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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1, 18 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 22 of Application No. 18/471,238. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims cover substantially the same subject matter and recite similar limitations.
Regarding claims 1, 18, see the table below.
Application No. 18/471,215
Application No. 18/471,238
Claims 1. A method for wireless communication at a user equipment (UE), comprising:
receiving, from a network node, a group of downlink transmissions;
forming a first hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ)-acknowledgement (ACK) part and a second HARQ-ACK part associated with a HARQ-ACK payload in accordance with a transformation scheme, the HARQ-ACK payload including HARQ feedback for each one of the group of downlink transmissions,
a size of the second HARQ-ACK part being a function of the first HARQ-ACK part;
separately encoding the first HARQ-ACK part and the second HARQ-ACK part; and transmitting, to the network node, the encoded first HARQ-ACK part and the encoded second HARQ-ACK part.
Claim 1. A method for wireless communication by a UE, comprising:
receiving, from a network node, a group of downlink transmissions;
forming, from an original HARQ-ACK payload, a first HARQ-ACK part and a second HARQ-ACK part in accordance with satisfying a forming condition, the original HARQ-ACK payload including HARQ feedback for each one of the group of downlink transmissions,
a size of the second HARQ-ACK part being a function of the first HARQ-ACK part;
separately encoding the first HARQ-ACK part and the second HARQ-ACK part; and transmitting the encoded first HARQ-ACK part and the encoded second HARQ-ACK part.
Claim 18. A user equipment (UE), comprising:
one or more processors; and one or more memories coupled with the one or more processors and storing processor-executable code that, when executed by the one or more processors, is configured to cause the UE to:
receive, from a network node, a group of downlink transmissions;
form a first hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ)-acknowledgement (ACK) part and a second HARQ-ACK part associated with a HARQ-ACK payload in accordance with a transformation scheme,
the HARQ-ACK payload including HARQ feedback for each one of the group of downlink transmissions, a size of the second HARQ-ACK part being a function of the first HARQ-ACK part;
separately encode the first HARQ-ACK part and the second HARQ-ACK part; and transmit, to the network node, the encoded first HARQ-ACK part and the encoded second HARQ-ACK part.
Claim 22: A user equipment (UE), comprising:
one or more processors; and one or more memories coupled with the one or more processors and storing processor-executable code that, when executed by the one or more processors, is configured to cause the UE to:
receive, from a network node, a group of downlink transmissions;
form, from an original HARQ-ACK payload, a first HARQ-ACK part and a second HARQ-ACK part in accordance with satisfying a forming condition,
the original HARQ-ACK payload including HARQ feedback for each one of the group of downlink transmissions, a size of the second HARQ-ACK part being a function of the first HARQ-ACK part;
separately encode the first HARQ-ACK part and the second HARQ-ACK part; and transmit the encoded first HARQ-ACK part and the encoded second HARQ-ACK part.
Regarding claims 1, 18 of Application No. 18/471,215 correspond to claims 1, 22 of U.S. Application No. 18/471,238.
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.
Claims 1-30 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.
Claims 1, 18 recite “forming a first hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ)-acknowledgement (ACK) part and a second HARQ-ACK part associated with a HARQ-ACK payload in accordance with a transformation scheme” is unclear. It is unclear what “a transformation scheme” refer to, does it refer to transmit on different PUCCH/PUSCH, or using different MCS, or different codebook or some else. Therefore, in accordance with a “transformation scheme” is broad and potentially result-oriented. Without clear parameters, rules, or examples in the specification, the term may not inform, with reasonable certainty, the scope of the invention.
Regarding claims 2-17, claims 2-17 fail to remedy the deficiencies of the claim 1 and therefore, are rejected.
Regarding claims 19-30, claims 19-30 fail to remedy the deficiencies of the claim 18 and therefore, are rejected.
Claims 6, 23 recite “the HARQ-ACK payload including one or more ACKs and one or more NACKs” is unclear. Does “the HARQ-ACK payload” refer to “the second HARQ-ACK part” or “the first HARQ-ACK part” or some else. Thus, are rejected.
Claims 7, 24 recite “the HARQ-ACK payload is associated with a codepoint from a set of codepoints … the set of codepoints is partitioned into a set of groups … each group index is associated with one or more codepoints of the set of codepoint” is unclear. It is unclear which technical effects are a result of the stated function. It is not clear whether “each group index is associated with one or more codepoints” is a processing step in the inventive concept.
Regarding claims 8-14, claims 8-14 fail to remedy the deficiencies of the claim 7 and therefore, are rejected.
Regarding claims 25-30, claims 25-30 fail to remedy the deficiencies of the claim 24 and therefore, are rejected.
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.
Claims 1- 6, 15-17, 18-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lei et al. (US 20210176011 A1, hereinafter Lei) in view of Marinier et al. (US 20240322979 A1, hereinafter Marinier).
Claim 1: Lei teaches a method for wireless communication at a user equipment UE (Abstract, [0005]), comprising:
receiving, from a network node, a group of downlink transmissions ([0032], “downlink (DL) transport blocks (TBs) are carried on the Physical Downlink Shared Channel (PDSCH) … a TB includes a plurality of CBGs. The number of code blocks within one CBG, i.e., CBG size, varies according to the TB size”, [0058-0060], Fig. 4, Fig. 5, illustrates TB-based HARQ-ACK for a group of downlink transmissions);
forming a first hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ)-acknowledgement ACK part and a second HARQ-ACK part associated with a HARQ-ACK payload in accordance with a transformation scheme ( Fig. 3, element 303, [0041], “a HARQ-ACK codebook may include two parts, wherein a first part includes K1 HARQ-ACK bits and a second part includes K2 HARQ-ACK bit fields, wherein K1 is a quantity of TBs in a downlink association set, and K2 is a quantity of HARQ-ACK bit fields in a HARQ-ACK codebook. Each bit in the first part corresponds to one TB in the downlink association set, and each HARQ-ACK bit field in the second part corresponds to one incorrectly decoded TB in the downlink association set. The first part may be called TB-based HARQ-ACK feedback …, and the second part may be called CBG-based HARQ-ACK”), the HARQ-ACK payload including HARQ feedback for each one of the group of downlink transmissions ([0051], “each HARQ-ACK bit field of the second part may include a plurality of HARQ-ACK bits and each of the plurality of HARQ-ACK bits corresponds to one CBG of one incorrectly decoded TB in the downlink association set … a bit length of each HARQ-ACK bit field may be equal to the maximum number of CBGs per TB, for example, M, configured by a RRC signaling. In response to the quantity of HARQ-ACK bits in the first part of the HARQ-ACK codebook is K1, the size of the HARQ-ACK codebook may be K1+M*K2”, [0040], “determining the HARQ-ACK codebook for CBG-based HARQ-ACK feedback retransmission may only report one ACK for one TB when all CBGs in this TB are successfully decoded … For a TB unsuccessfully decoded at the remote unit, this further determination manner may report the CBG-based HARQ-ACK for the TB in the HARQ-ACK codebook”).
a size of the second HARQ-ACK part being a function of the first HARQ-ACK part ([0040], “determining the HARQ-ACK codebook for CBG-based HARQ-ACK feedback retransmission may only report one ACK for one TB when all CBGs in this TB are successfully decoded … For a TB unsuccessfully decoded at the remote unit, this further determination manner may report the CBG-based HARQ-ACK for the TB in the HARQ-ACK codebook”, [0041], “Each bit in the first part corresponds to one TB in the downlink association set, and each HARQ-ACK bit field in the second part corresponds to one incorrectly decoded TB in the downlink association set”);
and transmitting, to the network node, the encoded first HARQ-ACK part and the encoded second HARQ-ACK part (Fig. 3, element 304, [0057], “the HARQ-ACK codebook is transmitted to the base unit… the first part and the second part of the HARQ-ACK codebook may be transmitted in one UCI. Alternatively, the first part and the second part of the HARQ-ACK codebook may be transmitted in different UCIs”, [0036], “this HARQ-ACK codebook determination manner may require Polar coding to encode the HARQ-ACK bits and need more uplink resources for the PUCCH transmission”).
However, Lei does not explicitly teach separately encoding the first HARQ-ACK part and the second HARQ-ACK part.
Marinier, from the same or similar field of endeavor, teaches separately encoding the first HARQ-ACK part and the second HARQ-ACK part ([0120], “The WTRU may combine both HARQ-ACK codebooks in same resource (PUCCH or PUSCH), and each payload may be separately encoded, or a first portion of a first HARQ-ACK codebook payload may be jointly encoded with a second HARQ-ACK codebook payload and a second portion may be separately encoded”, [0134], “The WTRU may separately encode a first and a second group of bits from the UCI”, [0229], “A WTRU may determine as a function of whether separate, joint, or partial joint coding is used for multiplexing HARQ-ACK or UCI”).
Lei and Marinier are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of wireless communication. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Lei and the features of separately encoding the first HARQ-ACK part and the second HARQ-ACK part as taught by Marinier, for the benefit of allowing UE to choose efficient encoding method for guarantying performance and reliability at the receiver with minimal number of codeword. (paragraph [0134]).
Claim 18 is analyzed and rejected according to claim 1 and Lei further teaches one or more processors (Fig. 7, element 702), and one or more memories coupled with the one or more processors and storing processor-executable code when executed by the one or more processors (Fig. 7, [0063], “the remote unit 101 may further include an input device, a display, a memory, and/or other elements … The functions and implementations of all elements in the apparatus 700 and definitions of related technical terms can refer to the specific descriptions of FIGS. 2-5 and the foregoing corresponding paragraphs in this specification”).
Claim 2: Lei teaches the method of claim 1, wherein a size of the first HARQ-ACK part is one bit (FIG. 4, Fig. 5, TB-based HARQ-ACK, [0005], “each bit in the first part corresponds to one TB in the downlink association set”, wherein size is one when one TB is supported.).
Claim 19 is analyzed and rejected according to Claim 18 and claim 2.
Claim 3: Lei teaches the method of claim 2, wherein the first HARQ-ACK part indicates a value of one in accordance with the HARQ-ACK payload being all ACKs and the second HARQ-ACK part is empty (Fig. 4, Fig. 5, [0040], “determining the HARQ-ACK codebook for CBG-based HARQ-ACK feedback retransmission may only report one ACK for one TB when all CBGs in this TB are successfully decoded”, [0051], “each HARQ-ACK bit field of the second part may include a plurality of HARQ-ACK bits and each of the plurality of HARQ-ACK bits corresponds to one CBG of one incorrectly decoded TB in the downlink association set”, wherein K2 is associated with incorrectly decoded TB, if TB is correctly decoded, K2 is zero, which the second HARQ-ACK part is empty. the first HARQ-ACK part indicates a value of one is reading as decoded TB correctly (or the value of ACK). [0049], “When the second parameter is equal to zero, there is no second part of a HARQ-ACK codebook, and the HARQ-ACK codebook only includes the first part with TB-based HARQ-ACK feedback …when a remote unit identifies the value of K2 is 0, only TB-based HARQ-ACK feedback in the first part of the HARQ-ACK codebook is transmitted”).
Claim 20 is analyzed and rejected according to Claim 19 and claim 3.
Claim 4: Lei teaches the method of claim 2, the first HARQ-ACK part indicates a value of zero in accordance with the HARQ-ACK payload including one or more negative acknowledgements (NACKs) and the size of the second HARQ-ACK part is equal to a size of the HARQ-ACK payload based on the first HARQ-ACK part indicating the value of zero. (Fig. 4, Fig.5,[0051], “each HARQ-ACK bit field of the second part may include a plurality of HARQ-ACK bits and each of the plurality of HARQ-ACK bits corresponds to one CBG of one incorrectly decoded TB in the downlink association set … a bit length of each HARQ-ACK bit field may be equal to the maximum number of CBGs per TB … the size of the HARQ-ACK codebook may be N+M*K2”, wherein NACK is reading as incorrectly decoded TB, and the size of the second HARQ-ACK is associated with the number of CBGs per TB. [0040], “determining the HARQ-ACK codebook for CBG-based HARQ-ACK feedback retransmission may only report one ACK for one TB when all CBGs in this TB are successfully decoded … For a TB unsuccessfully decoded at the remote unit, this further determination manner may report the CBG-based HARQ-ACK for the TB in the HARQ-ACK codebook”).
Claim 21 is analyzed and rejected according to Claim 19 and claim 4.
Claim 5: Lei teaches the method of claim 2, wherein: the first HARQ-ACK part indicates a value of one in accordance with the HARQ-ACK payload being all ACKs or all negative acknowledgements NACKs(FIG. 4, Fig. 5, TB-based HARQ-ACK, [0005], “each bit in the first part corresponds to one TB in the downlink association set”, [0040], “determining the HARQ-ACK codebook for CBG-based HARQ-ACK feedback retransmission may only report one ACK for one TB when all CBGs in this TB are successfully decoded…For a TB unsuccessfully decoded at the remote unit, this further determination manner may report the CBG-based HARQ-ACK for the TB in the HARQ-ACK codebook”), the size of the second HARQ-ACK part is one bit (FIG. 4, Fig. 5, CBG-based HARQ-ACK, [0041], “ a HARQ-ACK codebook may include two parts, wherein a first part includes K1 HARQ-ACK bits and a second part includes K2 HARQ-ACK bit fields, wherein K1 is a quantity of TBs in a downlink association set, and K2 is a quantity of HARQ-ACK bit fields in a HARQ-ACK codebook. Each bit in the first part corresponds to one TB in the downlink association set, and each HARQ-ACK bit field in the second part corresponds to one incorrectly decoded TB in the downlink association set”, [0051], “each HARQ-ACK bit field of the second part may include a plurality of HARQ-ACK bits and each of the plurality of HARQ-ACK bits corresponds to one CBG of one incorrectly decoded TB in the downlink association set … a bit length of each HARQ-ACK bit field may be equal to the maximum number of CBGs per TB … the size of the HARQ-ACK codebook may be N+M*K2”); and the second HARQ-ACK part indicates a value of one in accordance with the HARQ-ACK payload being all ACKs ([0040], “determining the HARQ-ACK codebook for CBG-based HARQ-ACK feedback retransmission may only report one ACK for one TB when all CBGs in this TB are successfully decoded”,) or the second HARQ-ACK part indicates a value of zero in accordance with the HARQ-ACK payload being all NACKs (alternative).
Claim 22 is analyzed and rejected according to Claim 19 and claim 5.
Claim 6: Lei teaches the method of claim 2, wherein: the first HARQ-ACK part indicates a value of zero in accordance with the HARQ-ACK payload including one or more ACKs and one or more NACKs (FIG. 4, Fig. 5, TB-based HARQ-ACK, [0005], “each bit in the first part corresponds to one TB in the downlink association set”, [0054], “The remaining incorrectly decoded TBs are merely reported as “NACK” in the TB-based HARQ-ACK bits in the first part of the HARQ-ACK codebook”, [0055], “The remaining incorrectly decoded TB are reported as “ACK” in the TB-based HARQ-ACK bits of the first part of the HARQ-ACK codebook”) and the size of the second HARQ-ACK part is equal to a size of the HARQ-ACK payload (Fig. 4, Fig.5, CBG-based HARQ-ACK, [0051], “each HARQ-ACK bit field of the second part may include a plurality of HARQ-ACK bits and each of the plurality of HARQ-ACK bits corresponds to one CBG of one incorrectly decoded TB in the downlink association set … a bit length of each HARQ-ACK bit field may be equal to the maximum number of CBGs per TB … the size of the HARQ-ACK codebook may be N+M*K2”, wherein NACK is reading as incorrectly decoded TB, and the size of the second HARQ-ACK is associated with the number of CBGs per TB. [0040], “determining the HARQ-ACK codebook for CBG-based HARQ-ACK feedback retransmission may only report one ACK for one TB when all CBGs in this TB are successfully decoded … For a TB unsuccessfully decoded at the remote unit, this further determination manner may report the CBG-based HARQ-ACK for the TB in the HARQ-ACK codebook”. [0033], “a wireless communication device can generate a single bit for each CBG then concatenate the generated bits in one HARQ-ACK codebook. That is, one HARQ-ACK bit corresponds to one CBG, and the number of resulting HARQ-ACK bits for one TB may be equal to the number of code block groups”).
Claim 23 is analyzed and rejected according to Claim 19 and claim 6.
Claim 15: Lei teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising receiving, from the network node, a message enabling the UE to form the first HARQ-ACK part and the second HARQ-ACK part, wherein the message is a first radio resource control (RRC) message, a medium access control (MAC)-control element (CE) message, or downlink control information (DCI) (Fig. 3, ELEMENT 301, 302, [0046], “the first parameter may be indicated by a total DAI in DCI…an UE can derive the total DAI indicated in DL assignment as the value of the first parameter K1…the TB-based HARQ-ACK bits in the HARQ-ACK codebook for the downlink association set corresponds to all downlink transmissions in the downlink association set and each bit in the TB-based HARQ-ACK bits is ordered based on the counter DAI”, [0049], “When the second parameter is equal to zero, there is no second part of a HARQ-ACK codebook, and the HARQ-ACK codebook only includes the first part with TB-based HARQ-ACK feedback”, [0047], “K2 which is an integer is received from a base unit …The value of the second parameter may be configured by a base unit via RRC signaling”, [0055], “a remote unit only reports CBG-based HARQ-ACK feedback corresponding to the first or last K2 TBs of all the incorrectly decoded TBs to guarantee the payload size of the second part equal to K2*M, wherein M is the RRC configured maximum number of CBGs per TB” ).
Claim 16: Lei teaches the method of claim 15, further comprising receiving a second RRC message indicating the DCI includes a field indicating whether to enable forming the first HARQ-ACK part and the second HARQ-ACK part, wherein the DCI schedules an uplink transmission or a downlink transmission (Fig. 3, ELEMENT 301, 302, [0046], “the first parameter may be indicated by a total DAI in DCI. In this embodiment, a first part of a HARQ-ACK codebook corresponds to each transmitted DL transmission (for example, PDSCH) within the downlink association set…TB-based HARQ-ACK bits corresponding to the K1 TBs within the downlink association set may be ordered in counter DAIs”, [0048], “the second parameter may be selected from a set of values configured by a RRC signaling and indicated by a plurality of bits in DCI”, [0049], “When the second parameter is equal to zero, there is no second
part of a HARQ-ACK codebook, and the HARQ-ACK codebook only includes the first part with TB-based HARQ-ACK feedback”, [0039], “introducing both counter DAI and total DAI in DCI … combining this HARQ-ACK codebook determination manner based on DAI and total DAI with the abovementioned HARQ-ACK codebook determination manner based on the configured maximum number of CBGs for HARQ-ACK bits per TB”, [0035], “the HARQ-ACK codebook size can be semi-statically changed by adjusting the configured maximum number of CBGs and/or the number of bundled PDSCHs via a RRC signaling.”).
Claim 17: Lei teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising transmitting, to the network node, a message indicating the UE supports forming the first HARQ-ACK part and the second HARQ-ACK part (Fig. 3, element 304, [0057], “the HARQ-ACK codebook is transmitted to the base unit. The first part and the second part of a HARQ-ACK codebook may be transmitted as a whole or may be transmitted separately”, [0049], “when a remote unit identifies the value of K2 is 0, only TB-based HARQ-ACK feedback in the first part of the HARQ-ACK codebook is transmitted. That implies CBG-based HARQ-ACK feedback is not supported.”, [0041], “ a HARQ-ACK codebook may include two parts, wherein a first part includes K1 HARQ-ACK bits and a second part includes K2 HARQ-ACK bit fields, wherein K1 is a quantity of TBs in a downlink association set, and K2 is a quantity of HARQ-ACK bit fields in a HARQ-ACK codebook. Each bit in the first part corresponds to one TB in the downlink association set, and each HARQ-ACK bit field in the second part corresponds to one incorrectly decoded TB in the downlink association set”).
Claims 7-14, 24-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lei et al. (US 20210176011 A1, hereinafter Lei) in view of Marinier et al. (US 20240322979 A1, hereinafter Marinier) and further in view of Marinier_225 et al. (US 20210297225 A1, hereinafter Marinier_225).
Claim 7: Lei does not explicitly teach the method of claim 1, wherein: the HARQ-ACK payload is associated with a codepoint from a set of codepoints; the set of codepoints is partitioned into a set of groups; each group, of the set of groups, is associated with a respective group index; and each group index is associated with one or more codepoints of the set of codepoint.
Marinier_225, from the same or similar field of endeavor, teaches the method of claim 1,wherein: the HARQ-ACK payload is associated with a codepoint from a set of codepoints ([0077], “using a codepoint, a specific format and/or combination of carriers for which a HARQ A/N report is expected for the concerned interval (for example, a subframe)”, [0078], “using a codepoint, a specific format and/or combination of carriers for which a HARQ A/N report is expected … The indication may consist of the value of a field included in the payload of the DCI … The field may consist, for instance, of a downlink assignment index (DAI) field, or of a dedicated field (HARQ A/N reporting indicator”); the set of codepoints is partitioned into a set of groups (abstract, “the DCI which includes the indication may further include a first codepoint mapped to the first group or a second codepoint mapped to the second group”); each group, of the set of groups, is associated with a respective group index ([0016], “the DCI which includes the indication may further include a first codepoint mapped to the first group or a second codepoint mapped to the second group”, [0194], “ The two other codepoints (10) and (11) may indicate different groups of 16 carriers, or possibly groups where the order of carriers is modified as in Option 1”,[0005], “for reducing HARQ-ACK payload…based on a combination of downlink control signaling that is associated with any PDSCH and of an index or order associated with this feedback group”); and each group index is associated with one or more codepoints of the set of codepoint ([0120], “The meaning of each codepoint may be set semi-statically by the eNode-B and may also indicate a group of TBs being ACKed (for example, a codepoint may indicate that a first and a second TB are ACK)”, [0112], “ The WTRU may generate additional HARQ-ACK information bits to indicate which groups belong to the first and second subsets, using for instance a combinatorial index.”, Abstract, “ the WTRU may determine a first group or a second group based on an indication received in DCI associated with at least one of the PDSCH transmissions. Then, the WTRU may generate hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ)-acknowledgment (ACK) feedback for data received in one or more PDSCH transmissions associated with the determined group” ).
Lei and Marinier_225 are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of wireless communication. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Lei and the features of configuring the HARQ-ACK payload to be associated with a codepoint from a set of codepoints as taught by Marinier_225, for the benefit for allowing UE to determine whether to transmit HARQ and what format that HARQ is expected via using codepoint (paragraph [0077-0078]).
Claim 24 is analyzed and rejected according to Claim 18 and claim 7.
Claim 8: The combination of Lei and Marinier_225 teaches the method of claim 7, wherein: the first HARQ-ACK part indicates a group index (Marinier_225 ,[0015], “the WTRU may generate HARQ-ACK feedback for data received in one or more PDSCH transmissions associated with the determined group”, [0112], “ The WTRU may generate additional HARQ-ACK information bits to indicate which groups belong to the first and second subsets, using for instance a combinatorial index.”); and the second HARQ-ACK part indicates an index associated with the codepoint from the one or more codepoints included in the group associated with the group index (Lei, Fig. 4, Fig. 5,[0051], “ each HARQ-ACK bit field of the second part may include a plurality of HARQ-ACK bits and each of the plurality of HARQ-ACK bits corresponds to one CBG of one incorrectly decoded TB in the downlink association set”, [0052], “For the second part of the HARQ-ACK codebook, CBG-based HARQ-ACK bits corresponding to the incorrectly decoded TBs may be ordered in the rule of frequency-first time-second, which is similar to TB-based HARQ-ACK bits in the first part of the HARQ-ACK codebook”).
The motivation for combining Lei and Marinier_225 regarding to the claim 7 is also applied to claim 8.
Claim 25 is analyzed and rejected according to Claim 24 and claim 8.
Claim 9: The combination of Lei and Marinier_225 teaches the method of claim 7, Marinier_225 additionally teaches further comprising receiving, from the network node, a message indicating the respective group index ([0193], “the network may indicate which pre-configured group(s) of carriers contain at least one downlink assignment”, ) associated with each codepoint of the set of codepoints ([0120], “The meaning of each codepoint may be set semi-statically by the eNode-B and may also indicate a group of TBs being ACKed (for example, a codepoint may indicate that a first and a second TB are ACK)”, [0219], “a codebook indicator may be included in at least one of all the downlink assignments whose transmissions map to a single HARQ A/N feedback resource. The meaning of the codepoints in the codebook indicator may be configured by the network”, Abstract, “the DCI which includes the indication may further include a first codepoint mapped to the first group or a second codepoint mapped to the second group”).
The motivation for combining Lei and Marinier_225 regarding to the claim 7 is also applied to claim 9.
Claim 26 is analyzed and rejected according to Claim 24 and claim 9.
Claim 10: The combination of Lei and Marinier_225 teaches the method of claim 7, Marinier_225 additionally teaches further comprising receiving, from the network node, a message indicating a set of lists, wherein: each list, of the set of lists, is associated with a group index ([0120], “there may be pre-configured locations within the bit string where a set of TB HARQ A/N reports may be located. Such a set of bit locations may be used to report subsets of ACKs for multiple TBs”, Abstract, “the DCI which includes the indication may schedule a plurality of PDSCH transmissions included in the determined group”); and each list includes the one or more codepoints associated with the group index ([0120], “The meaning of each codepoint may be set semi-statically by the eNode-B and may also indicate a group of TBs being ACKed (for example, a codepoint may indicate that a first and a second TB are ACK)”, Abstract, “ the DCI which includes the indication may further include a first codepoint mapped to the first group or a second codepoint mapped to the second group”).
The motivation for combining Lei and Marinier_225 regarding to the claim 7 is also applied to claim 10.
Claim 27 is analyzed and rejected according to Claim 24 and claim 10.
Claim 11: The combination of Lei and Marinier_225 teaches the method of claim 10, Marinier_225 additionally teaches wherein a quantity of lists in the set of lists is less than or equal to a quantity of groups in the set of groups ([0111],“the number of information bits generated for HARQ-ACK may be reduced by applying bundling for a subset of groups of transport blocks that may be dynamically selected to minimize the resulting number of unnecessary retransmissions.”, [0116], “the selection of the groups may be based on an indication from physical layer or higher signaling of the bundling solution to be applied for a certain group”, [0220], “a codebook indicator for a codebook may be determined by a combination of the configuration of a subset of codepoints and of at least one serving cell… the sets may be determined at the WTRU by a network-transmitted indicator of total number of sets”).
The motivation for combining Lei and Marinier_225 regarding to the claim 7 is also applied to claim 11.
Claim 28 is analyzed and rejected according to Claim 27 and claim 11.
Claim 12: The combination of Lei and Marinier_225 teaches the method of claim 7, Marinier_225 additionally teaches further comprising receiving, from the network node, a message indicating a quantity of codepoints associated with one or more groups of the set of groups( [0220], “a codebook indicator for a codebook may be determined by a combination of the configuration of a subset of codepoints and of at least one serving cell… the sets may be determined at the WTRU by a network-transmitted indicator of total number of sets”, Table 5, [0225], “the sets for every codepoint in Table 5 may be determined by a WTRU as a function of the total number of sets and of a pre-configured or pre-determined formula…. codepoint ‘1’ may be groups of four sets (e.g., select the set that includes at least one cell transmitting the index from: ABCD or EFGH )”).
The motivation for combining Lei and Marinier_225 regarding to the claim 7 is also applied to claim 12.
Claim 29 is analyzed and rejected according to Claim 24 and claim 12.
Claim 13: The combination of Lei and Marinier_225 teaches the method of claim 7, further comprising receiving, from the network node, a message indicating a size of the first HARQ-ACK part ([0041], “a HARQ-ACK codebook may include two parts, wherein a first part includes K1 HARQ-ACK bits and a second part includes K2 HARQ-ACK bit fields, wherein K1 is a quantity of TBs in a downlink association set, and K2 is a quantity of HARQ-ACK bit fields in a HARQ-ACK codebook”, [0046], “the first parameter may be indicated by a total DAI in DCI …an UE can derive the total DAI indicated in DL assignment as the value of the first parameter K1”) or a quantity of groups in the set of groups (alternative), wherein the one or more codepoints associated with each group index (Marinier_225, Abstract, “the DCI which includes the indication may further include a first codepoint mapped to the first group or a second codepoint mapped to the second group”) is based on the size of the first HARQ-ACK part ([0046], “TB-based HARQ-ACK bits corresponding to the K1 TBs within the downlink association set may be ordered in counter DAIs. That is, the TB-based HARQ-ACK bits in the HARQ-ACK codebook for the downlink association set corresponds to all downlink transmissions in the downlink association set and each bit in the TB-based HARQ-ACK bits is ordered based on the counter DAI”, [0041], “Each bit in the first part corresponds to one TB in the downlink association set, and each HARQ-ACK bit field in the second part corresponds to one incorrectly decoded TB in the downlink association set”,[0040], “determining the HARQ-ACK codebook for CBG-based HARQ-ACK feedback retransmission may only report one ACK for one TB when all CBGs in this TB are successfully decoded … For a TB unsuccessfully decoded at the remote unit, this further determination manner may report the CBG-based HARQ-ACK for the TB in the HARQ-ACK codebook”) or the quantity of groups in the set of groups (alternative).
Claim 30 is analyzed and rejected according to Claim 24 and claim 13.
Claim 14: Lei teaches the method of claim 7, further comprising receiving, from the network node, a message indicating a set of HARQ-ACK payload sizes (Fig. 3, element 301, 302, 303, [0050], “ the size of a HARQ-ACK codebook is determined based on the received first and second signals … and the size of the HARQ-ACK codebook may be determined as a sum of lengths of the two parts”), wherein the message is a radio resource control (RRC) message, a medium access control (MAC)-control element (CE) message, or downlink control information DCI (Fig. 3, [0045], “the first signal is a RRC signaling. The first parameter may be used as a payload size of a first part of a HARQ-ACK codebook”, [0053], “ the payload size of the second part equal to K2*M, wherein M is the RRC configured maximum number of CBGs per TB”, [0047], “K2 which is an integer is received from a base unit …The value of the second parameter may be configured by a base unit via RRC signaling”, [0046], “the first parameter may be indicated by a total DAI in DCI”).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892 form. The closest prior art reference is Molavian et al. (US 20230139269 A1, hereinafter Molavian), which describes a system for acknowledge information enhancement.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YONGHONG ZHAO whose telephone number is (571)272-4089. The examiner can normally be reached Monday -Friday 9:00 am - 5:00pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, NICHOLAS JENSEN can be reached on (571) 270-5443. 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.
/Y.Z./Examiner, Art Unit 2472
/NICHOLAS A JENSEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2472