Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 05-12-2026 has been entered and considered.
Claims 1-30 are pending in the current application.
Claim 1, 3, 5, 8-9, 11, 13, 17-19 and 28-30 remain rejected as discussed below.
Claims 2, 4, 6-7, 10, 12, 14-16, and 20-27 are object to.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3, 5, 8-9, 11, 13, 18-19 and 29-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lei et al (US 2022/0294573). Hereinafter referred to as lei.
Regarding claims 1, 18 and 29-30, Lei discloses an apparatus for wireless communication at a user equipment (UE) (see at least figure 1), comprising: memory; and at least one processor coupled to the memory and, based at least in part on information stored in the memory, the at least one processor, individually or in any combination, (see at least figure 1) is configured to receive one or more downlink transmissions from a network node; and transmit two-part hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) acknowledgement (HARQ-ACK) feedback for the one or more downlink transmissions based (see at least figure 7) on at least one of a first compression data set for a first codebook and a second compression data set for a second HARQ-ACK codebook (see at least paragraph [0045]), or a third compression data set based on a combination of the first HARQ-ACK codebook and the second HARQ-ACK codebook (see at least paragraphs [0004], [0045], [0094]).
Regarding claim 3. Lei discloses an apparatus wherein the two-part HARQ-ACK feedback includes jointly compressed feedback based on the third compression data set (see at least paragraphs [0004], [0045], [0094]).
Regarding claim 5, Lei discloses an apparatus wherein the at least one processor, individually or in any combination, is further configured to receive, from the network node, a first configuration indicative of at least one of the first compression data set, the second compression data set, or the third compression data set (see at least paragraph [0099]).
Regarding claim 8, Lei discloses an apparatus wherein the two-part HARQ-ACK feedback includes separate compressions of first HARQ-ACK feedback based on the first compression data set and the first HARQ-ACK codebook and second HARQ-ACK feedback based on the second compression data set and the second HARQ-ACK codebook (see at least figures 7-8 and paragraphs [0004], [0045], [0094]).
Regarding claim 9. Lei discloses an apparatus wherein the at least one processor, individually or in any combination, is further configured to encode, as a payload for the two-part HARQ-ACK feedback and for an associated channel, at least one of a first part of a first compressed codebook, the first part of a second compressed codebook, a second part of the first compressed codebook, or the second part of the second compressed codebook (see at least figures 7-8).
Regarding claim 11. Lei discloses an apparatus wherein to encode, the at least one processor, individually or in any combination, is configured to separately encode each of the first part of the first compressed codebook, the first part of the second compressed codebook, the second part of the first compressed codebook, and the second part of the second compressed codebook (see at least figures 7-8 and paragraphs [0004], [0045], [0094]).
Regarding claim 13. Lei discloses an apparatus wherein the two-part HARQ-ACK feedback comprises a joint compression associated with the third compression data set that partitions the combination of the first HARQ-ACK codebook and the second HARQ-ACK codebook (see at least paragraph [0004], [0045], [0094]).
Regarding claim 19, lei discloses an, apparatus wherein the at least one processor, individually or in any combination, is further configured to: decode a payload of the two-part HARQ-ACK feedback based on the first configuration (see at least paragraph [0004], [0045], [0094] and figure 1).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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 17 and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lei in view of Lei et al (US 2021/0266105, hereinafter referred to as Lei-105).
Regarding claims 17 and 28, Lei discloses all the limitations of the claimed invention with the exception the first compression data set is associated with transport block (TB) based feedback, and the second compression data set is associated with code block group (CBG) based feedback; or wherein the first compression data set is associated with a higher priority HARQ-ACK feedback, and the second compression data set is associated with a lower priority HARQ-ACK feedback. However, Lei-105, from the same field of endeavor, teaches the first compression data set is associated with transport block (TB) based feedback, and the second compression data set is associated with code block group (CBG) based feedback; or wherein the first compression data set is associated with a higher priority HARQ-ACK feedback, and the second compression data set is associated with a lower priority HARQ-ACK feedback (see at least abstract, and paragraphs [0004], [0029], [0032]-[0034] and [0093]). Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the invention to employ the teaching of Lei-105, as indicated, into the communication method of Lei for the purpose of improving transmission/retransmission resources utilization.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 4, 6-7, 10, 12, 14-16, and 20-27 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 05-12-2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicants’ representative argues that the prior art of record fails to teach “and transmit two-part hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) acknowledgement (HARQ-ACK) feedback for the one or more downlink transmissions based on at least one of a first compression data set for a first codebook and a second compression data set for a second HARQ-ACK codebook, or a third compression data set based on a combination of the first HARQ-ACK codebook and the second HARQ-ACK codebook”.
Examiner respectfully disagrees, in at least paragraph 4, the reference discloses a combined HARQ-ACK codebook that includes a first sub-codebook and a second sub-codebook. Therefore, the combined codebook is formed from the first and second sub-codebooks, the combined codebook constitutes a data representation based on the combination of the first HARQ-ACK codebook and the second HARQ-codebook. Furthermore, the reference discloses transmitting HARQ-ACK information associated with one sub-codebook separately from HARQ-ACK information associated with another sub-codebook. Such selective transmission corresponds to the claimed transmission of multiple portions of HARQ-ACK feedback, two part HARQ-ACK feedback.
Examiner would like to direct applicants’ representative to the broad scope of the claim language as it does not articulate what is being claimed. For instance, “two part HARQ-ACK” and “based on at least one of a first compression data set for a first codebook and a second compression data set for a second HARQ-ACK codebook” are broad as the claim does not define what constitutes a “part” of the recited two-part feedback. In the absence of an express definition, the term is interpreted broadly to encompass any HARQ-ACK feedback having two distinguishable portions, including sperate codebooks, sub-codebooks, feedback fields or feedback transmissions. The recitation of “based on” is extremely broad and could be interpreted multiple ways. For instance a combined HARQ-ACK codebook is based on the first and second sub-codebooks, a transmitted HARQ-ACK message is based on the codebook from which it was generated, or other. Examiner suggests improving the claim language to articulate the invention as submitted. Moreover. Lei-573 teaches “The wireless communication system 100 may be compatible with any type of network that is capable of sending and receiving wireless communication signals. For example, the wireless communication system 100 is compatible with a…LTE network, a 3GPP-based network, a 3GPP 5G network, a satellite communications network, a high-altitude platform network, and/or other communications networks. For instance HARQ-ACK codebook compression is a 5G NR concept where through RRC signaling, network compress feedback using either spatial bundling or codebook concatenation.
Claims are given their broadest reasonable construction "in light of the specification as it would be interpreted by one of ordinary skill in the art." In re Am. Acad. of Sci. Tech. Ctr., 367 F.3d 1359, 1364[, 70 USPQ2d 1827] (Fed. Cir. 2004).
For the sake of compact prosecution examiner would like to direct applicants’ representative to 3GPP R1-2101842 as pertinent to the claimed invention.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO_892.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
In the case of amending the claimed invention, Applicant is respectfully requested to indicate the portion(s) of the specification which dictate(s) the structure relied on for proper interpretation and also to verify and ascertain the metes and bounds of the claimed invention.
When responding to this office action, applicants are advised to clearly point out the patentable novelty which they think the claims present in view of the state of the art disclosed by the references cited or the objections made. Applicants must also show how the amendments avoid such references or objections. See 37C.F.R 1.111(c). In addition, applicants are advised to provide the examiner with the line numbers and pages numbers in the application and/or references cited to assist examiner in locating the appropriate paragraphs.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOUNIR MOUTAOUAKIL whose telephone number is (571)270-1416. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10AM-4PM EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ayaz Sheikh can be reached at 571-272-3795. 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.
/MOUNIR MOUTAOUAKIL/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2476
Prosecution Insights