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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 1/19/2024 has been entered and considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 2-17 and 19 are objected to because of the following informalities: Regarding claims 2-17 and 19, the preamble of the claims begins with “a method according to claim . . . .” However, the preamble for such claims should instead begin with “the method according to claim . . . .” Appropriate correction is required.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 8-17, 19, and 32-33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang et al. (US 2023/0171038, Yang hereinafter) in view of NOKIA ET AL., “HARQ-ACK Feedback Enhancements for URLLC/IIoT”, 3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #105-e, R1-2104309, May 19th-27th, 2021 (provided by Applicant, Nokia hereinafter). Regarding claims 1 and 32, Yang teaches a method and a communications device operable to receive data from a wireless communications network (User equipment (UE); Figs. 1-3 and 6; [0033]), the communications device comprising transceiver circuitry configured to transmit and/or to receive signals (The UE may be comprised of a transceiver; Fig. 2; [0033]); control circuitry configured in combination with the transceiver circuitry (The UE may be comprised of a processor used in combination with the transceiver; Fig. 2; [0033]) to receive a plurality of downlink transmissions in physical downlink shared channel resources of a wireless access interface provided by the wireless communications network (As can be seen in at least step 305 of Fig. 3, the UE may receive a signal from the currently camped cell. The signal may include control information and/or payload data. As can be seen in at least paragraph [0024], downlink data may be received on a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH). The UE may thus be interpreted as receiving a plurality of downlink transmissions in physical downlink shared channel resources of a wireless access interface provided by the wireless communications network; Yang; Figs. 3 and 6; [0024], [0039]-[0040]), each downlink transmission being a transmission of a data unit transmitted according to a different Hybrid Automatic Repeat Request, HARQ, type process (As can be seen in at least step 310 of Fig. 3, the UE may generate HARQ feedback for one or more HARQ processes after receiving the downlink transmissions in step 305. Each downlink transmission may thus be interpreted as being a transmission of a data unit transmitted according to a different Hybrid Automatic Repeat Request, HARQ, type process; Yang; Figs. 3 and 6; [0039]-[0040]), determine a HARQ acknowledgement or negative acknowledgement, HARQ-ACK, for each of the plurality of received downlink transmissions in accordance with whether the data unit for the HARQ type process was correctly received or not (As can be seen in at least step 310 of Fig. 3, the UE may generate HARQ feedback for one or more HARQ processes after receiving the downlink transmissions in step 305. Such feedback is described as being an ACK if the information and/or data corresponding to a particular HARQ process is successfully received and a NACK if the information and/or data corresponding to the HARQ process is not successfully received. The UE may thus be interpreted as determining a HARQ acknowledgement or negative acknowledgement, HARQ-ACK, for each of the plurality of received downlink transmissions in accordance with whether the data unit for the HARQ type process was correctly received or not; Yang; Figs. 3 and 6; [0039]-[0040]), determine for each of the different HARQ-type processes for each of the plurality of received downlink transmissions of the data units, the HARQ-ACKs to be transmitted for the received downlink data units (As can be seen in at least step 310 of Fig. 3, the UE may generate HARQ feedback for one or more HARQ processes after receiving the downlink transmissions in step 305. The UE may thus be interpreted as for each of the different HARQ-type processes for each of the plurality of received downlink transmissions of the data units, the HARQ-ACKs to be transmitted for the received downlink data units; Yang; Figs. 3 and 6; [0039]-[0040]), determine that an uplink transmission of the HARQ-ACKs, which is scheduled in uplink resources of the wireless access interface, is cancelled and cannot be transmitted in the scheduled uplink resources (As can be seen in at least step 315 of Fig. 3, the UE may determine that the scheduled transmission of the HARQ feedback is cancelled. The UE may thus be interpreted as determining that an uplink transmission of the HARQ-ACKs, which is scheduled in uplink resources of the wireless access interface, is cancelled and cannot be transmitted in the scheduled uplink resources; Yang; Figs. 3 and 6; [0041]-[0043]), receive a trigger from the wireless communications network to transmit the cancelled HARQ-ACKs in subsequently scheduled uplink resources (As can be seen in at least step 320 of Fig. 3, the UE may retransmit the cancelled HARQ feedback, and such retransmission is described as being triggered based on a predetermined condition. The network is also described as potentially transmitting an explicit request for transmission of the cancelled HARQ feedback. The UE may thus be interpreted as receiving a trigger from the wireless communications network to transmit the cancelled HARQ-ACKs in subsequently scheduled uplink resources; Yang; Figs. 3 and 6; [0044]-[0045]), and in response to the trigger, using a HARQ-ACK codebook to transmit the cancelled HARQ ACKs (The UE may use a type 3 HARQ codebook for the retransmission of the cancelled HARQ feedback; Yang; Figs. 3 and 6; [0044]). However, Yang does not specifically disclose selecting one of a plurality of configured HARQ-ACK codebooks to transmit the cancelled HARQ ACKs, wherein the configured HARQ-ACK codebook is selected based on one or more conditions. Nokia teaches selecting one of a plurality of configured HARQ-ACK codebooks to transmit the cancelled HARQ ACKs (As can be seen in at least “Alt. 3” in Section 2.1, RRC configuration may determine multiple enhanced Type 3 codebooks (CBs), and one of such CBs is selected for retransmission of dropped HARQ-ACK. At least “Alt. 4” also describes selecting between “Alt. 3A” and “Alt. 1” based on one or more conditions. One of a plurality of configured HARQ-ACK codebooks may thus be interpreted as being selected to transmit the cancelled HARQ ACKs; Nokia; Sections 2.1-2.2), wherein the configured HARQ-ACK codebook is selected based on one or more conditions (As can be seen in at least “Alt. 3” in Section 2.1, one of the multiple enhanced Type 3 CBs may be selected based on one or more conditions. At least “Alt. 4” also describes selecting between “Alt. 3A” and “Alt. 1” based on one or more conditions; Nokia; Sections 2.1-2.2). Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in Nokia regarding retransmission of cancelled HARQ-ACKs with the teachings as in Yang regarding retransmission of cancelled HARQ-ACKs. The motivation for doing so would have been to increase performance at least by selecting a codebook that is not too large for Ultra-Reliable and Low Latency Communications (URLLC) (Nokia; Section 2). Regarding claim 2, Yang and Nokia teach the limitations of claim 1. Nokia further teaches the one or more conditions comprises a number of the cancelled HARQ-ACKs for one or more of the received downlink data units of the different HARQ-type processes, which can be carried by the configured HARQ-ACK codebook (The codebook is described as being selected/determined based on the number of HARQ-ACKs that are required to be transmitted. The one or more conditions may thus be interpreted as comprising a number of the cancelled HARQ-ACKs for one or more of the received downlink data units of the different HARQ-type processes, which can be carried by the configured HARQ-ACK codebook; Nokia; Sections 2.1-2.2). Regarding claim 8, Yang and Nokia teach the limitations of claim 1. Yang further teaches each of the different HARQ processes is associated with a different HARQ process number from a set of HARQ process numbers (HARQ processes are described as having a HARQ process ID and are also discussed as being numbered (e.g., up to 16 HARQ processes). The HARQ feedback is also described as having a bit for each HARQ process (e.g., 16 bits for 16 HARQ processes). Each of the different HARQ processes may thus be interpreted as being associated with a different HARQ process number from a set of HARQ process numbers; Yang; Fig. 4; [0017], [0026], [0051]). Nokia further teaches the one or more conditions for selecting the configured HARQ-ACK codebooks is based on the HARQ process numbers of the HARQ processes for the received downlink data units for which the HARQ-ACKs were cancelled (At least Section 2.1 discusses selecting a codebook based on the number HARQ processes configured for retransmission. The codebook may thus be interpreted as being selected based on the number of HARQ processes (i.e., the HARQ process numbers of the HARQ processes); Nokia; Sections 2.1-2.2). Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in Nokia regarding retransmission of cancelled HARQ-ACKs with the teachings as in Yang regarding retransmission of cancelled HARQ-ACKs. The motivation for doing so would have been to increase performance at least by selecting a codebook that is not too large for Ultra-Reliable and Low Latency Communications (URLLC) (Nokia; Section 2). Regarding claim 9, Yang and Nokia teach the limitations of claim 8. Yang further teaches receiving the HARQ process number for each of the HARQ processes via Radio Resource Control, RRC, signals from the wireless communications network (HARQ process IDs (i.e., HARQ process numbers) are described as being configured via radio resource control (RRC) signaling; Yang; Fig. 4; [0017], [0026], [0051]). Regarding claim 10, Yang and Nokia teach the limitations of claim 8. Nokia further teaches each of the plurality of HARQ-ACK codebooks is configured to carry a HARQ-ACK for a plurality of HARQ processes which have a subset of different HARQ process numbers from the set of HARQ process numbers (At least Section 2.1 discusses using different codebooks depending on which subset of HARQ processes are being retransmitted. An example is also described wherein a codebook may be used for HARQ processes up to a certain index (i.e., process number). Each of the plurality of HARQ-ACK codebooks may thus be interpreted as being configured to carry a HARQ-ACK for a plurality of HARQ processes which have a subset of different HARQ process numbers from the set of HARQ process numbers; Nokia; Sections 2.1-2.2), wherein the selecting the configured HARQ-ACK codebook from the plurality of configured HARQ-ACK codebooks comprises selecting a configured HARQ-ACK codebook based on the sub-set of the HARQ process numbers which include one or more of the same HARQ process numbers of the cancelled HARQ-ACKs (At least Section 2.1 discusses selecting a codebook depending on which subset of HARQ processes are being retransmitted. The HARQ-ACK codebook may thus be interpreted as being selected based on the sub-set of the HARQ process numbers which include one or more of the same HARQ process numbers of the cancelled HARQ-ACKs; Nokia; Sections 2.1-2.2). Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in Nokia regarding retransmission of cancelled HARQ-ACKs with the teachings as in Yang regarding retransmission of cancelled HARQ-ACKs. The motivation for doing so would have been to increase performance at least by selecting a codebook that is not too large for Ultra-Reliable and Low Latency Communications (URLLC) (Nokia; Section 2). Regarding claim 11, Yang and Nokia teach the limitations of claim 10. Nokia further teaches the one or more conditions comprises a greatest number of the cancelled HARQ-ACKs with HARQ process numbers which can be carried by a HARQ-ACK codebook (At least Section 2.1 discusses selecting a codebook based on the number of cancelled HARQ-ACKs for which retransmission is desired. For instance, different HARQ-ACK feedback may include for (1) Rel-16 Type 3 CB, (2) only HARQ processes of all SPS configurations, or alternatively only HARQ processes of high or low priority SPS HARQ-ACK, (3) only for a subset of RRC configured serving cells or only of activated DL serving cells, and (4) only a subset of RC configured HARQ processes. An example is also described wherein a codebook may be used for HARQ processes up to a certain index (i.e., process number). The one or more conditions may thus be interpreted as comprising a greatest number of the cancelled HARQ-ACKs with HARQ process numbers which can be carried by a HARQ-ACK codebook; Nokia; Sections 2.1-2.2) and the selecting the one of the plurality of configured HARQ-ACK codebooks comprises identifying the HARQ process number of the HARQ process for each of the cancelled HARQ-ACK of the plurality of received downlink data units (An example is also described wherein a codebook may be used for HARQ processes up to a certain index (i.e., process number). Use of at least such a codebook may be interpreted as comprising identifying the HARQ process number of the HARQ process for each of the cancelled HARQ-ACK of the plurality of received downlink data units; Nokia; Sections 2.1-2.2), identifying which of the configured HARQ-ACK codebooks can carry a greatest number of the cancelled HARQ-ACKs, based on the subset of HARQ process numbers which each configured HARQ-ACK codebooks can carry (At least Section 2.1 discusses selecting a codebook based on the number of cancelled HARQ-ACKs for which retransmission is desired. One potential embodiment discusses the use of Type 3 codebook according to Rel-16 specification, which may be interpreted as including all of the HARQ processes. Use of such a codebook may thus be interpreted as comprising identifying which of the configured HARQ-ACK codebooks can carry a greatest number of the cancelled HARQ-ACKs, based on the subset of HARQ process numbers which each configured HARQ-ACK codebooks can carry; Nokia; Sections 2.1-2.2), and selecting the configured HARQ-ACK codebook which can carry the greatest number of the HARQ-ACKs for the plurality of received of downlink transmissions (At least use of Type 3 codebook according to Rel-16 specification may be interpreted as selecting the configured HARQ-ACK codebook which can carry the greatest number of the HARQ-ACKs for the plurality of received of downlink transmissions; Nokia; Sections 2.1-2.2). Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in Nokia regarding retransmission of cancelled HARQ-ACKs with the teachings as in Yang regarding retransmission of cancelled HARQ-ACKs. The motivation for doing so would have been to increase performance at least by selecting a codebook that is not too large for Ultra-Reliable and Low Latency Communications (URLLC) (Nokia; Section 2). Regarding claim 12, Yang and Nokia teach the limitations of claim 11. Nokia further teaches the selecting the configured HARQ-ACK codebook which can carry the greatest number of the HARQ-ACKs for the plurality of received of downlink transmissions comprises if the greatest number of the HARQ-ACK retransmissions can be carried by more than one of the configured HARQ-ACK codebooks, selecting the configured HARQ-ACK codebook which can carry the greatest number of HARQ retransmissions and which has the smallest size (The Examiner would like to note that the entirety of the claimed functionality is based on conditional “if” claim language. Ex Parte Schulhauser, No. 2013-007847 (P.T.A.B. April 29, 2016) states the following regarding conditional limitations: “[a]lthough claim 11 recites functions that are substantially similar to the steps recited in the method of claim 1, as noted supra, claim 11 is directed to a system. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a system claim having structure that performs a function, which only needs to occur if a condition precedent is met, still requires structure for performing the function should the condition occur. This interpretation of the system claim differs from the method claim because the structure (i.e., a processor programmed to perform an algorithm for carrying out the recited function should the recited condition be met) is present in the system regardless of whether the condition is met and the function is actually performed.” Such conditional “if” claim language may thus be broadly reasonably interpreted as optional when using an interpretation wherein the claimed “if” condition does not occur. However, in the interest of compact prosecution, the Examiner would like to note that Nokia discusses a desire to minimize overhead and use smaller codebooks when possible; Nokia; Sections 2-2.2). Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in Nokia regarding retransmission of cancelled HARQ-ACKs with the teachings as in Yang regarding retransmission of cancelled HARQ-ACKs. The motivation for doing so would have been to increase performance at least by selecting a codebook that is not too large for Ultra-Reliable and Low Latency Communications (URLLC) (Nokia; Section 2). Regarding claim 13, Yang and Nokia teach the limitations of claim 1. Yang further teaches the receiving the plurality of downlink transmissions of the data units according to the different HARQ type process comprises receiving the plurality of downlink transmissions of the data units according to the different HARQ type processes from a downlink part of a plurality of component carriers (As can be seen in at least step 305 of Fig. 3, the UE may receive a signal from the currently camped cell. The signal may include control information and/or payload data (i.e., a plurality of downlink transmissions of the data units). Such downlink transmission is also described as being performed on a plurality of component carriers (CCs), and downlink transmission on a component carrier may be interpreted as being received from a downlink part of a plurality of component carriers. The UE may thus be interpreted as receiving the plurality of downlink transmissions of the data units according to the different HARQ type processes from a downlink part of a plurality of component carriers; Yang; Figs. 3 and 6; [0039]-[0040], [0045]), and one or more of the plurality of configured HARQ-ACK codebooks are configured to carry HARQ-ACKs for downlink transmissions for HARQ processes transmitted on a sub-set of the plurality of component carriers (A HARQ-ACK codebook configured to carry only HARQ-ACK for HARQ processes transmitted on a sub-set of the component carriers (e.g., only activated CCs as opposed to all configured CCs). One or more of the plurality of configured HARQ-ACK codebooks may thus be interpreted as being configured to carry HARQ-ACKs for downlink transmissions for HARQ processes transmitted on a sub-set of the plurality of component carriers; Yang; Figs. 3 and 6; [0039]-[0040], [0045]), the one or more conditions for using the configured HARQ-ACK codebook being the one or more component carriers on which the received downlink transmissions were transmitted and the cancelled HARQ-ACKs are being retransmitted (The one or more component carriers on which the received downlink transmissions were transmitted and the cancelled HARQ-ACKs are being retransmitted may be interpreted as being included in the active CCs. A codebook for active CCs may thus be interpreted as a codebook for the one or more component carriers on which the received downlink transmissions were transmitted and the cancelled HARQ-ACKs are being retransmitted; Yang; Figs. 3 and 6; [0039]-[0040], [0045]). Nokia further teaches selecting the configured HARQ-ACK codebook (As can be seen in at least “Alt. 3” in Section 2.1, RRC configuration may determine multiple enhanced Type 3 codebooks (CBs), and one of such CBs is selected for retransmission of dropped HARQ-ACK. At least “Alt. 4” also describes selecting between “Alt. 3A” and “Alt. 1” based on one or more conditions. One of a plurality of configured HARQ-ACK codebooks may thus be interpreted as being selected to transmit the cancelled HARQ ACKs; Nokia; Sections 2.1-2.2). Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in Nokia regarding retransmission of cancelled HARQ-ACKs with the teachings as in Yang regarding retransmission of cancelled HARQ-ACKs. The motivation for doing so would have been to increase performance at least by selecting a codebook that is not too large for Ultra-Reliable and Low Latency Communications (URLLC) (Nokia; Section 2). Regarding claim 14, Yang and Nokia teach the limitations of claim 13. Yang further teaches receiving the sub-set of the plurality of component carriers via Radio Resource Control, RRC, signals from the wireless communications network (Configuration of HARQ processes for downlink transmission (i.e., the sub-set of the plurality of component carriers) is described as being performed via Radio Resource Control (RRC) signaling; Yang; Figs. 3 and 6; [0051], [0058], [0061], [0079], [0087]). Regarding claim 15, Yang and Nokia teach the limitations of claim 13. Nokia further teaches the selecting of the one of the plurality of configured HARQ-ACK codebooks comprises selecting the configured HARQ-ACK codebook which can carry a greatest number of cancelled HARQ-ACK retransmissions (At least use of Type 3 codebook according to Rel-16 specification may be interpreted as selecting the configured HARQ-ACK codebook which can carry the greatest number of the HARQ-ACKs for the plurality of received of downlink transmissions; Nokia; Sections 2.1-2.2). Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in Nokia regarding retransmission of cancelled HARQ-ACKs with the teachings as in Yang regarding retransmission of cancelled HARQ-ACKs. The motivation for doing so would have been to increase performance at least by selecting a codebook that is not too large for Ultra-Reliable and Low Latency Communications (URLLC) (Nokia; Section 2). Regarding claim 16, Yang and Nokia teach the limitations of claim 15. Nokia further teaches the selecting the one of the plurality of configured HARQ-ACK codebooks comprises if the greatest number of the cancelled HARQ-ACK retransmissions can be carried by more than one of the configured HARQ-ACK codebooks, selecting the configured HARQ- ACK codebook which can carry the greatest number of cancelled HARQ retransmissions and which has the smallest size (The Examiner would like to note that the entirety of the claimed functionality is based on conditional “if” claim language. Ex Parte Schulhauser, No. 2013-007847 (P.T.A.B. April 29, 2016) states the following regarding conditional limitations: “[a]lthough claim 11 recites functions that are substantially similar to the steps recited in the method of claim 1, as noted supra, claim 11 is directed to a system. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a system claim having structure that performs a function, which only needs to occur if a condition precedent is met, still requires structure for performing the function should the condition occur. This interpretation of the system claim differs from the method claim because the structure (i.e., a processor programmed to perform an algorithm for carrying out the recited function should the recited condition be met) is present in the system regardless of whether the condition is met and the function is actually performed.” Such conditional “if” claim language may thus be broadly reasonably interpreted as optional when using an interpretation wherein the claimed “if” condition does not occur. However, in the interest of compact prosecution, the Examiner would like to note that Nokia discusses a desire to minimize overhead and use smaller codebooks when possible; Nokia; Sections 2-2.2). Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in Nokia regarding retransmission of cancelled HARQ-ACKs with the teachings as in Yang regarding retransmission of cancelled HARQ-ACKs. The motivation for doing so would have been to increase performance at least by selecting a codebook that is not too large for Ultra-Reliable and Low Latency Communications (URLLC) (Nokia; Section 2). Regarding claim 17, Yang and Nokia teach the limitations of claim 1. Nokia further teaches the selecting the one of the plurality of configured HARQ-ACK codebooks comprises identifying the HARQ-ACK codebook which can carry one or more of the cancelled HARQ-ACKs for retransmission of a received downlink data unit transmitted later in time, which are more recent, than cancelled HARQ-ACKs for retransmission of a received downlink data units transmitted earlier in time, which are older (At least Section 2.1 discusses selecting a codebook based on the number of cancelled HARQ-ACKs for which retransmission is desired. For instance, different HARQ-ACK feedback may include for (1) Rel-16 Type 3 CB, (2) only HARQ processes of all SPS configurations, or alternatively only HARQ processes of high or low priority SPS HARQ-ACK, (3) only for a subset of RRC configured serving cells or only of activated DL serving cells, and (4) only a subset of RC configured HARQ processes. At least use of a Type 3 CB according to Rel-16 specification may be interpreted as comprising feedback for all HARQ processes, which may be interpreted as an identified codebook which can carry one or more of the cancelled HARQ-ACKs for retransmission of a received downlink data unit transmitted later in time, which are more recent, than cancelled HARQ-ACKs for retransmission of a received downlink data units transmitted earlier in time, which are older; Nokia; Sections 2.1-2.2), and selecting the configured HARQ-ACK codebook which can carry the cancelled HARQ-ACKs later in time (At least selection of a codebook which can carry all cancelled HARQ-ACKs (e.g., a Type 3 CB according to Rel-16 specification) may be interpreted as selecting the configured HARQ-ACK codebook which can carry the cancelled HARQ-ACKs later in time; Nokia; Sections 2.1-2.2). Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in Nokia regarding retransmission of cancelled HARQ-ACKs with the teachings as in Yang regarding retransmission of cancelled HARQ-ACKs. The motivation for doing so would have been to increase performance at least by selecting a codebook that is not too large for Ultra-Reliable and Low Latency Communications (URLLC) (Nokia; Section 2). Regarding claim 19, Yang and Nokia teach the limitations of claim 1. Nokia further teaches the selecting the one of the plurality of configured HARQ-ACK codebooks comprises identifying the HARQ-ACK codebook which can carry one or more of the cancelled HARQ-ACKs for retransmission of a received downlink data unit transmitted earlier in time, which are older, than cancelled HARQ-ACKs for retransmission of a received downlink data units transmitted later in time, which are more recent (At least Section 2.1 discusses selecting a codebook based on the number of cancelled HARQ-ACKs for which retransmission is desired. For instance, different HARQ-ACK feedback may include for (1) Rel-16 Type 3 CB, (2) only HARQ processes of all SPS configurations, or alternatively only HARQ processes of high or low priority SPS HARQ-ACK, (3) only for a subset of RRC configured serving cells or only of activated DL serving cells, and (4) only a subset of RC configured HARQ processes. At least use of a Type 3 CB according to Rel-16 specification may be interpreted as comprising feedback for all HARQ processes, which may be interpreted as an identified codebook which can carry one or more of the cancelled HARQ-ACKs for retransmission of a received downlink data unit transmitted earlier in time, which are older, than cancelled HARQ-ACKs for retransmission of a received downlink data units transmitted later in time, which are more recent; Nokia; Sections 2.1-2.2), and selecting the configured HARQ-ACK codebook which can carry the cancelled HARQ-ACKs earlier in time (At least selection of a codebook which can carry all cancelled HARQ-ACKs (e.g., a Type 3 CB according to Rel-16 specification) may be interpreted as selecting the configured HARQ-ACK codebook which can carry the cancelled HARQ-ACKs earlier in time; Nokia; Sections 2.1-2.2). Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in Nokia regarding retransmission of cancelled HARQ-ACKs with the teachings as in Yang regarding retransmission of cancelled HARQ-ACKs. The motivation for doing so would have been to increase performance at least by selecting a codebook that is not too large for Ultra-Reliable and Low Latency Communications (URLLC) (Nokia; Section 2). Regarding claim 32, Yang teaches an infrastructure equipment in a wireless communications network operable to transmit data to a communications device (Base station (BS) may transmit data to a user equipment (UE); Yang; Figs. 1, 3, and 6; [0005], [0029]), the infrastructure equipment comprising transceiver circuitry configured to transmit and/or to receive signals (The BS may perform wireless communication with one or more UEs and may thus be interpreted as comprising transceiver circuitry; Yang; Figs. 1, 3, and 6; [0005], [0029]); control circuitry configured in combination with the transceiver circuitry (The BS may be comprised of a processor that may be interpreted as being used in combination with the transceiver circuitry; Yang; Figs. 1, 3, and 6; [0005], [0029]) to transmit, to the communications device, a plurality of downlink transmissions in physical downlink shared channel resources of a wireless access interface provided by the wireless communications network (As can be seen in at least step 305 of Fig. 3, the BS/cell may transmit a signal to the UE. The signal may include control information and/or payload data. As can be seen in at least paragraph [0024], downlink data may be received on a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH). The BS may thus be interpreted as transmitting, to the communications device, a plurality of downlink transmissions in physical downlink shared channel resources of a wireless access interface provided by the wireless communications network; Yang; Figs. 3 and 6; [0024], [0039]-[0040]), each downlink transmission being a transmission of a data unit transmitted according to a different Hybrid Automatic Repeat Request, HARQ, type process (As can be seen in at least step 310 of Fig. 3, the UE may generate HARQ feedback for one or more HARQ processes after receiving the downlink transmissions in step 305. Each downlink transmission may thus be interpreted as being a transmission of a data unit transmitted according to a different Hybrid Automatic Repeat Request, HARQ, type process; Yang; Figs. 3 and 6; [0039]-[0040]), wherein the infrastructure equipment schedules a HARQ acknowledgement or negative acknowledgement, HARQ-ACK, in uplink resources of the wireless access interface for each of the plurality of transmitted downlink transmissions of the data units in accordance with whether the data unit for the HARQ type process was correctly received or not (As can be seen in at least step 310 of Fig. 3, the UE may generate HARQ feedback for one or more HARQ processes after receiving the downlink transmissions in step 305. As can be seen in at least step 315, such HARQ feedback is described as being scheduled. Such feedback is described as being an ACK if the information and/or data corresponding to a particular HARQ process is successfully received and a NACK if the information and/or data corresponding to the HARQ process is not successfully received. The BS may thus be interpreted as scheduling a HARQ acknowledgement or negative acknowledgement, HARQ-ACK, in uplink resources of the wireless access interface for each of the plurality of transmitted downlink transmissions of the data units in accordance with whether the data unit for the HARQ type process was correctly received or not; Yang; Figs. 3 and 6; [0039]-[0041]); configure the communications device with a HARQ-ACK, codebook for transmitting HARQ-ACKs (The UE may use a type 3 HARQ codebook for the retransmission of the cancelled HARQ feedback, and the network is described as configuring such a codebook. The BS may thus be interpreted as configuring the communications device with a HARQ-ACK, codebook for transmitting HARQ-ACKs; Yang; Figs. 3 and 6; [0030], [0044], [0046]); transmit a trigger to the communications device to transmit cancelled HARQ-ACKs, which could not be transmitted by the communications device in the scheduled uplink resources, in subsequently scheduled uplink resources (As can be seen in at least step 320 of Fig. 3, the UE may retransmit the cancelled HARQ feedback, and such retransmission is described as being triggered based on a predetermined condition. The network is also described as potentially transmitting an explicit request for transmission of the cancelled HARQ feedback. The BS may thus be interpreted as transmitting a trigger to the communications device to transmit cancelled HARQ-ACKs, which could not be transmitted by the communications device in the scheduled uplink resources, in subsequently scheduled uplink resources; Yang; Figs. 3 and 6; [0044]-[0045]), the communications device using a HARQ-ACK codebook to transmit the cancelled HARQ-ACKs (The UE may use a type 3 HARQ codebook for the retransmission of the cancelled HARQ feedback; Yang; Figs. 3 and 6; [0044]). However, Yang does not specifically disclose configuring the communications device with a plurality of HARQ-ACK, codebooks for transmitting HARQ-ACKs; and the communications device selecting one of the plurality of configured HARQ-ACK codebooks to transmit the cancelled HARQ- ACKs based on one or more conditions. Nokia teaches configuring the communications device with a plurality of HARQ-ACK, codebooks for transmitting HARQ-ACKs (As can be seen in at least “Alt. 3” in Section 2.1, RRC configuration may determine multiple enhanced Type 3 codebooks (CBs), and one of such CBs is selected for retransmission of dropped HARQ-ACK. At least “Alt. 4” also describes selecting between “Alt. 3A” and “Alt. 1” based on one or more conditions. The BS may thus be interpreted as configuring the communications device with a plurality of HARQ-ACK, codebooks for transmitting HARQ-ACKs; Nokia; Sections 2.1-2.2); and the communications device selecting one of the plurality of configured HARQ-ACK codebooks to transmit the cancelled HARQ-ACKs based on one or more conditions (As can be seen in at least “Alt. 3” in Section 2.1, one of the multiple enhanced Type 3 CBs may be selected based on one or more conditions. At least “Alt. 4” also describes selecting between “Alt. 3A” and “Alt. 1” based on one or more conditions. The communications device may thus be interpreted as selecting one of the plurality of configured HARQ-ACK codebooks to transmit the cancelled HARQ-ACKs based on one or more conditions; Nokia; Sections 2.1-2.2). Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in Nokia regarding retransmission of cancelled HARQ-ACKs with the teachings as in Yang regarding retransmission of cancelled HARQ-ACKs. The motivation for doing so would have been to increase performance at least by selecting a codebook that is not too large for Ultra-Reliable and Low Latency Communications (URLLC) (Nokia; Section 2).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-7 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
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIC A MYERS whose telephone number is (571)272-0997. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 10:30am to 7:00pm.
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, Michael Thier can be reached at 5712722832. 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.
/ERIC MYERS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2474
Prosecution Insights