16, the claim recites “….the multiple type 3 codebooks…” in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Appropriate corrections are requested. For the purpose of examinations, the examiner will interpret the claims as best understood.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
12. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
13. A rejection on this statutory basis (35 U.S.C. 102(g) as in force on March 15, 2013) is appropriate in an application or patent that is examined under the first to file provisions of the AIA if it also contains or contained at any time (1) a claim to an invention having an effective filing date as defined in 35 U.S.C. 100(i) that is before March 16, 2013 or (2) a specific reference under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, or 365(c) to any patent or application that contains or contained at any time such a claim.
14. 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 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.
15. Claims 1, 3, 5, 8, 9, 15, 18, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by WONG et al. (US 2023/0261840 A1), hereinafter “Wong”.
Regarding claim 1, Wong discloses a codebook feedbacking method (Figs. 1-2, paragraph [0001], transmitting and/or receiving acknowledgements in a mobile telecommunications network), comprising:
determining, by a terminal (paragraphs [0086], [0114], [0165], possible rules to configure the multiplexing or non-multiplexing of the HARQ-ACKs depending on the codebook for the first DCI and second DCI), a target codebook for feedback (paragraphs [0086], [0114], [0165], whether to multiplex the missed HARQ-ACK in resources for a HARQ-ACK for a further transmission or not) based on one or more type 3 codebooks (paragraphs [0086], [0114], [0165], Type 3 HARQ-ACK codebook in DCI format) and other hybrid automatic repeat request acknowledgement (HARQ-ACK) codebook(s) (paragraphs [0086], [0114], [0165], Type 1 or Type 2 HARQ-ACK codebook) that need to be fed back (paragraphs [0086], [0114], [0165], one or more of (i) priority information for one or both of the first and second transmissions; (ii) Group information for one or both of the first and second transmissions; (iii) a parameter associated with the first transmission (e.g. in the first DCI) and (iv) a parameter associated with the second transmission (e.g. in the second DCI));
wherein the one or more type 3 codebooks need to be fed back by the terminal (paragraphs [0128], [0129], One-shot HARQ -ACK request = False i.e. HARQ ACK CB Type 3 only) in a single time unit as triggered by a network side (paragraphs [0128], [0129], One-shot by the network side), or the one or more type 3 codebooks and other HARQ-ACK codebook(s) need to be fed back (paragraphs [0128], [0129], One-shot HARQ -ACK request= True i.e. HARQ ACK CB Type 3 and/or HARQ ACK CB Type 2) by the terminal in a single time unit as triggered by the network side (paragraphs [0128], [0129], ], One-shot by the network side).
Regarding claim 3, Wong discloses the step of determining a target codebook for feedback based on one or more type 3 codebooks and other HARQ-ACK codebook(s) comprises: determining, by the terminal, a target HARQ-ACK to be fed back according to a first codebook determination method, the one or more type 3 codebooks, and the other HARQ-ACK codebook(s); or determining, by the terminal, a type of the target HARQ-ACK to be fed back according to a second codebook determination method; and in a case that the type of the target HARQ-ACK is type 3 codebook, determining, by the terminal, the target codebook to be fed back based on the one or more type 3 codebooks and the other HARQ-ACK codebook(s) (paragraphs [0114], [0128]-[0129], [0135], [0165], in an example, if the first HARQ-ACK CB is Type 2 and the second HARQ-ACK CB is Type 3, then the resource scheduled by the second DCI carries all HARQ-ACKs (for all HARQ processes) including missed HARQ-ACKs scheduled by the first DCI if the second DCI indicates 1-shot=TRUE (i.e. “One-shot HARQ-ACK request”=TRUE); in a legacy system, all HARQ-ACKs for all HARQ processes which were associated with “CodeBook Type 3” would be transmitted, but only these; on the other hand, in this case the HARQ-ACKs will also include the “one shot” feedback for HARQ processes associated with Type 2).
Regarding claim 5, Wong discloses the method further comprises: determining, by the terminal, in a case that the one or more type 3 codebooks are triggered in a single time unit and the other HARQ-ACK codebook(s) need to be fed back, that HARQ processes corresponding to the triggered one or more type 3 codebooks cover HARQ processes corresponding to the other HARQ-ACK codebook(s) (paragraphs [0128]-[0129], [0134]-[0135], [0165], One-shot HARQ -ACK request = False i.e. HARQ ACK CB Type 3 only and One-shot HARQ -ACK request= True i.e. HARQ ACK CB Type 3 and/or HARQ ACK CB Type 3 Type 2).
Regarding claim 8, Wong discloses the first codebook determination method comprises one of the following: cascading, in a second order in a head-to-tail manner, at least a part of the one or more type 3 codebooks, and other HARQ-ACK codebook(s) that need to be fed back, to obtain a composite codebook; and directly feeding back the basic type 3 codebook (paragraphs [0114], [0128]-[0129], [0134]-[0135], possible rules used to configured multiplexing or non-multiplexing of the HARQ-ACKs depending on codebook of first and second DCIs).
Regarding claim 9, Wong discloses the second order comprises: cascading the other HARQ-ACK codebook(s) after a bit order corresponding to the one or more type 3 codebooks, or cascading the bit order corresponding to the one or more type 3 codebooks after the other HARQ-ACK codebook(s) (paragraphs [0114], [0128]-[0129], [0134]-[0135], L1 priority of missed HARQ-ACK scheduled by DCI).
Regarding claim 15, Wong discloses a feedback codebook method (Figs. 1-2, paragraph [0001], transmitting and/or receiving acknowledgements in a mobile telecommunications network), comprising:
triggering, by a network side device, a terminal to feed back one or more type 3 codebooks (paragraphs [0128], [0129], One-shot HARQ -ACK request = False i.e. HARQ ACK CB Type 3 only) in a single time unit (paragraphs [0128], [0129], ], One-shot by the network side), or triggering, by the network side device, the terminal to feed back one or more type 3 codebooks and other HARQ-ACK codebook(s) (paragraphs [0128], [0129], One-shot HARQ -ACK request= True i.e. HARQ ACK CB Type 3 and/or HARQ ACK CB Type 2) in a single time unit (paragraphs [0128], [0129], ], One-shot by the network side); and
obtaining, by the network side device, a target codebook fed back by the terminal (paragraphs [0086], [0114], [0165], possible rules to configure the multiplexing or non-multiplexing of the HARQ-ACKs depending on the codebook for the first DCI and second DCI), wherein the target codebook is determined by the terminal according to the one or more type 3 codebooks, or according to the one or more type 3 codebooks and other HARQ-ACK codebook(s) (paragraphs [0086], [0114], [0165], one or more of (i) priority information for one or both of the first and second transmissions; (ii) Group information for one or both of the first and second transmissions; (iii) a parameter associated with the first transmission (e.g. in the first DCI) and (iv) a parameter associated with the second transmission (e.g. in the second DCI)).
Regarding claim 18, the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 5.
Regarding claim 19, the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 1.
Regarding claim 20, the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 15.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
16. 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 of this title, 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.
17. Claims 2, 4, 7, 11, 12, 13 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WONG et al. (US 2023/0261840 A1), hereinafter “Wong” in view of Blankenship et al. (US 2023/0283415 A1), hereinafter “Blankenship”.
Regarding claim 2, Wong discloses the method according to claim 1.
While Wong implicitly refers to “the multiple type 3 codebooks correspond to a same physical layer priority; or the one or more type 3 codebooks and the other HARQ-ACK codebook(s) correspond to a same physical layer priority; or at least one of the one or more type 3 codebooks and/or the other HARQ-ACK codebook(s) corresponds to a different physical layer priority from that/those corresponding to the rest codebooks”, Blankenship from the same or similar field of endeavor explicitly discloses the multiple type 3 codebooks correspond to a same physical layer priority; or the one or more type 3 codebooks and the other HARQ-ACK codebook(s) correspond to a same physical layer priority; or at least one of the one or more type 3 codebooks and/or the other HARQ-ACK codebook(s) corresponds to a different physical layer priority from that/those corresponding to the rest codebooks (paragraphs [0110], [0143]-[0146], If a Type-3 codebook collides with another codebook, and if the Type-3 codebook is configured with “relatively” lower BLER target or lower coding rate or lower MCS or higher transmission power, etc., then the Type-3 codebook is implicitly considered of higher priority with respect to the other codebook; and accordingly, collision resolution principles based on priority can be implemented where the higher priority codebook is transmitted only, and other is not).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide “the multiple type 3 codebooks correspond to a same physical layer priority; or the one or more type 3 codebooks and the other HARQ-ACK codebook(s) correspond to a same physical layer priority; or at least one of the one or more type 3 codebooks and/or the other HARQ-ACK codebook(s) corresponds to a different physical layer priority from that/those corresponding to the rest codebooks” as taught by Blankenship, in the system of Wong, so that it would provide enhanced one-shot hybrid automatic repeat request acknowledgement (HARQ ACK) codebook transmission directed to wireless communications (Blankenship, paragraph [0001]).
Regarding claim 4, Wong discloses the method according to claim 3.
While Wong implicitly refers to “the second codebook determination method comprises: only type 3 codebook(s) are transmitted”, Blankenship from the same or similar field of endeavor explicitly discloses the second codebook determination method comprises: only type 3 codebook(s) are transmitted (paragraphs [0110], [0143]-[0146], condition only type 3 codebook(s) are transmitted).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide “the second codebook determination method comprises: only type 3 codebook(s) are transmitted” as taught by Blankenship, in the system of Wong, so that it would provide enhanced one-shot hybrid automatic repeat request acknowledgement (HARQ ACK) codebook transmission directed to wireless communications (Blankenship, paragraph [0001]).
Regarding claim 7, Wong discloses the method according to claim 1.
While Wong implicitly refers to “the first type 3 codebook comprises: a basic type 3 codebook and/or an enhanced type 3 codebook”, Blankenship from the same or similar field of endeavor explicitly discloses the first type 3 codebook comprises: a basic type 3 codebook and/or an enhanced type 3 codebook (paragraphs [0082], [0083], enhanced Type-3 HARQ-ACK codebook including HARQ-ACK bits of a predefined subset of HARQ processes).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide “the first type 3 codebook comprises: a basic type 3 codebook and/or an enhanced type 3 codebook” as taught by Blankenship, in the system of Wong, so that it would provide enhanced one-shot hybrid automatic repeat request acknowledgement (HARQ ACK) codebook transmission directed to wireless communications (Blankenship, paragraph [0001]).
Regarding claim 11, Wong discloses the method according to claim 1.
While Wong implicitly refers to “the method further comprises: determining, by the terminal, a physical layer priority corresponding to the target codebook; and feeding back, by the terminal, the target codebook according to a first codebook feedback method and the physical layer priority corresponding to the target codebook”, Blankenship from the same or similar field of endeavor explicitly discloses the method further comprises: determining, by the terminal, a physical layer priority corresponding to the target codebook; and feeding back, by the terminal, the target codebook according to a first codebook feedback method and the physical layer priority corresponding to the target codebook (paragraphs [0110], [0143]-[0146], collision resolution principles based on priority implemented).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide “the method further comprises: determining, by the terminal, a physical layer priority corresponding to the target codebook; and feeding back, by the terminal, the target codebook according to a first codebook feedback method and the physical layer priority corresponding to the target codebook” as taught by Blankenship, in the system of Wong, so that it would provide enhanced one-shot hybrid automatic repeat request acknowledgement (HARQ ACK) codebook transmission directed to wireless communications (Blankenship, paragraph [0001]).
Regarding claim 12, Wong discloses the method according to claim 11.
While Wong implicitly refers to “the first codebook feedback method comprises allowing codebook multiplexing across physical layer priorities”, Blankenship from the same or similar field of endeavor explicitly discloses the first codebook feedback method comprises allowing codebook multiplexing across physical layer priorities (paragraphs [0110], [0143]-[0146], if a first PUCCH with Type-3 HARQ codebook overlaps with a second PUCCH with HARQ codebook other than Type-3 (i.e., Type-1 or Type-2 codebook), the second PUCCH is dropped).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide “the first codebook feedback method comprises allowing codebook multiplexing across physical layer priorities” as taught by Blankenship, in the system of Wong, so that it would provide enhanced one-shot hybrid automatic repeat request acknowledgement (HARQ ACK) codebook transmission directed to wireless communications (Blankenship, paragraph [0001]).
Regarding claim 13, the claim depends on claim 12 and the claim recites multiple functionalities by using “one of the following” and “or” in a selective way. Since Examiner has shown the teaching of at least one functionality, the claim limitation(s) is/are still met which dependent upon the claim.
Regarding claim 16, the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 2.
18. Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WONG et al. (US 2023/0261840 A1), hereinafter “Wong” in view of ELMALI et al. (US 2024/0056776 A1), hereinafter “Elmali”.
Regarding claim 10, Wong discloses the method according to claim 8.
While Wong implicitly refers to “a second value order, wherein the second value order is a value order of codebook indexes or state indexes corresponding to the one or more type 3 codebooks and codebook indexes or state indexes corresponding to the other HARQ-ACK codebook(s)”, Elmali from the same or similar field of endeavor explicitly discloses a second value order, wherein the second value order is a value order of codebook indexes or state indexes corresponding to the one or more type 3 codebooks and codebook indexes or state indexes corresponding to the other HARQ-ACK codebook(s) (paragraphs [0030], [0042], the UE can concatenate the constructed HARQ-ACK sub-codebooks based on the PHY identification of the sub-codebook, i.e., the G-RNTI parameter that is a 16-bit identification (ID)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide “a second value order, wherein the second value order is a value order of codebook indexes or state indexes corresponding to the one or more type 3 codebooks and codebook indexes or state indexes corresponding to the other HARQ-ACK codebook(s)” as taught by Elmali, in the system of Wong, so that it would provide HARQ-ACK feedback for all received services that are scheduled for the same time instance to a multicast and broadcast service (Elmali, paragraph [0002]),
19. Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WONG et al. (US 2023/0261840 A1), hereinafter “Wong” in view of Alfahan et al. (US 2023/0074723 A1), hereinafter “Alfahan”.
Regarding claim 6, Wong discloses the method according to claim 1.
While Wong implicitly refers to “a state corresponding to the first type 3 codebook is comprised in a state list configured by the network side”, Alfahan from the same or similar field of endeavor explicitly discloses a state corresponding to the first type 3 codebook is comprised in a state list configured by the network side (paragraphs [0078]-[0079], [0081], HARQ process IDs associated with the state as part of the priority subset).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide “a state corresponding to the first type 3 codebook is comprised in a state list configured by the network side” as taught by Alfahan, in the system of Wong, so that it would provide reliable HARQ-ACK transmission needed for selective one-shot hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) feedback by a priority level (Alfahan, paragraph [0003]).
20. Claims 14 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WONG et al. (US 2023/0261840 A1), hereinafter “Wong” in view of YANG et al. (US 2022/0303064 A1), hereinafter “Yang”.
Regarding claim 14, Wong discloses the method according to claim 1.
While Wong implicitly refers to “not expecting, by the terminal, the network side to trigger the terminal to feed back multiple type 3 codebooks in a single time unit; or not expecting, by the terminal, the network side to trigger the terminal to feed back, in a single time unit, the one or more type 3 codebooks and the other HARQ-ACK codebook(s) that need to be fed back”, Yang from the same or similar field of endeavor explicitly discloses not expecting, by the terminal, the network side to trigger the terminal to feed back multiple type 3 codebooks in a single time unit; or not expecting, by the terminal, the network side to trigger the terminal to feed back, in a single time unit, the one or more type 3 codebooks and the other HARQ-ACK codebook(s) that need to be fed back (Fig. 23, paragraphs [0403], [0404], when higher layer signaling (2305) includes a Type-3 codebook-based HARQ-ACK feedback configuration and a Type-3 codebook-based HARQ-ACK is indicated to a UE through DCI (e.g., One-shot HARQ-ACK) request), a UE may generate a Type-3 codebook-based HARQ-ACK and transmit it to a network (2330)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide “not expecting, by the terminal, the network side to trigger the terminal to feed back multiple type 3 codebooks in a single time unit; or not expecting, by the terminal, the network side to trigger the terminal to feed back, in a single time unit, the one or more type 3 codebooks and the other HARQ-ACK codebook(s) that need to be fed back” as taught by Yang, in the system of Wong, so that it would efficiently performing a wireless signal transmission/reception process relates to transmitting or receiving a uplink/downlink wireless signal in a wireless communication system (Yang, paragraph [0004]).
Regarding claim 17, Wong discloses the method according to claim 15.
While Wong implicitly refers to “the method further comprises: determining, by the network side device, that a number of type 3 codebooks fed back by the terminal in a single time unit is one”, Yang from the same or similar field of endeavor explicitly discloses the method further comprises: determining, by the network side device, that a number of type 3 codebooks fed back by the terminal in a single time unit is one (Fig. 23, paragraphs [0403], [0404], [0422], [0472], when higher layer signaling (2305) includes a Type-3 codebook-based HARQ-ACK feedback configuration and a Type-3 codebook-based HARQ-ACK is indicated to a UE through DCI (e.g., One-shot HARQ-ACK) request), a UE may generate a Type-3 codebook-based HARQ-ACK and transmit it to a network (2330)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide “the method further comprises: determining, by the network side device, that a number of type 3 codebooks fed back by the terminal in a single time unit is one” as taught by Yang, in the system of Wong, so that it would efficiently performing a wireless signal transmission/reception process relates to transmitting or receiving a uplink/downlink wireless signal in a wireless communication system (Yang, paragraph [0004]).
Conclusion
21. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SITHU KO whose telephone number is 571-272-8647. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Friday 8:30am-5:00pmEST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Edan Orgad can be reached on 571-272-7884. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/SITHU KO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2414