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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 6 and 8 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 6, in line 5, “refraining” should be “refrain”.
Regarding claim 8, in line 3, “refraining” should be “refrain”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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.
Claims 1, 12-14, 18 and 26-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Xu et al. (US 2020/0313802).
Regarding Claim 1, Xu teaches a user equipment (UE), comprising: one or more memories storing processor-executable code; and one or more processors coupled with the one or more memories and individually or collectively operable to execute the code to cause the UE to ([0117] Processor 720 may be configured to execute computer-readable instructions stored in a memory to perform various functions):
receive a downlink control message indicating a grant of channel resources for communication between the UE and a network entity, the downlink control message further indicating last transmission information corresponding to a last packet for a hybrid automatic repeat request process associated with the grant of channel resources ([0090] FIG. 4 illustrates an example of a process flow 400 that supports a dynamic termination of HARQ retransmissions; [0091] At 405, base station 105-d may transmit DCI to UE 115-d to schedule the UE 115-d for a downlink transmission of data (e.g., to allocate resources for UE 115-d to monitor for the downlink transmission). In some cases, the DCI may also indicate (e.g., using a single bit) whether the scheduled transmission is a final transmission of the data; [0094] The above techniques may be repeated (e.g., including another retransmission of the data at 430) until base station 105-d determines that a retransmission of data following a scheduled transmission of the data would exceed a latency budget. In such cases, the base station 105-d may indicate that a scheduled transmission of data is a final transmission of the data. Specifically, the base station 105-c may transmit the indication of whether the scheduled transmission of the data is a final transmission of the data in the DCI used to schedule the transmission; [0095] base station 105-d may transmit an indication of whether the scheduled transmission is a final transmission based on the determination; [0160] At 1305 the UE 115 may receive DCI that schedules an uplink or downlink transmission of data; [0161] At 1310 the UE 115 may receive, in the DCI, an indication of whether the uplink or downlink transmission is a final transmission of the data); and
process data associated with the hybrid automatic repeat request process based at least in part on the last transmission information ([0093] UE 115-d may determine whether the transmission of the data at 410 was the final transmission of the data based on the indication in the DCI, and UE 115-d may determine whether to monitor for a retransmission of the data based on the determination. If UE 115-d determines that the DCI indicated that the transmission of the data at 410 was the final transmission, UE 115-d may pass the data received at 410 to higher layers for processing, and UE 115-d may avoid monitoring for the retransmission. Otherwise, UE 115-d may wait for a retransmission of the data; [0094] UE 115-d may determine to monitor or wait for a retransmission of the data from base station 105-d, and, at 425, UE 115-d may receive the retransmission of the data from base station 105-d. The above techniques may be repeated (e.g., including another retransmission of the data at 430) until base station 105-d determines that a retransmission of data following a scheduled transmission of the data would exceed a latency budget. In such cases, the base station 105-d may indicate that a scheduled transmission of data is a final transmission of the data. Specifically, the base station 105-c may transmit the indication of whether the scheduled transmission of the data is a final transmission of the data in the DCI used to schedule the transmission; [0162] At 1315 the UE 115 may transmit the data in the uplink transmission or receiving the data in the downlink transmission based at least in part on the DCI).
Regarding Claim 12, Xu teaches a network entity, comprising: one or more memories storing processor-executable code; and one or more processors coupled with the one or more memories and individually or collectively operable to execute the code to cause the network entity to ([0142] Processor 1020 may be configured to execute computer-readable instructions stored in a memory to perform various functions):
output a downlink control message indicating a grant of channel resources for communication between the network entity and a user equipment (UE), the downlink control message further indicating last transmission information corresponding to a last packet for a hybrid automatic repeat request process associated with the grant of channel resources ([0090] FIG. 4 illustrates an example of a process flow 400 that supports a dynamic termination of HARQ retransmissions; [0091] At 405, base station 105-d may transmit DCI to UE 115-d to schedule the UE 115-d for a downlink transmission of data (e.g., to allocate resources for UE 115-d to monitor for the downlink transmission). In some cases, the DCI may also indicate (e.g., using a single bit) whether the scheduled transmission is a final transmission of the data; [0094] The above techniques may be repeated (e.g., including another retransmission of the data at 430) until base station 105-d determines that a retransmission of data following a scheduled transmission of the data would exceed a latency budget. In such cases, the base station 105-d may indicate that a scheduled transmission of data is a final transmission of the data. Specifically, the base station 105-c may transmit the indication of whether the scheduled transmission of the data is a final transmission of the data in the DCI used to schedule the transmission; [0095] base station 105-d may transmit an indication of whether the scheduled transmission is a final transmission based on the determination; [0175] At 1610 the base station 105 may transmit, in the DCI, an indication of whether the uplink or downlink transmission is a final transmission of the data); and
output data associated with the hybrid automatic repeat request process based at least in part on the last transmission information ([0092] At 410, base station 105-d may transmit the data to UE 115-d, and UE 115-d may receive the data from base station 105-d; [0094] The above techniques may be repeated (e.g., including another retransmission of the data at 430) until base station 105-d determines that a retransmission of data following a scheduled transmission of the data would exceed a latency budget. In such cases, the base station 105-d may indicate that a scheduled transmission of data is a final transmission of the data. Specifically, the base station 105-c may transmit the indication of whether the scheduled transmission of the data is a final transmission of the data in the DCI used to schedule the transmission; [0176] At 1615 the base station 105 may transmit the data in the downlink transmission or receiving the data in the uplink transmission based at least in part on the DCI).
Regarding Claim 13, Xu teaches the last transmission information indicates that the data corresponds to the last packet ([0091] the DCI may also indicate (e.g., using a single bit) whether the scheduled transmission is a final transmission of the data; [0094] the base station 105-d may indicate that a scheduled transmission of data is a final transmission of the data. Specifically, the base station 105-c may transmit the indication of whether the scheduled transmission of the data is a final transmission of the data in the DCI used to schedule the transmission; [0095] base station 105-d may transmit an indication of whether the scheduled transmission is a final transmission based on the determination; [0175] At 1610 the base station 105 may transmit, in the DCI, an indication of whether the uplink or downlink transmission is a final transmission of the data).
Regarding Claim 14, Xu teaches output a retransmission of the data associated with the hybrid automatic repeat request process, wherein the last transmission information indicates that the data does not correspond to the last packet ([0091] the DCI may also indicate (e.g., using a single bit) whether the scheduled transmission is a final transmission of the data; [0094] The above techniques may be repeated (e.g., including another retransmission of the data at 430) until base station 105-d determines that a retransmission of data following a scheduled transmission of the data would exceed a latency budget. In such cases, the base station 105-d may indicate that a scheduled transmission of data is a final transmission of the data. Specifically, the base station 105-c may transmit the indication of whether the scheduled transmission of the data is a final transmission of the data in the DCI used to schedule the transmission; [0095] base station 105-d may transmit an indication of whether the scheduled transmission is a final transmission based on the determination; [0175] At 1610 the base station 105 may transmit, in the DCI, an indication of whether the uplink or downlink transmission is a final transmission of the data).
Regarding Claim 18, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in Claim 1.
Regarding Claim 26, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in Claim 12.
Regarding Claim 27, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in Claim 13.
Regarding Claim 28, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in Claim 14.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
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 8-9 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu et al. in view of Yamada et al. (US 2018/0049121).
Regarding Claim 8, Xu does not teach enter a sleep state and refraining from waking for a retransmission period associated with the data based at least in part on the last transmission information indicating that the data corresponds to the last packet.
In an analogous art, Yamada teaches enter a sleep state and refraining from waking for a retransmission period associated with the data based at least in part on the last transmission information indicating that the data corresponds to the last packet ([0089] When the UE 10 has correctly decoded the Last data Indication (the transmission end information) and hence has succeeded in the reception, it stops the drx-InactivityTimer and the HARQ RTT Timer (Step 15) and finishes the On-Duration regardless of its remaining time (Step 16) as shown in FIGS. 10 and 11. Then, the UE 10 changes to a Sleep period).
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 combined Yamada’s method with Xu’s method so that it can reduce the power consumption of a radio terminal while securing the opportunity in which the radio terminal appropriately receives information from a radio network (Yamada [0015]).
Regarding Claim 9, Xu does not teach refrain from allocating a retransmission timer based at least in part on the last transmission information indicating that the data corresponds to the last packet, wherein refraining from waking for the retransmission period is based at least in part on refraining from allocating the retransmission timer.
In an analogous art, Yamada teaches refrain from allocating a retransmission timer based at least in part on the last transmission information indicating that the data corresponds to the last packet, wherein refraining from waking for the retransmission period is based at least in part on refraining from allocating the retransmission timer ([0089] When the UE 10 has correctly decoded the Last data Indication (the transmission end information) and hence has succeeded in the reception, it stops the drx-InactivityTimer and the HARQ RTT Timer (Step 15) and finishes the On-Duration regardless of its remaining time (Step 16) as shown in FIGS. 10 and 11. Then, the UE 10 changes to a Sleep period).
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 combined Yamada’s method with Xu’s method so that it can reduce the power consumption of a radio terminal while securing the opportunity in which the radio terminal appropriately receives information from a radio network (Yamada [0015]).
Regarding Claim 24, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in Claim 8.
Claims 10, 17, 25 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu et al. in view of Baek et al. (US 2023/0007527).
Regarding Claim 10, Xu does not teach to process the data, the one or more processors are individually or collectively operable to execute the code to cause the UE to: process the data associated with the hybrid automatic repeat request process as a new transmission based at least in part on the last transmission information indicating that a previous packet was the last packet.
In an analogous art, Baek teaches to process the data, the one or more processors are individually or collectively operable to execute the code to cause the UE to: process the data associated with the hybrid automatic repeat request process as a new transmission based at least in part on the last transmission information indicating that a previous packet was the last packet ([0344] After transmitting the last packet on the legacy DRB, the transmitter transmits an indicator indicative of completion of packet transmission through the legacy DRB. Afterward, the transmitter transmits subsequent packets on a new DRB).
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 combined Baek’s method with Xu’s method so that it can control to determine whether a quality of service (QoS) flow mapping is switched from a first data radio bearer (DRB) to a second DRB and transmit information on a last packet being transmitted on the first DRB to a receiving device in the QoS flow based on switching from the first DRB to the second DRB (Baek [0020]).
Regarding Claim 17, Xu does not teach to output the data, the one or more processors are individually or collectively operable to execute the code to cause the network entity to: output the data associated with the hybrid automatic repeat request process as a new transmission based at least in part on the last transmission information indicating that a previous packet was the last packet.
In an analogous art, Baek teaches to output the data, the one or more processors are individually or collectively operable to execute the code to cause the network entity to: output the data associated with the hybrid automatic repeat request process as a new transmission based at least in part on the last transmission information indicating that a previous packet was the last packet ([0344] After transmitting the last packet on the legacy DRB, the transmitter transmits an indicator indicative of completion of packet transmission through the legacy DRB. Afterward, the transmitter transmits subsequent packets on a new DRB).
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 combined Baek’s method with Xu’s method so that it can control to determine whether a quality of service (QoS) flow mapping is switched from a first data radio bearer (DRB) to a second DRB and transmit information on a last packet being transmitted on the first DRB to a receiving device in the QoS flow based on switching from the first DRB to the second DRB (Baek [0020]).
Regarding Claim 25, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in Claim 10.
Regarding Claim 30, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in Claim 17.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-7, 11, 15-16, 19-23 and 29 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Tsai et al. (US 2023/0371039) teaches downlink control channel for NR from 52.6 GHz and above.
Hwang et al. (US 2021/0360523) teaches method for transmitting downlink data.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YU-WEN CHANG whose telephone number is (408)918-7645. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00am-5:00pm PT.
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, Un Cho can be reached at 571-272-7919. 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.
/YU-WEN CHANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2413