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 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)(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.
Claim(s) 1-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Muruganathan et al. “Muruganathan” US 2022/0376844.
Regarding claims 1 and 12, Muruganathan teaches a method and base station comprising:
Control circuitry, which in operation, determines information to be configured to a signal based on a configuration related to feedback for a retransmission process, the signal indicating a number of assignments of data in the retransmission process (base station (402) generates DCI for scheduling transmissions related to a HARQ process (i.e. retransmission process). The DCI includes information related to the total DAI and counter DAI (i.e. number of assignments); See Figures 7a and 7b; Paragraphs 133 and 135); and
transmission circuitry, which in operation, transmits the information in the signal (Paragraphs 133 and 135 (see also step 706 of Figure 7A) teaches transmitting the DCI).
Regarding claim 2, Muruganathan teaches configuring the information on the number of assignments in a first retransmission process for which feedback is enabled to the signal for a second retransmission process for which it is disabled (the base station configures the information for a first and second HARQ process wherein the feedback is either enabled or disabled; Paragraph 133).
Regarding claim 3, Muruganathan teaches not counting an assignment of the data for the second retransmission process in configuring the information on the number of assignments (the base station may refrain from incrementing the counter DAI (i.e. not counting an assignment); Paragraph 133, see also Paragraph 93 talking about not incrementing DAI).
Regarding claim 4, Muruganathan teaches not configuring the information on the number of assignments of the data in at least some field of the signal for a retransmission process which the feedback is disabled (the base station may refrain from incrementing the counter DAI (i.e. not configuring information on number of assignments); Paragraph 133, see also Paragraph 93 talking about not incrementing DAI. Since the value is not being configured/incremented, this is viewed as not configuring the information in at least some field of the signal. Further, the base station configures the information for a first and second HARQ process wherein the feedback is either enabled or disabled; Paragraph 133. Figure 5 step 504 further shows a disabled HARQ process and the counter not being incremented).
Regarding claim 5, Muruganathan teaches configuring the information on assignments for a retransmission process which the feedback is enabled in a field other than the field in which the information is not configured when it’s disabled (the base station configures the information for a first and second HARQ process wherein the feedback is either enabled or disabled; Paragraph 133. Figure 5 step 512 shows that when the HARQ is enabled, the counter DAI is incremented (i.e. configuring the information when feedback is enabled).
Regarding claim 6, Muruganathan teaches the field in which the information is not configured is at least on of a first field indicating a cumulative number of assignments of the data for each component carrier or second field indicating total number of assignments of the data for each slot (for the two types of codebooks shown in Figures 7a/7B and described in paragraphs 128/133, the information (i.e. DAI values) are for one or more components carriers; Paragraph 37.Therefore the field not being configured associated with each CC as claimed).
Regarding claim 7, Muruganathan teaches configuring information other than information on the number of assignments of the data in the field (the UE is configured for type-2; step 700 of Figure 7a, see paragraph 133. The DAI (assignment) values are not incremented; however, there are other fields being configured (part of the HARQ process configuration) thus reading on the claimed “other information”).
Regarding claim 8, Muruganathan teaches configuring known information between the base station and terminal in the field which assignments are not configured (the UE is configured for type-2; step 700 of Figure 7a, see paragraph 133. The DAI (assignment) values are not incremented; however, there are other fields being configured (part of the HARQ process configuration) thus reading on the claimed “other information”). This information is viewed as known information because the base station and UE are able to communicate and the UE is configured by the base station thus reading on the claimed “known information”).
Regarding claim 9, Muruganathan teaches configuring a parameter related to transmission of data in the retransmission process for which feedback is disabled in the field which isn’t configured (Figures 7A and 7B (see paragraphs 130-137) show a base station configuring the terminal for a HARQ process and the terminal transmits data/retransmission based on the configuration (See step 720). This can all be done in response to the feedback being disabled given the HARQ type configuration).
Regarding claim 10, Muruganathan teaches the parameter is one of repetitions of data, coding/modulation of data, indication if data is retransmission data, and/or transmit power of the data (steps 708, 709, 710 of Figure 7A show a UE receiving the DCI from the base station which indicates whether or not to perform a HARQ process. This is viewed as an indication of the data being retransmission data because the UE would know that once it transmits the feedback, information received after that would be retransmission data. Thus this initial transmission from the base station is an indication the current data received is not retransmission data).
Regarding claims 11 and 13, Muruganathan teaches a method and terminal comprising:
Reception circuitry, which in operation, receives information configured based on a configuration related to feedback for a retransmission process, the signal indicating a number of assignments of data in the retransmission process (base station (402) generates DCI for scheduling transmissions related to a HARQ process (i.e. retransmission process). The DCI includes information related to the total DAI and counter DAI (i.e. number of assignments); See Figures 7a and 7b; Paragraphs 133 and 135. This information is received by the UE); and
control circuitry, which in operation, controls reception of the data based on the information (Paragraphs 133 and 135 (see also step 706 of Figure 7A) teaches the UE receiving the DCI).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRANDON M RENNER whose telephone number is (571)270-3621. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7am-5pm 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, Derrick Ferris can be reached at (571)-272-3123. 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.
/BRANDON M RENNER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2411