DETAILED ACTION
1. This office action is a response to the Application/Control Number: 18/653,445 filed 05/02/2024.
Claims Status
2. This office action is based upon claims received on 10/20/2025, which replace all prior or other submitted versions of the claims.
-Claims 1, 3, 7, 9, 11, 12, 14, 19, 20 are amended.
- Claim 8 is cancelled.
- Claims 1-7, 9-20 are pending.
- Claims 1-7, 9-20 are rejected.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
3. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
4. Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged.
Acknowledgment is made of a continuation of 16/761,452 filed 2020-05-04 based upon a continuation of 371 of PCT/SE2017/051127 filed 11/14/2017.
Information Disclosure Statement
5. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/21/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendments/Remarks
6. Applicant's remarks/arguments, see page 9 of 18, filed on 10/20/2025, with respect to Double Patenting Rejection have been considered in light of applicant’s remarks indicating that “Applicant will consider filing a terminal disclaimer when the claims are indicated as allowable but for the double patenting rejection”. As such, applicable double patenting rejections remain in effect, but will be held in abeyance in consideration of applicant’s remarks.
7. Applicant's remarks/arguments, see page 9-10 of 18, filed on 10/20/2025, with respect to Claim Objections have been considered in light of applicant remarks and amendments. Claim objections pertaining to Claims 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 14, 17, 18, 20 as referenced in the most recent office action are withdrawn.
8. Applicant's remarks/arguments, see page 10 of 18, filed on 10/20/2025, with respect to Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. 101 have been considered in light of applicant amendments. Claim rejection of Claim 20 under 35 U.S.C. 101 is withdrawn.
9. Applicant's remarks/arguments, see page 10 to 11, filed on 10/20/2025, with respect to Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 112 (b) have been considered in light of applicant’s amendments and cancellation of Claim 8. The claims rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, of Claims 7, 8, 9, 11, 19 as presented in the previous office action are withdrawn.
10. Applicant's remarks/arguments, see page 11-17 of 18, filed on 10/20/2025, with respect to Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 102 & Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 103 have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the new grounds of rejection being used in the current rejection.
Furthermore, remarks with respect to any applicable Dependent Claims have been considered, and are moot for the same reasons noted above, and are not persuasive at least via dependency to the independent claims and via individual rejections addressing the specific claims.
The rejection has been revised and set forth below according to the amended claims (see Office Action).
A. Applicant in applicant’s remarks pertaining to independent claims 7, 11, indicates:
- See page 14 (ln 12-13), page 6 (ln 1-5) that – “Lu”[…] “alone or in combination, do not teach or suggest features of independent Claims 1, 11, 12, 19, and 20”.
B. In response, the office action respectfully contends to the extent this office action continues to rely on Lu et. al (US-20150334693-A1), i.e. “Lu”, applicant’s remarks above (See item A.) are moot and not persuasive, since the rejection of Claim 1 and Claims 11, 12, 19, and 20 (including i.e. parallel features in claims 11, 12, 19, and 20) are now rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lu et. al (US-20150334693-A1), i.e. “Lu” in view of Shen (US 20180241510 A1) as also supported in parallel by Shen (WO 2017/028001 A1) i.e. “Shen”, where new reference Shen as relied upon teaches each and every limitation of applicant’s contention in combination (See office action).
The office action respectfully contends that applicant’s arguments against Lu are directed against the reference individually, and one cannot show non-obviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references used to address the rejection of applicant’s claims (See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986)).
Applicant is respectfully directed to the new grounds of rejection of Claim 1 (including claims 11, 12, 19, and 20) presented under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lu in view of Shen where the disclosure of each and every limitation of claims as amended are presented in combination.
The rejection has been revised and set forth below according to the amended claims (see Office Action).
Claim Objections (minor informalities)
11. Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities:
A. Claim 9 subject to applicant amendments now recites “the control channel being one [[of]] a dedicated channel [[and]] or a shared channel”. In light of similar amendments made to claim 7 (as pertains to Claim 7 and Claim 9 issues identified in the previous office action – see Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 112 (b)), to avoid any questions raised, this office action interprets the foregoing limitation as “the control channel being” “a dedicated channel [[and]] or a shared channel” where limitations separated by a recitation “or” are interpreted as presented in the alternative and not required together i.e. for the purposes of patentable weight. In light of similar amendments made to claim 7 (i.e. as pertains to Claim 7 and Claim 9 issues identified in the previous office action – see Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 112 (b)), the recitation “one” in claim 9 is interpreted as intended for strike out or deletion as presented for similar issues addressed in Claim 7.
Examiner interprets the subject claims listed as best possible. Applicant is requested to review and address questions raised and clarify applicant’s objective for the referred to claim language.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
12. 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.
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 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.
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.
13. Claims 1, 4, 7, 9, 11, 12, 15, 18, 19, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lu et. al (US-20150334693-A1), i.e. “Lu” in view of Shen (US 20180241510 A1) as also supported in parallel by Shen (WO 2017/028001 A1) i.e. “Shen” .
Regarding Claim 1. (Currently Amended) Lu teaches: A method of operating a target radio node in a radio access network (Lu FIG. 2 & ¶0052 […] a method in the network node 110 for allocating uplink, UL, radio resources to a pair of D2D devices 121, 122 will now be described with reference to the flowchart depicted in FIG. 2; ¶0119 […] in this action 207, if the network node 110 receives a NACK from at least one of the devices 121, 122 in the D2D pair; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: i.e. a method reads on: A method in the network node 110 for allocating uplink, UL, radio resources to reads on: of operating i.e. a pair of D2D devices 121, 122 reads on: a target radio node in a radio access network where devices 121, 122 perform the method in conjunction with the network device i.e. per ¶0119 action 207 devices transmit NACK ),
the method comprising: receiving a control message comprising control information transmitted on a control channel (Lu FIG. 2 & ¶0057 Action 201 ¶0058 […] network node 110 assigns a common DL control signaling message, to the pair of D2D devices 121, 122[…];¶0059[…] the common DL control signaling message is a DCI […] the DCI may be scrambled by the identifier specific to the D2D pair 121, 122 […] By blindly searching the DCI scrambled by the D2D-RNTI of the D2D pair 121, 122 itself, in the DCI set located in the PDCCH[…] D2D pair 121, 122 may find the DCI allocated to it; ¶0119 […] in this action 207, if the network node 110 receives a NACK from at least one of the devices 121, 122 in the D2D pair, the network node 110 may retransmit the signaling to the one of the first wireless device 121 and the second wireless device 122 that sent the NACK, based on the assigned individual cellular identifier. The network node 110 may retransmit the for example, PDCCH signaling, scrambled by an individual wireless device identifier, such as a Cellular RNTI (C-RNTI), to one of the first wireless device 121 and the second wireless device 122. In this case, since only one wireless device in the D2D pair 121, 122 would need to feedback an ACK/NACK, there may be no PUCCH resource interference; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: : per ¶0058 i.e. network node 110 assigns a common DL control signaling message, to the pair of D2D devices 121, 122 reads on: the method comprising: receiving a control message comprising control information where i.e. the DCI set located in the PDCCH reads on: transmitted on a control channel) ;
and transmitting acknowledgement feedback pertaining to the control information (Lu FIG. 2 & ¶0119 see above; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: i.e. , action 207 if the network node 110 receives a NACK from at least one of the devices 121, 122 reads on: and transmitting acknowledgement feedback , i.e. the network node 110 may retransmit the signaling, i.e. The network node 110 may retransmit the for example, PDCCH signaling reads on: pertaining to the control information to one of the first wireless device 121 and the second wireless device 122, i.e. for which at least one of the devices 121, 122 sent a NACK).
Lu does not appear to explicitly teach or strongly suggest (Note See italicized portions) : the control information comprising a position indication, the position indication indicating a position of a first acknowledgement feedback relative to a second acknowledgement feedback in a feedback codebook, the feedback codebook indicating which bits at least of the second acknowledgement feedback pertain to a data structure pertaining to or indicated by the control message;
Shen teaches: the control information (Shen FIG. 9 & (note: for corresponding reference in WO 2017/028001 A1 - see ¶0117) - ¶0116 […] the network equipment 104 transmits the C-DAI and C-TAI to the UE 102 in each downlink control information (DCI) scheduling a PDSCH for the UE 102 correspondingly in Shen; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: per FIG. 9 receiving a C-DAI and C-TAI in each DCI & ¶0116 i.e. the network equipment 104 transmits the C-DAI and C-TAI to the UE 102 in each downlink control information (DCI) reads on: the control information )
comprising a position indication (Shen FIG. 9 & ¶0095 (note: for corresponding reference in WO 2017/028001 A1 - see ¶0096) […] Two new fields, a cell-domain downlink assignment indicator (C-DAI) and a cell-domain total assignment indicator (C-TAI), are introduced which are included in the DCI. The C-DAI and C-TAI may be used by the UE to determine the HARQ-ACK codebook size and the HARQ-ACK codebook bit ordering; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: per ¶0095 (i.e. WO 2017/028001 A1 - see ¶0096) i.e. The C-DAI and C-TAI may be used by the UE to determine i.e. the HARQ-ACK codebook bit ordering reads on: comprising a position indication where furthermore i.e. bit ordering of the HARQ-ACK codebook provides a position indication, i.e. as determined from the C-DAI and C-TAI included and received in DCI ),
the position indication indicating a position of a first acknowledgement feedback relative to a second acknowledgement feedback in a feedback codebook (Shen FIG. 9 & ¶0147 (note: for corresponding reference in WO 2017/028001 A1 - see ¶0142) […] UE 102 determined the bit ordering within codebook CB.sub.(i,ym), using the information conveyed by C-DAI. The bit ordering may further be based on A, the maximum number of transport blocks (TBs) transmittable on PDSCH in a serving cell of the cell group within the subframe. For example, where A=1, if PDSCH is received on serving cell if PDSCH is received on serving cell j[..](g) and the C-DAI field in the corresponding DL grant indicates a value of I.sub.C-DAI,g, then the HARQ-ACK feedback bit position for the PDSCH received on serving cell j[..](g) within the codebook CB.sub.(i, ym) is based on Equation 9, below:
P.sub.g=K.sub.g×2̂Q+I.sub.C-DAI,g (9);
¶0148 (note: for corresponding reference in WO 2017/028001 A1 - see ¶0143) […] In one embodiment, where A≥2, the UE 102 may determine the bit ordering using Equation 9, wherein P.sub.g identifies a pointer in the HARQ-ACK codebook, each pointer points to the starting of A feedback bit positions. Thus, for A=2, the first pointer (e.g., g=1) points to the first two bits of the HARQ-ACK codebook, the second pointer (e.g., g=2) to the second two bits of the HARQ-ACK codebook […] ; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: per ¶0147 (note – for WO 2017/028001 A1 - see ¶0142) where i.e. The bit ordering may further be based on A, the maximum number of transport blocks (TBs) transmittable on PDSCH in a serving cell, and i.e. the C-DAI field in the corresponding DL grant indicates a value of I.sub.C-DAI,g reads on: reads on: the position indication which is used to determine P.sub.g. Furthermore, per ¶0148 (note - for WO 2017/028001 A1 - see ¶0143) i.e. where A≥2, the UE 102 may determine the bit ordering using Equation 9, wherein P.sub.g identifies a pointer in the HARQ-ACK codebook, each pointer points to the starting of A feedback bit positions. Thus, for A=2, the first pointer (e.g., g=1) points to the first two bits of the HARQ-ACK codebook reads on: indicating a position of a first acknowledgement feedback . Furthermore per ¶0148 (note - for WO 2017/028001 A1 - see ¶0143) i.e. P.sub.g identifies a pointer in the HARQ-ACK codebook, each pointer points to the starting of A feedback bit positions i.e. for A=2 pointer points to the starting of 2 feedback bit positions within the HARQ-ACK codebook relative to each other reads on: relative to , and furthermore i.e. the second pointer (e.g., g=2) to the second two bits of the HARQ-ACK codebook reads on: a second acknowledgement feedback in a feedback codebook),
the feedback codebook indicating which bits at least of the second acknowledgement feedback pertain to a data structure pertaining to (note: limitations separated by a recitation “or” are interpreted as presented in the alternative and not required together i.e. for the purposes of patentable weight)
or(note: limitations separated by a recitation “or” are interpreted as presented in the alternative and not required together i.e. for the purposes of patentable weight)
indicated by (note: limitations separated by a recitation “or” are interpreted as presented in the alternative and not required together i.e. for the purposes of patentable weight)
the control message (Shen FIG. 5-6, FIG. 9 & ¶0116 (note for WO 2017/028001 A1 - see ¶0117) see above ; ¶0147 (note – for WO 2017/028001 A1 - see ¶0142) See above ; per ¶0148 (note - for WO 2017/028001 A1 - see ¶0143) See above ; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: per ¶0148 (note - for WO 2017/028001 A1 - see ¶0143) i.e. the second pointer (e.g., g=2) to the second two bits of the HARQ-ACK codebook reads on: the feedback codebook indicating which bits at least of the second acknowledgement feedback i.e. at least two bits pertain to TBs associated with PDSCH. Furthermore per ¶0147 (note – for WO 2017/028001 A1 - see ¶0142) i.e. The bit ordering may further be based on A, the maximum number of transport blocks (TBs) transmittable on PDSCH and per ¶0148 (note - for WO 2017/028001 A1 - see ¶0143) i.e. P.sub.g identifies a pointer in the HARQ-ACK codebook, each pointer points to the starting of A feedback bit positions i.e. for A=2 pointer points to the starting of 2 feedback bit positions within the HARQ-ACK codebook as it pertains to 2 TBs associated with PDSCH reads on: pertain to a data structure i.e. associated with i.e. TBs associated with PDSCH. Furthermore per ¶0116 (note for WO 2017/028001 A1 - see ¶0117) i.e. the network equipment 104 transmits the C-DAI and C-TAI to the UE 102 in each downlink control information (DCI) scheduling a PDSCH and where i.e. per ¶0095 (i.e. WO 2017/028001 A1 - see ¶0096) i.e. The C-DAI and C-TAI may be used by the UE to determine i.e. the HARQ-ACK codebook bit ordering reads on: pertaining to or indicated by the control message i.e. which schedules the PDSCH with TB structure and also transmits C-DAI & C-TAI that determines the HARQ-ACK codebook bit ordering );
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Lu with teachings of Shen, since Shen enables beneficially, to allow a wireless communication system to reduce the number of HARQ-ACK feedback bits to be transmitted in an UL subframe, as compared to conventional methods (Shen ¶0096).
Regarding Claim 4. (Original) Lu in view of Shen teaches: The method according to claim 1,
furthermore Lu teaches: wherein the control information comprises a response resource indication indicating resources for transmission of the acknowledgement feedback (Lu FIG.2 & FIG. 3 , ¶0057 Action 201 ¶0058 […] network node 110 assigns a common DL control signaling message, to the pair of D2D devices 121, 122[…];¶0059[…] the common DL control signaling message is a DCI […] the DCI may be scrambled by the identifier specific to the D2D pair 121, 122 […] By blindly searching the DCI scrambled by the D2D-RNTI of the D2D pair 121, 122 itself, in the DCI set located in the PDCCH¶0079 […] the allocation of UL radio resources 320, 420, 520, 620, 720, 820, 920 may be based on the allocation of DL radio resources 310, 410, 510, 610, 710, 810, 910 […]UL radio resources 320, 420, 520, 620, 720, 820, 920 may comprise Acknowledgement/Negative Acknowledgement, ACK/NACK, feedback. ; NOTE-DISCLOSURE: per ¶0057 i.e. a common DL control signaling message, to the pair of D2D devices 121, 122 per FIG. 3 & ¶0079 maps to the allocation of UL radio resources 320 reads on: wherein the control information comprises a response resource indication indicating which per ¶0079 comprise Acknowledgement/Negative Acknowledgement, ACK/NACK reads on: resources for transmission of the acknowledgement feedback and in step 207 devices send NACK).
Regarding Claim 7. (Currently Amended) Lu in view of Shen teaches: The method according to claim 1,
furthermore Lu teaches: wherein the is channel (note: limitations separated by a recitation “or” are interpreted as presented in the alternative and not required together i.e. for the purposes of patentable weight;
Lu FIG. 2 & ¶0057 See claim 1; ¶0058 See claim 1; ¶0059 See claim 1; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: per ¶0058 i.e. the common DL control signaling message is a DCI […] the DCI may be scrambled by the identifier specific to the D2D pair 121, 122 […] By blindly searching the DCI scrambled by the D2D-RNTI of the D2D pair 121, 122 itself, in i.e. per ¶0058 the DCI set is located in the PDCCH reads on: wherein the control channel is a dedicated channel […] D2D pair 121, 122 may find the DCI allocated to it);
or (note: limitations separated by a recitation “or” are interpreted as presented in the alternative and not required together i.e. for the purposes of patentable weight)
a shared channel (note: limitations separated by a recitation “or” are interpreted as presented in the alternative and not required together i.e. for the purposes of patentable weight).
Regarding Claim 9. (Currently Amended) Lu in view of Shen teaches: The method according to claim 1,
furthermore Lu teaches: wherein the acknowledgement feedback is transmitted on [[a]] the control channel, the control channel being one [[of]] a dedicated channel (note: limitations separated by a recitation “or” are interpreted as presented in the alternative and not required together i.e. for the purposes of patentable weight;
Lu FIG.2 & FIG. 3 , ¶0057 See claim 1; ¶0058 See claim 1;¶0059 See claim 1; ¶0079 […] the allocation of UL radio resources 320, 420, 520, 620, 720, 820, 920 may be based on the allocation of DL radio resources 310, 410, 510, 610, 710, 810, 910 […]UL radio resources 320, 420, 520, 620, 720, 820, 920 may comprise Acknowledgement/Negative Acknowledgement, ACK/NACK, feedback. ; ¶0119 See claim 1; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: i.e. , action 207 if the network node 110 receives a NACK from at least one of the devices 121, 122 reads on: and transmitting acknowledgement feedback which per FIG. 3 ¶0079 the DCI received indicates or maps to allocation of PUCCH resources reads on: on a control channel where per ¶0079 PUCCH comprises Acknowledgement/Negative Acknowledgement, ACK/NACK reads on: the control channel being one a dedicated Channel comprised in a PUCCH where and in step 207 devices send NACK)
[[and]] or (note: limitations separated by a recitation “or” are interpreted as presented in the alternative and not required together i.e. for the purposes of patentable weight)
a shared channel (note: limitations separated by a recitation “or” are interpreted as presented in the alternative and not required together i.e. for the purposes of patentable weight).
Regarding Claim 11. (Currently Amended) Lu teaches: A target radio node for a radio access network (Lu FIG. 2 & ¶0052 […] a method in the network node 110 for allocating uplink, UL, radio resources to a pair of D2D devices 121, 122 will now be described with reference to the flowchart depicted in FIG. 2; ¶0119 […] in this action 207, if the network node 110 receives a NACK from at least one of the devices 121, 122 in the D2D pair; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: i.e. a method in the network node 110 for allocating uplink, UL, radio resources to i.e. a pair of D2D devices 121, 122 reads on: A target radio node in a radio access network where devices 121, 122 perform the method in conjunction with the network device i.e. per ¶0119 action 207 devices transmit NACK ),
(See the rejection of Claim 1, Claim 11 recites similar and parallel features to Claim 1, and Claim 11 pertains to a radio node associated to Claim 1, and the rationale for the rejection of claim 1 applies similarly to Claim 11. Where applicable, minor differences between claims are noted as appropriate)
the target radio node comprising processing circuitry being configured to: receive a control message comprising control information transmitted on a control channel, the control information comprising a position indication, the position indication indicating a position of a first acknowledgement feedback relative to a second acknowledgement feedback in a feedback codebook, the feedback codebook indicating which bits at least of the second acknowledgement feedback pertain to a data structure pertaining to or indicated by the control message; and to transmit acknowledgement feedback pertaining to the control information (See the rejection of Claim 1, Claim 11 recites similar and parallel features to Claim 1, and Claim 11 pertains to a radio node associated to Claim 1, and the rationale for the rejection of claim 1 applies similarly to Claim 11. Where applicable, minor differences between claims are noted as appropriate).
Regarding Claim 12. (Currently Amended) Lu teaches: A method of operating a transmitting radio node in a radio access network(Lu FIG. 2 & ¶0052 […] a method in the network node 110 for allocating uplink, UL, radio resources to a pair of D2D devices 121, 122 will now be described with reference to the flowchart depicted in FIG. 2; ¶0119 […] in this action 207, if the network node 110 receives a NACK from at least one of the devices 121, 122 in the D2D pair; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: i.e. a method reads on: A method in the network node 110 for allocating uplink, UL, radio resources reads on: of operating a transmitting radio node in a radio access network to i.e. a pair of D2D devices 121, 122),
the method comprising: retransmitting, to a target radio node, a control message comprising control information based on acknowledgement feedback pertaining to the control information (Lu – FIG. 2 & ¶0058 See claim 1; ¶0119 See Claim 1; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: if the network node 110 receives a NACK from at least one of the devices 121, 122, the network node 110 may i.e. retransmit the signaling such as retransmit the PDCCH signaling . reads on: the method comprising: retransmitting, to a target radio node, a control message comprising control information where i.e. the retransmitted PDCCH signaling comprises a control message i.e. signaling comprising control information such as per ¶0058 i.e. network node 110 assigns a common DL control signaling message i.e. control message comprising control information. Furthermore i.e. retransmit the signaling to the one of the first wireless device 121 and the second wireless device 122 i.e. that sent the NACK read on: based on acknowledgement feedback pertaining to the control information).
Lu does not appear to explicitly teach or strongly suggest (Note See italicized portions) : the control information comprising a position indication, the position indication indicating a position of a first acknowledgement feedback relative to a second acknowledgement feedback in a feedback codebook, the feedback codebook indicating which bits at least of the second acknowledgement feedback pertain to a data structure pertaining to or indicated by the control message;
Shen teaches: the control information comprising a position indication, the position indication indicating a position of a first acknowledgement feedback relative to a second acknowledgement feedback in a feedback codebook, the feedback codebook indicating which bits at least of the second acknowledgement feedback pertain to a data structure pertaining to(note: limitations separated by a recitation “or” are interpreted as presented in the alternative and not required together i.e. for the purposes of patentable weight)
or(note: limitations separated by a recitation “or” are interpreted as presented in the alternative and not required together i.e. for the purposes of patentable weight)
indicated by (note: limitations separated by a recitation “or” are interpreted as presented in the alternative and not required together i.e. for the purposes of patentable weight)
the control message (See the rejection of Claim 1, Claim 12 recites similar and parallel features to Claim 1, and the rationale for the rejection of Claim 1 applies similarly to Claim 12. Where applicable, minor differences between claims are noted as appropriate);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Lu with teachings of Shen, since Shen enables beneficially, to allow a wireless communication system to reduce the number of HARQ-ACK feedback bits to be transmitted in an UL subframe, as compared to conventional methods (Shen ¶0096).
Regarding Claim 15. (Original) Lu in view of Shen teaches: The method according to claim 12,
(See the rejection of Claim 4, Claim 15 recites similar and parallel features to Claim 4, and Claim 15 pertains to a transmitting radio node as associated to the target radio node of Claim 4, and the rationale for the rejection of Claim 4 applies similarly to Claim 15 as applied to the transmitting Radio node. Where applicable, minor differences between claims are noted as appropriate)
wherein the control information comprises a response resource indication indicating resources for transmission of the acknowledgement feedback(See the rejection of Claim 4, Claim 15 recites similar and parallel features to Claim 4, and Claim 15 pertains to a transmitting radio node as associated to the target radio node of Claim 4, and the rationale for the rejection of Claim 4 applies similarly to Claim 15 as applied to the transmitting Radio node. Where applicable, minor differences between claims are noted as appropriate).
Regarding Claim 18. (Original) Lu in view of Shen teaches: The method according to claim 12,
(See the rejection of Claim 7, Claim 18 recites similar and parallel features to Claim 7, and Claim 18 pertains to a transmitting radio node as associated to the target radio node of Claim 7, and the rationale for the rejection of Claim 7 applies similarly to Claim 18 as applied to the transmitting Radio node. Where applicable, minor differences between claims are noted as appropriate) wherein the control information is transmitted in a control information message on a control channel, the control channel being one of a dedicated and a shared channel (See the rejection of Claim 7, Claim 18 recites similar and parallel features to Claim 7, and Claim 18 pertains to a transmitting radio node as associated to the target radio node of Claim 7, and the rationale for the rejection of Claim 7 applies similarly to Claim 18 as applied to the transmitting Radio node. Where applicable, minor differences between claims are noted as appropriate).
Regarding Claim 19 (Currently Amended). Lu teaches: A transmitting radio node for a radio access network (Lu FIG. 2 & ¶0052 […] a method in the network node 110 for allocating uplink, UL, radio resources to a pair of D2D devices 121, 122 will now be described with reference to the flowchart depicted in FIG. 2; ¶0119 […] in this action 207, if the network node 110 receives a NACK from at least one of the devices 121, 122 in the D2D pair; NOTE- DISCLOSURE: in the network node 110 reads on: a transmitting radio node in a radio access network for allocating uplink, UL, radio resources r to i.e. a pair of D2D devices 121, 122),
(See the rejection of Claim 12, Claim 19 recites similar and parallel features to Claim 12, and Claim 19 pertains to method for a transmitting radio node associated to Claim 12, and the rationale for the rejection of Claim 12 applies similarly to Claim 19. Where applicable, minor differences between claims are noted as appropriate).
the transmitting radio node comprising processing circuitry being configured to: retransmit, to a target radio node, a control message comprising control information based on acknowledgement feedback pertaining to the control information, the control information comprising a position indication, the position indication indicating a position of a first acknowledgement feedback relative to a second acknowledgement feedback in a feedback codebook, the feedback codebook indicating which bits at least of the second acknowledgement feedback pertain to a data structure pertaining to or indicated by the control message (See the rejection of Claim 12, Claim 19 recites similar and parallel features to Claim 12, and Claim 19 pertains to method for a transmitting radio node associated to Claim 12, and the rationale for the rejection of Claim 12 applies similarly to Claim 19. Where applicable, minor differences between claims are noted as appropriate).
Regarding Claim 20. (Currently Amended) Lu teaches: A non-transitory computer storage medium storing an executable computer program having instructions that, when executed, causes processing circuitry to at least one of control and perform a method for operating a target radio node in a radio access network (Lu FIG. 2 & FIG. 11, ¶0048 […] The wireless devices 121, 122 and 123 may further be referred to as mobile telephones, mobile terminals, wireless terminals and/or mobile stations, cellular telephones, or […] may be, […] computer-comprised, or vehicle-mounted mobile devices […] the wireless devices 121, 122 and 123 may further be referred to as network nodes.; ¶0052 […] See claim 1; ¶0119 See claim 1; ¶0140 […] Any of the other information processed by the processing circuit 1106 may also be stored in the memory circuit 1107 ; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: D2D devices per ¶0048 i.e. computer-comprised, or vehicle-mounted mobile devices a laptop, a Personal Digital Assistant (PDA), or a tablet computer i.e. all devices well known to comprise a processor executing instruction stored in the memory where per ¶0048 the wireless devices 121, 122 and 123 may further be referred to as network nodes with FIG. 11 depicting a network node with where per ¶0104 Any of the other information processed by the processing circuit 1106 may also be stored in the memory circuit 1107 reads on: A non-transitory computer storage medium storing an executable computer program having instructions that, when executed, causes processing circuitry to at least one of control and perform where per ¶119 i.e. a method reads on: A method in the network node 110 for allocating uplink, UL, radio resources to reads on: of operating i.e. a pair of D2D devices 121, 122 reads on: a target radio node in a radio access network where devices 121, 122 perform the method in conjunction with the network device i.e. per ¶0119 action 207 devices transmit NACK ),
(See the rejection of Claim 1, Claim 20 recites similar and parallel features to Claim 1, and Claim 20 pertains to a computer storage medium associated to Claim 1, and the rationale for the rejection of claim 1 applies similarly to Claim 20. Where applicable, minor differences between claims are noted as appropriate)
the method comprising: receiving a control message comprising control information transmitted on a control channel, the control information comprising a position indication, the position indication indicating a position of a first acknowledgement feedback relative to a second acknowledgement feedback in a feedback codebook, the feedback codebook indicating which bits at least of the second acknowledgement feedback pertain to a data structure pertaining to or indicated by the control message; and transmitting acknowledgement feedback pertaining to the control information (See the rejection of Claim 1, Claim 20 recites similar and parallel features to Claim 1, and Claim 20 pertains to a computer storage medium associated to Claim 1, and the rationale for the rejection of claim 1 applies similarly to Claim 20. Where applicable, minor differences between claims are noted as appropriate).
14. Claim 2, 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lu in view of Shen, further in view of ISLAM et. al (US-20170359826-A1) i.e. “ISLAM”.
Regarding Claim 2. (Original) Lu in view of Shen teaches: The method according to claim 1,
furthermore Lu teaches: wherein the control information comprises control information (Lu FIG. 2 & ¶0057 See claim 1 ¶0058 […] See claim 1;¶0059 See claim 1; ¶0119 See claim 1; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: per ¶0058 i.e. network node 110 assigns a common DL control signaling message, to the pair of D2D devices 121, 122 reads on: the method comprising: receiving control information where i.e. the DCI set located in the PDCCH reads on: wherein the control information comprises control information as in DCI)
Lu in view of Shen does not appear to explicitly teach or strongly suggest (Note see italicized portions): comprises command type control information;
ISLAM teaches: wherein the control information comprises command type control information (ISLAM - FIG. 7D & ¶0125….. at 776, if the UE 702 successfully decodes the DCI to detect the beam change instruction, the UE includes a distinct DMRS sequence in the PUCCH ….. UE 702 transmits at 778 the PUCCH with the distinct DMRS sequence….the distinct DMRS sequence is different from a DMRS sequence used by the UE to transmit the PUCCH if the beam change instruction is not detected in the DCI; FIG. 8B & ¶0127….. at 836, the UE 802 includes a bit in a PUCCH to separately indicate an ACK/NACK response for successful decoding of the DCI and detection of the beam change instruction, and the UE 802 transmits at 838 the PUCCH with the bit; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: DCI i.e. reads on: control information comprises beam change instruction i.e. beam change reads on command type instruction).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Lu in view of Shen with teachings of ISLAM, since ISLAM enables mechanisms for including a bit or a distinct DMRS sequence in a PUCCH to separately indicate an ACK/NACK response for successful decoding of DCI and detection of beam change instruction separate from other ACK/NACK responses such as pertaining to PDSCH reception (ISLAM ¶0092-¶0094).
Regarding Claim 13. (Original) Lu in view of Shen teaches: The method according to claim 12,
(See the rejection of Claim 2, Claim 13 recites similar and parallel features to Claim 2, and Claim 13 pertains to a transmitting radio node as associated to the target radio node of Claim 2, and the rationale for the rejection of Claim 2 applies similarly to Claim 13 as applied to the transmitting Radio node. Where applicable, minor differences between claims are noted as appropriate)
wherein the control information comprises command type control information (See the rejection of Claim 2, Claim 13 recites similar and parallel features to Claim 2, and Claim 13 pertains to a transmitting radio node as associated to the target radio node of Claim 2, and the rationale for the rejection of Claim 2 applies similarly to Claim 13 as applied to the transmitting Radio node. Where applicable, minor differences between claims are noted as appropriate).
15. Claim 3, 5, 14, 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lu in view of Shen, further in view of Chang et al. (WO-2018005615-A1) i.e. “Chang”.
Regarding Claim 3. (Currently Amended) Lu in view of Shen teaches: The method according to claim 1,
furthermore Lu teaches: wherein the control information comprises scheduling type control information, the control information indicating at least one of (note: limitations subsequent to recitation “at least one of” are interpreted as presented in the alternative and not required together i.e. for the purposes of carrying patentable weight) : at least one of (note: limitations subsequent to recitation “at least one of” are interpreted as presented in the alternative and not required together i.e. for the purposes of carrying patentable weight)
first resources for reception of signaling; and at least one of second resources for transmission of signaling ( Lu FIG. 2 & ¶0052 See claim 1 ; ¶0057 See Claim 1; ¶0058 See claim 1; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: per FIG. 2 Action 203 Allocate UL radio resources to the devices such as FIG. 3 reads on: wherein the control information comprises scheduling type control information, the control information indicating at least one of: at least one of first resources for reception of signaling such as UL PUCCH resources of FIG. 3. Per ¶0058 DCI set located in the PDCCH reads on: and at least one of second resources for transmission of signaling );
Lu in view of Shen does not appear to explicitly teach or strongly suggest (Note see italicized portions): at least one of first resources and first transmission parameters for reception of signaling; and at least one of second resources and second transmission parameters for transmission of signaling.
Chang teaches: wherein the control information comprises scheduling type control information(Chang - FIG. 8 & ¶0053… Upon detection of a PDCCH 210, two ACK/NACK feedback may be transmitted by the UE 100. A first ACK/NACK may be transmitted in a UL subframe n+k that provides an acknowledgement response at least for the detected PDCCH 210. A second ACK/NACK feedback may be transmitted in the UL subframe n+m for the detected PDSCHs 220 scheduled by the PDCCH 210; NOTE-DISCLOSURE& TEACHING: detection of a PDCCH 210 by the UE 100, where the PDSCH scheduled by PDCCH i.e. reads upon: wherein the control information comprises scheduling type control information),
the control information indicating at least one of (note: limitations subsequent to recitation “at least one of” are interpreted as presented in the alternative and not required together i.e. for the purposes of carrying patentable weight):
at least one of (note: limitations subsequent to recitation “at least one of” are interpreted as presented in the alternative and not required together i.e. for the purposes of carrying patentable weight)
first resources and first transmission parameters for reception of signaling (note: limitations subsequent to recitation “at least one of” are interpreted as presented in the alternative and not required together i.e. for the purposes of carrying patentable weight;
Chang - FIG. 8 & ¶0053… See above; NOTE – DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: the associated PDSCH 220 … that is scheduled by the PDCCH 210 where a second ACK/NACK feedback may be transmitted in the UL subframe n+m for the detected PDSCHs 220 scheduled by I.e. the PDCCH 210 i.e. reads on: the control information indicating PDSCH 220 shown in FIG. 8 depicting PDSCH in a specific subframe i.e. reads on: first resources for reception by the UE i.e. the target radio node of the data signaling within SFN, and parameters N for reception by the UE reads on: first transmission parameters for reception of signaling);
and at least one of (note: limitations subsequent to recitation “at least one of” are interpreted as presented in the alternative and not required together i.e. for the purposes of carrying patentable weight)
second resources and second transmission parameters for transmission of signaling (note: limitations subsequent to recitation “at least one of” are interpreted as presented in the alternative and not required together i.e. for the purposes of carrying patentable weight;
Chang - FIG. 8 & ¶0053… See above NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: the associated PDSCH 220 … that is scheduled by the PDCCH 210 where a second ACK/NACK feedback may be transmitted in the UL subframe n+m for the detected PDSCHs 220 scheduled by the PDCCH 210 where shown in FIG. 8 depicting PDSCH in a specific subframe i.e. reads on the PDCCH i.e. the control information indicating resources for transmitting by eNB of the data PDSCH signaling within SFN and parameters N for transmitting by eNB reads on: second resources and second transmission parameters for transmission of signaling comprising PDSCH signaling by the eNB; Note: ACK/NACK feedback may be transmitted in the UL subframe n+m for the detected PDSCHs also reads on: second resources and second transmission parameters for transmission of signaling in the uplink ).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Lu in view of Shen with teachings of Chang since Chang enables an early acknowledgement feedback to inform the eNB of the outcome of at least a DCI decoding operation for aggregated transmissions in multiple subframes (SFs), which may enable improving the system throughput and spectrum efficiency (Chang - ¶0034)
Regarding Claim 5. (Original) Lu in view of Shen teaches: The method according to claim 1,
Lu in view of Shen does not appear to explicitly teach or strongly suggest (Note see italicized portions): the control information comprises a second response resource indication indicating second resources for transmission of second acknowledgement feedback, the second acknowledgement feedback pertaining to second information indicated for reception by the target radio node
Chang teaches: wherein the control information comprises a second response resource indication indicating second resources for transmission of second acknowledgement feedback (Chang FIG. 8 & ¶0053 a PDCCH 210 used for aggregated transmissions scheduling on either the DL or the UL and the associated PDSCH 220 or PUSCH 280 that is scheduled by the PDCCH 210[….] Upon detection of a PDCCH 210, two ACK/NACK feedback may be transmitted by the UE 100. A first ACK/NACK may be transmitted in a UL subframe n+k that provides an acknowledgement response at least for the detected PDCCH 210. A second ACK/NACK feedback may be transmitted in the UL subframe n+m for the detected PDSCHs 220 scheduled by the PDCCH 210 – NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: A first ACK/NACK may be transmitted in a UL subframe n+k that provides an acknowledgement response at least for the detected PDCCH 210 reads on: wherein the control information comprises , where i.e. A second ACK/NACK feedback may be transmitted in the UL subframe a subframe n+m reads on: a second response resource indication indicating a subframe n+m for ACK/NACK pertaining to the detected PDSCHs 220. i.e. A second ACK/NACK feedback may be transmitted reads on: transmission of second acknowledgement feedback, scheduled by the PDCCH 210 reads on the control message comprising),
the second acknowledgement feedback (Chang FIG. 8 & ¶0053 See above …; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: Upon detection of a PDCCH 210, two ACK/NACK feedback transmitted, where a second ACK/NACK feedback i.e. reads on the second acknowledgement feedback , transmitted in the UL subframe n+m for the detected PDSCHs)
pertaining to second information indicated for reception by the target radio node (Chang FIG. 8 & ¶0053 See above …; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: transmitted in the UL subframe n+m for the detected PDSCHs reads on pertaining to second information indicated for reception by the target radio node).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Lu in view of Shen with teachings of Chang since Chang enables an early acknowledgement feedback to inform the eNB of the outcome of at least a DCI decoding operation for aggregated transmissions in multiple subframes (SFs), which may enable improving the system throughput and spectrum efficiency (Chang - ¶0034).
Regarding Claim 14. (Currently Amended) Lu in view of Shen teaches: The method according to claim 12,
(See the rejection of Claim 3, Claim 14 recites similar and parallel features to Claim 3, and Claim 14 pertains to a transmitting radio node as associated to the target radio node of Claim 3, and the rationale for the rejection of Claim 3 applies similarly to Claim 14 as applied to the transmitting Radio node. Where applicable, minor differences between claims are noted as appropriate)
wherein the control information comprises scheduling type control information, the control information indicating at least one of: at least one of first resources and first transmission parameters for reception of signaling; and at least one of second resources and second transmission parameters for transmission of signaling (See the rejection of Claim 3, Claim 14 recites similar and parallel features to Claim 3, and Claim 14 pertains to a transmitting radio node as associated to the target radio node of Claim 3, and the rationale for the rejection of Claim 3 applies similarly to Claim 14 as applied to the transmitting Radio node. Where applicable, minor differences between claims are noted as appropriate).
Regarding Claim 16. (Original) Lu in view of Shen teaches: The method according to claim 12,
(See the rejection of Claim 5, Claim 16 recites similar and parallel features to Claim 5, and Claim 16 pertains to a transmitting radio node as associated to the target radio node of Claim 5, and the rationale for the rejection of Claim 5 applies similarly to Claim 16 as applied to the transmitting Radio node. Where applicable, minor differences between claims are noted as appropriate)
wherein the control information comprises a second response resource indication indicating second resources for transmission of second acknowledgement feedback, the second acknowledgement feedback pertaining to second information indicated for reception by the target radio node (See the rejection of Claim 5, Claim 16 recites similar and parallel features to Claim 5, and Claim 16 pertains to a transmitting radio node as associated to the target radio node of Claim 5, and the rationale for the rejection of Claim 5 applies similarly to Claim 16 as applied to the transmitting Radio node. Where applicable, minor differences between claims are noted as appropriate).
16. Claims 6, 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lu in view of Shen, further in view of Qu et. al (US-20140029584-A1) i.e. “Qu”.
Regarding Claim 6. (Original) Lu in view of Shen teaches: The method according to claim 1,
furthermore Lu teaches: wherein transmitting the acknowledgement feedback is based on determining whether the control information has been received correctly based on at least one of (Note: subsequent features after recitation “at least one of” are presented in the alternative and not required together) error coding (Note: limitation after recitation “at least one of” are presented in the alternative and not required together) and reception quality (Note: limitation after recitation “at least one of” are presented in the alternative and not required together; Lu – FIG. 2 & ¶0118 [….]HARQ is the simultaneous combination of Automatic Retransmission request (ARQ), and Forward Error Correction (FEC). […] enable the overhead of error correction to be adapted dynamically depending on the channel quality; … if the errors may be detected but not corrected, a retransmission may be requested; ¶0119 See claim 1…; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: feedback ACK/NACK for retransmission i.e. reads on: wherein transmitting the acknowledgement feedback, of control information based upon i.e. FEC […] enabling error correction adapted to channel quality reads on: is based on determining whether the control information has been received correctly based on at least one of error coding and reception quality, where if the errors may be detected but not corrected, a retransmission may be requested);
While Lu teaches: determining whether the control information has been received correctly based on at least one of error coding and reception quality as noted herein above in that per i.e. ¶0118 HARQ is the simultaneous combination of Automatic Retransmission request (ARQ), and Forward Error Correction (FEC) an channel quality and that per ¶119 NACK is in response to DCI reception failure indicating the DCI received is subject to NACK is also subject to FEC and channel quality assessment;
Assuming arguendo (Note: emphasis added Lu already reads on and teaches the subject claims features as noted herein) Lu in view of Shen does not appear to explicitly teach or strongly suggest (See italicized portions): received correctly based on at least one of error coding and reception quality.
Qu teaches: transmitting acknowledgement feedback based on control information received based on at least one of (Note: subsequent features presented in the alternative) error coding and reception quality (Qu - ¶0090 (ln 17-23) UE may also perform a CRC check using the generalized UE identity since the CRC bits are masked by the generalized UE identity obtained from the eNB. If the CRC check passes, the UE may decide if the decoding of the PDCCH and/or EPDCCH is correct and provide feedback (ACK/NACK) accordingly; NOTE-DISCLOSURE& TEACHING: UE that feeds back ACK or NACK i.e. provide feedback (ACK/NACK) accordingly reads on: transmitting acknowledgement feedback, i.e. based upon at least one of performing CRC check associated with decoding PDCCH or control information I.e. If the CRC check passes, if the decoding of the PDCCH and/or EPDCCH is correct reads on: on control information received based on at least one of error coding and reception quality ).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Lu in view of Shen with teachings of Qu, since Qu enables assignment and coordination of PDCCH by eNB to independent UE’s based upon PDCCH masked via UE identity further enabling UE ability to provide feedback on correct PDCCH decoding (Qu - ¶0090, ¶0126).
Regarding Claim 17. (Original) Lu in view of Shen teaches: The method according to claim 12,
(See the rejection of Claim 6, Claim 17 recites similar and parallel features to Claim 6, and Claim 17 pertains to a transmitting radio node as associated to the target radio node of Claim 6, and the rationale for the rejection of Claim 6 applies similarly to Claim 17 as applied to the transmitting Radio node. Where applicable, minor differences between claims are noted as appropriate)
wherein transmitting the acknowledgement feedback is based on determining whether the control information has been received correctly based on at least one of error coding and reception quality(See the rejection of Claim 6, Claim 17 recites similar and parallel features to Claim 6, and Claim 17 pertains to a transmitting radio node as associated to the target radio node of Claim 6, and the rationale for the rejection of Claim 6 applies similarly to Claim 17 as applied to the transmitting Radio node. Where applicable, minor differences between claims are noted as appropriate).
17. Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over of Lu in view of Shen, further in view of Babaei et al. (US-20190068317-A1), i.e. “Babaei”.
Regarding Claim 10. (Original) Lu in view of Shen teaches: The method according to claim 1,
furthermore Lu teaches: wherein the acknowledgement feedback is transmitted on a control channel, the control channel being one of (Note: subsequent features after recitation “one of” are presented in the alternative and not required together) a dedicated (Lu FIG.2 & FIG. 3 , ¶0057 See claim 1; ¶0058 See claim 1;¶0059 See claim 1; ¶0079 […] the allocation of UL radio resources 320, 420, 520, 620, 720, 820, 920 may be based on the allocation of DL radio resources 310, 410, 510, 610, 710, 810, 910 […]UL radio resources 320, 420, 520, 620, 720, 820, 920 may comprise Acknowledgement/Negative Acknowledgement, ACK/NACK, feedback. ; ¶0119 See claim 1; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: ¶0119 see above; NOTE-DISCLOSURE: i.e. , action 207 if the network node 110 receives a NACK from at least one of the devices 121, 122 reads on: and transmitting acknowledgement feedback which per FIG. 3 ¶0079 the DCI received indicates or maps to allocation of PUCCH resources reads on: on a channel where per ¶0079 PUCCH comprises Acknowledgement/Negative Acknowledgement, ACK/NACK reads on: the control channel being one of a dedicated Channel comprised in a PUCCH where and in step 207 devices send NACK)
Lu in view of Shen does not appear to explicitly teach or strongly suggest (Note see italicized portions): feedback is transmitted on a data channel;
Babaei teaches: wherein the acknowledgement feedback is transmitted on a data channel, the control channel being one of (Note: subsequent features after recitation “ one of” are presented in the alternative and not required together)
a dedicated (Note: limitation after recitation “at least one of” are presented in the alternative and not required together)
and a shared channel (Note: limitation after recitation “one of” are presented in the alternative and not required together;
Babaei - ¶00207 a HARQ feedback timing may be indicated in a DCI scheduling a downlink transmission (e.g., a PDSCH). In an example, DCI may comprise a field with a value/number/integer that indicates the time between the downlink transmission and HARQ feedback corresponding to the downlink transmission (e.g., ACK or NACK). The HARQ feedback may be transmitted on a PUCCH and/or PUSCH; NOTE-DISCLOSURE & TEACHING: DCI that indicates HARQ feedback transmitted reads on: wherein the acknowledgement feedback is transmitted at least on a PUCCH (i.e. dedicated control channel) and/or on PUSCH reads on: on a data channel the PUSCH carrying the HARQ feedback reads on: the control channel being one of a shared channel).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Lu in view of Shen with teachings of Babaei, since Babaei enables implementation of enhanced signaling mechanisms between a base station and a wireless device to improve uplink spectral efficiency and reduce decoding error rates when dynamic and configured grants are implemented (Babaei - ¶0265).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MALICK A SOHRAB whose telephone number is (571)272-4347. The examiner can normally be reached on Mo-Fri 9:00 am - 5:00 pm. 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, Edan Orgad can be reached on (571) 272-7884. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/M.A.S./Examiner, Art Unit 2414 17 Dec 2025
/STEVEN HIEU D NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2414