Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter for the following reasons. The body of Claim 16 is directed to “at least one controller …”, which, according to paragraph 15 of Applicant’s Specification, may “take the form of … an entirely software embodiment []”. Applicant has now amended claim 16 to add that “… the controller comprises one or more of hardware circuits, a programmable hardware device, and executable code stored on computer readable storage media”, meaning that the “controller” may in fact still consist entirely of “executable code stored on computer readable storage media”, pursuant to the BRI construction of this claim limitation. This means that the “controller” may be software per se, which is non-statutory subject matter. To the extent support exists in the originally filed disclosure, Applicant may consider amending “controller” to “controller circuitry” or “controller device”, to address this rejection.
Claims 17-20 are rejected as indefinite due to their dependence from an indefinite parent claim, and the fact that they do not claim subject matter that would obviate the indefiniteness rejection applicable to their respective parent claim.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been considered. However, they are either moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument, or unpersuasive. In particular, Applicant argues that the DCI format 2 “does not schedule a PDSCH”. However, as disclosed in the reference Wang II cited below, DCI format 2 may indeed be used to schedule PDSCH resources; this teaching thus teaches to a phosita that Wang II and Zhang’s respective teachings are not rendered non-combinable simply because the applicable DCI format in those references is format 2. Please see rejection below, especially for details pertaining to and supporting the combinability of Wang II, Zhang and the cited references.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3,8-10,11-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication No. 2022/0078827 A1 to Zhang et al., in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2014/0169312 A1 to Wang et al. (hereinafter “Wang II”)
As to claim 1, Zhang discloses a user equipment (UE), comprising: at least one memory; and at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory and configured to cause the UE to: detect a downlink control information (DCI) format comprising a DCI parameter indicating triggering of a hybrid automatic repeat request acknowledgement (HARQ-ACK) retransmission (Fig. 4, paragraphs 139-152, disclosing a UE receiving a DCI format 2 in slot 4, where “the base station instructs the user terminal to retransmit the first HARQ-ACK sub-codebook in slot 6” and “After receiving the DCI format 2 issued by the base station in slot 5, the user terminal should send the second HARQ-ACK sub-codebook [previously already sent] and the third HARQ-ACK sub-codebook to the base station in slot 6”, thus teaching a BRI broadest reasonable interpretation embodiment of “a DCI format comprising a DCI parameter indicating triggering of a HARQ ACK retransmission”, to a phosita; also see Fig. 5, paragraphs 153-160),
wherein the DCI format comprises information related to at least one HARQ-ACK transmission occasion for retransmission (Fig. 4, paragraphs 139-152, disclosing a UE receiving a DCI format 2 in slot 4, where “the base station instructs the user terminal to retransmit the first HARQ-ACK sub-codebook in slot 6”, “slot 6” teaching “an indication of at least one HARQ-ACK transmission occasion for retransmission”; also see Fig. 5, paragraphs 153-160);
construct a HARQ-ACK codebook based on the information related to the at least one HARQ-ACK transmission occasion for retransmission; and transmit the HARQ-ACK codebook in a first slot (Fig. 4, paragraphs 139-152, disclosing a UE being instructed by the base station to retransmit first and second HARQ-ACK sub-codebooks in slot 6, in a “HARQ-ACK codebook” comprising sorted first and second harq-ack sub-codebooks, where the construction/generation of such “HARQ-ACK codebook” is the result of, and thus is dependent on, the assignment of the retransmission of the first and second subcodebooks in the same slot 6, i.e., “based on the information related to the at least one HARQ-ACK transmission occasion for retransmission”, teaching this limitation; also see Fig. 5, paragraphs 153-160).
Zhang does not appear to explicitly disclose a DCI format configured to schedule a PDSCH.
Wang II discloses a DCI format configured to schedule a PDSCH. (paragraph 95, disclosing a DCI format 2 DCI being the “primary DCI” which is used for “acquir[ing] the scheduling information of the PDSCH”).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine Wang II’s teachings discussed above with Zhang’s teachings discussed above, to reject this claim, at least since both references are directed to DCI of different formats and their implementation and management. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to a phosita to incorporate the DCI format features disclosed in Wang II in the DCI format disclosed in Zhang, in particular since both of the DCI/DCI format cited in Wang II and Zhang are of format 2, and thus it would have been obvious to combine/incorporate Wang II’s teaching of “a DCI format configured to schedule a PDSCH” and Zhang’s teaching of “detect a downlink control information (DCI) format comprising a DCI parameter indicating triggering of a hybrid automatic repeat request acknowledgement (HARQ-ACK) retransmission” to reject “detect a downlink control information (DCI) format configured to schedule a PDSCH and comprising a DCI parameter indicating triggering of a hybrid automatic repeat request acknowledgement (HARQ-ACK) retransmission”. The cited references are directed to control signaling in wireless communication infrastructures. The suggestion/motivation would have been to improve resource allocation and signaling for wireless communications, especially pertaining to DCI of different formats and their implementation and management (Wang II, paragraphs 1-16; Wang, paragraphs 1-25; Zhang, paragraphs 1-34). Furthermore, note that with regard to the claimed invention, especially the limitation above, all of the claimed elements have been shown to be known in the cited art, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art as of and before the effective filing date.
As to claim 2, Zhang and Wang II teach the user equipment (UE) as in the parent claim 1.
Zhang further discloses wherein the indication of the at least one HARQ-ACK transmission occasion for retransmission comprises timing information of the at least one HARQ-ACK transmission occasion. (Fig. 4, paragraphs 139-152, disclosing a UE receiving a DCI format 2 in slot 4, where “the base station instructs the user terminal to retransmit the first HARQ-ACK sub-codebook in slot 6” and “After receiving the DCI format 2 issued by the base station in slot 5, the user terminal should send the second HARQ-ACK sub-codebook [previously already sent] and the third HARQ-ACK sub-codebook to the base station in slot 6”; also see Fig. 5, paragraphs 153-160).
As to claim 3, Zhang and Wang II teach the user equipment (UE) as in the parent claim 2.
Zhang further discloses wherein the timing information of the at least one HARQ-ACK transmission occasion comprises at least one timing offset value in terms of a number of slots with respect to a second slot associated with timing of the DCI format being detected. (Fig. 4, paragraphs 139-152, disclosing a UE receiving a DCI format 2 in slot 4, where “the base station instructs the user terminal to retransmit the first HARQ-ACK sub-codebook in slot 6” and “After receiving the DCI format 2 issued by the base station in slot 5, the user terminal should send the second HARQ-ACK sub-codebook [previously already sent] and the third HARQ-ACK sub-codebook to the base station in slot 6”; also see Fig. 5, paragraphs 153-160; paragraphs 75-76, disclosing “K1”, which is the offset from the slot number of the PDSCH corresponding to the HARQ-AcK, teaching this limitation ).
As to claims 8-10, please see rejections for claims 1-3, in the same order.
As to claims 11-13, please see rejections for claims 1-3, in the same order.
Claim(s) 4,5,7,14,15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication No. 2022/0078827 A1 to Zhang et al., in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2014/0169312 A1 to Wang et al. (hereinafter “Wang II”), further in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2021/0234643 A1 to Wang et al.
As to claim 4, Zhang and Wang II teach the UE as in the parent claim 1.
Zhang does not appear to explicitly disclose wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to concatenate a first HARQ-ACK codebook corresponding to the at least one HARQ-ACK transmission occasion for retransmission and a second HARQ-ACK codebook scheduled to be multiplexed in the first slot.
Wang discloses wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to concatenate a first HARQ-ACK codebook corresponding to the at least one HARQ-ACK transmission occasion for retransmission and a second HARQ-ACK codebook scheduled to be multiplexed in the first slot. (paragraphs 126-133, Fig. 3-8, disclosing concatenating “CB.sub.a” and “CB.sub.b”)
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine Wang’s teachings discussed above with Zhang’s teachings discussed above, to reject this claim, at least since both references are directed to harq-ack feedback codebooks and it would have been obvious to a phosita to incorporate the Wang’s codebook concatenation features in the codebooks disclosed in Zhang. The cited references are directed to control signaling in wireless communication infrastructures. The suggestion/motivation would have been to improve resource allocation and signaling for wireless communications, especially pertaining to harq-ack codebooks (Wang II, paragraphs 1-16; Wang, paragraphs 1-25; Zhang, paragraphs 1-34). Furthermore, note that with regard to the claimed invention, especially the limitation above, all of the claimed elements have been shown to be known in the cited art, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art as of and before the effective filing date.
As to claim 5, Zhang, Wang II and Wang teach the UE as in the parent claim 4.
Zhang does not appear to explicitly disclose wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to use a default HARQ-ACK codebook as the first HARQ-ACK codebook in response to HARQ-ACK information of the at least one HARQ-ACK transmission occasion for retransmission not being available.
Wang discloses wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to use a default HARQ-ACK codebook as the first HARQ-ACK codebook in response to HARQ-ACK information of the at least one HARQ-ACK transmission occasion for retransmission not being available. (paragraphs 122-133, Fig. 3-8, disclosing concatenating “CB.sub.a” and “CB.sub.b”)
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine Wang’s teachings discussed above with Zhang’s teachings discussed above, to reject this claim, at least since both references are directed to harq-ack feedback codebooks and it would have been obvious to a phosita to incorporate the Wang’s codebook concatenation features in the codebooks disclosed in Zhang. The cited references are directed to control signaling in wireless communication infrastructures. The suggestion/motivation would have been to improve resource allocation and signaling for wireless communications, especially pertaining to harq-ack codebooks (Wang II, paragraphs 1-16; Wang, paragraphs 1-25; Zhang, paragraphs 1-34). Furthermore, note that with regard to the claimed invention, especially the limitation above, all of the claimed elements have been shown to be known in the cited art, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art as of and before the effective filing date.
As to claim 7, Zhang and Wang II teach the UE as in the parent claim 1.
Zhang discloses wherein the DCI format comprises a downlink (DL) DCI format, and the HARQ-ACK codebook is transmitted in a resource indicated by the DL DCI format. (Fig. 4, paragraphs 139-152, disclosing a UE receiving a DCI format 2 in slot 4, where “the base station instructs the user terminal to retransmit the first HARQ-ACK sub-codebook in slot 6”; also see Fig. 5, paragraphs 153-160)
Zhang does not appear to explicitly disclose PUCCH.
Wang discloses PUCCH (paragraphs 122-133, Fig. 3-8: PUCCH for transmitting HARQ-ACK)
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine Wang’s teachings discussed above with Zhang’s teachings discussed above, to reject this claim, at least since both references are directed to harq-ack feedback codebooks and it would have been obvious to a phosita to transmit the harq-ack disclosed in Zhang in the PUCCH disclosed in Wang, which is also used to transmit harq-acks. The cited references are directed to control signaling in wireless communication infrastructures. The suggestion/motivation would have been to improve resource allocation and signaling for wireless communications, especially pertaining to harq-ack codebooks (Wang II, paragraphs 1-16; Wang, paragraphs 1-25; Zhang, paragraphs 1-34). Furthermore, note that with regard to the claimed invention, especially the limitation above, all of the claimed elements have been shown to be known in the cited art, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art as of and before the effective filing date.
As to claims 14,15, please see rejections for claims 4,7, in the same order.
Claim(s) 16-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication No. 2022/0078827 A1 to Zhang et al., in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2014/0169312 A1 to Wang et al. (hereinafter “Wang II”), further in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2020/0267750 A1 to Park et al.
As to claim 16, Zhang discloses a processor for wireless communication, comprising: at least one controller coupled with at least one memory and configured to cause the processor to (Fig. 4, paragraphs 139-152, disclosing a UE, teaching the recited processor, controller and memory to a phosita):
detect a downlink control information (DCI) format comprising a DCI parameter indicating triggering of a hybrid automatic repeat request acknowledgement (HARQ-ACK) retransmission (Fig. 4, paragraphs 139-152, disclosing a UE receiving a DCI format 2 in slot 4, where “the base station instructs the user terminal to retransmit the first HARQ-ACK sub-codebook in slot 6” and “After receiving the DCI format 2 issued by the base station in slot 5, the user terminal should send the second HARQ-ACK sub-codebook [previously already sent] and the third HARQ-ACK sub-codebook to the base station in slot 6”, thus teaching a BRI broadest reasonable interpretation embodiment of “a DCI format comprising a DCI parameter indicating triggering of a HARQ ACK retransmission”, to a phosita; also see Fig. 5, paragraphs 153-160),
wherein the DCI format comprises information related to at least one HARQ-ACK transmission occasion for retransmission (Fig. 4, paragraphs 139-152, disclosing a UE receiving a DCI format 2 in slot 4, where “the base station instructs the user terminal to retransmit the first HARQ-ACK sub-codebook in slot 6”, “slot 6” teaching “an indication of at least one HARQ-ACK transmission occasion for retransmission”; also see Fig. 5, paragraphs 153-160);
construct a HARQ-ACK codebook based on the information related to the at least one HARQ-ACK transmission occasion for retransmission; and transmit the HARQ-ACK codebook in a first slot (Fig. 4, paragraphs 139-152, disclosing a UE being instructed by the base station to retransmit first and second HARQ-ACK sub-codebooks in slot 6, in a “HARQ-ACK codebook” comprising sorted first and second harq-ack sub-codebooks, where the construction/generation of such “HARQ-ACK codebook” is the result of, and thus is dependent on, the assignment of the retransmission of the first and second subcodebooks in the same slot 6, i.e., “based on the information related to the at least one HARQ-ACK transmission occasion for retransmission”, teaching this limitation; also see Fig. 5, paragraphs 153-160),
wherein the controller comprises one or more of hardware circuits, a programmable hardware device, and executable code stored on computer readable storage media (Fig. 4, paragraphs 139-152, disclosing a UE, teaching the recited processor, controller and memory to a phosita).
Zhang does not appear to explicitly disclose a DCI format configured to schedule a PDSCH.
Wang II discloses a DCI format configured to schedule a PDSCH. (paragraph 95, disclosing a DCI format 2 DCI being the “primary DCI” which is used for “acquir[ing] the scheduling information of the PDSCH”).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine Wang II’s teachings discussed above with Zhang’s teachings discussed above, to reject this claim, at least since both references are directed to DCI of different formats and their implementation and management. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to a phosita to incorporate the DCI format features disclosed in Wang II in the DCI format disclosed in Zhang, in particular since both of the DCI/DCI format cited in Wang II and Zhang are of format 2, and thus it would have been obvious to combine/incorporate Wang II’s teaching of “a DCI format configured to schedule a PDSCH” and Zhang’s teaching of “detect a downlink control information (DCI) format comprising a DCI parameter indicating triggering of a hybrid automatic repeat request acknowledgement (HARQ-ACK) retransmission” to reject “detect a downlink control information (DCI) format configured to schedule a PDSCH and comprising a DCI parameter indicating triggering of a hybrid automatic repeat request acknowledgement (HARQ-ACK) retransmission”. The cited references are directed to control signaling in wireless communication infrastructures. The suggestion/motivation would have been to improve resource allocation and signaling for wireless communications, especially pertaining to DCI of different formats and their implementation and management (Wang II, paragraphs 1-16; Wang, paragraphs 1-25; Zhang, paragraphs 1-34). Furthermore, note that with regard to the claimed invention, especially the limitation above, all of the claimed elements have been shown to be known in the cited art, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art as of and before the effective filing date.
Neither Wang II nor Zhang would appear to explicitly disclose DCI format 1 configured to schedule a PDSCH.
Park discloses DCI format 1 configured to schedule a PDSCH. (paragraphs 113-116, disclosing DCI format 1_1 allocating/scheduling the carrier and bandwidth of a pdsch).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine Park’s teachings discussed above with Wang II and Zhang’s combined teachings discussed above, to reject this claim, at least since all references are directed to DCI of different formats and their implementation and management. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to a phosita to incorporate the DCI format 1 disclosed in Park, in the DCI format disclosed in the combined teachings of Wang II and Zhang, in particular since these two respective DCI formats both schedule pdsch resources, and thus it would have been obvious to combine/incorporate the DCI format 1 disclosed in Park, and Wang II and Zhang’s teaching of “detect a downlink control information (DCI) format configured to schedule a PDSCH and comprising a DCI parameter indicating triggering of a hybrid automatic repeat request acknowledgement (HARQ-ACK) retransmission” to reject “detect a downlink control information (DCI) format 1 configured to schedule a PDSCH and comprising a DCI parameter indicating triggering of a hybrid automatic repeat request acknowledgement (HARQ-ACK) retransmission”. The cited references are directed to control signaling in wireless communication infrastructures. The suggestion/motivation would have been to improve resource allocation and signaling for wireless communications, especially pertaining to DCI of different formats and their implementation and management (Wang II, paragraphs 1-16; Wang, paragraphs 1-25; Zhang, paragraphs 1-34; Park, paragraphs 1-12). Furthermore, note that with regard to the claimed invention, especially the limitation above, all of the claimed elements have been shown to be known in the cited art, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art as of and before the effective filing date.
As to claim 17, Zhang, Park and Wang II teach the user equipment (UE) as in the parent claim 16.
Zhang further discloses wherein the indication of the at least one HARQ-ACK transmission occasion for retransmission comprises timing information of the at least one HARQ-ACK transmission occasion. (Fig. 4, paragraphs 139-152, disclosing a UE receiving a DCI format 2 in slot 4, where “the base station instructs the user terminal to retransmit the first HARQ-ACK sub-codebook in slot 6” and “After receiving the DCI format 2 issued by the base station in slot 5, the user terminal should send the second HARQ-ACK sub-codebook [previously already sent] and the third HARQ-ACK sub-codebook to the base station in slot 6”; also see Fig. 5, paragraphs 153-160).
As to claim 18, Zhang, Park and Wang II teach the user equipment (UE) as in the parent claim 17.
Zhang further discloses wherein the timing information of the at least one HARQ-ACK transmission occasion comprises at least one timing offset value in terms of a number of slots with respect to a second slot associated with timing of the DCI format being detected. (Fig. 4, paragraphs 139-152, disclosing a UE receiving a DCI format 2 in slot 4, where “the base station instructs the user terminal to retransmit the first HARQ-ACK sub-codebook in slot 6” and “After receiving the DCI format 2 issued by the base station in slot 5, the user terminal should send the second HARQ-ACK sub-codebook [previously already sent] and the third HARQ-ACK sub-codebook to the base station in slot 6”; also see Fig. 5, paragraphs 153-160; paragraphs 75-76, disclosing “K1”, which is the offset from the slot number of the PDSCH corresponding to the HARQ-AcK, teaching this limitation ).
Claim(s) 19,20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication No. 2022/0078827 A1 to Zhang et al., in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2014/0169312 A1 to Wang et al. (hereinafter “Wang II”) and U.S. Patent Publication No. 2020/0267750 A1 to Park et al., further in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2021/0234643 A1 to Wang et al.
As to claim 19, Zhang, Park and Wang II teach the UE as in the parent claim 16.
Zhang does not appear to explicitly disclose wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to concatenate a first HARQ-ACK codebook corresponding to the at least one HARQ-ACK transmission occasion for retransmission and a second HARQ-ACK codebook scheduled to be multiplexed in the first slot.
Wang discloses wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to concatenate a first HARQ-ACK codebook corresponding to the at least one HARQ-ACK transmission occasion for retransmission and a second HARQ-ACK codebook scheduled to be multiplexed in the first slot. (paragraphs 126-133, Fig. 3-8, disclosing concatenating “CB.sub.a” and “CB.sub.b”)
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine Wang’s teachings discussed above with Zhang’s teachings discussed above, to reject this claim, at least since both references are directed to harq-ack feedback codebooks and it would have been obvious to a phosita to incorporate the Wang’s codebook concatenation features in the codebooks disclosed in Zhang. The cited references are directed to control signaling in wireless communication infrastructures. The suggestion/motivation would have been to improve resource allocation and signaling for wireless communications, especially pertaining to harq-ack codebooks (Wang II, paragraphs 1-16; Wang, paragraphs 1-25; Zhang, paragraphs 1-34). Furthermore, note that with regard to the claimed invention, especially the limitation above, all of the claimed elements have been shown to be known in the cited art, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art as of and before the effective filing date.
As to claim 20, Zhang, Park, Wang II and Wang teach the UE as in the parent claim 19.
Zhang does not appear to explicitly disclose wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to use a default HARQ-ACK codebook as the first HARQ-ACK codebook in response to HARQ-ACK information of the at least one HARQ-ACK transmission occasion for retransmission not being available.
Wang discloses wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to use a default HARQ-ACK codebook as the first HARQ-ACK codebook in response to HARQ-ACK information of the at least one HARQ-ACK transmission occasion for retransmission not being available. (paragraphs 122-133, Fig. 3-8, disclosing concatenating “CB.sub.a” and “CB.sub.b”)
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine Wang’s teachings discussed above with Zhang’s teachings discussed above, to reject this claim, at least since both references are directed to harq-ack feedback codebooks and it would have been obvious to a phosita to incorporate the Wang’s codebook concatenation features in the codebooks disclosed in Zhang. The cited references are directed to control signaling in wireless communication infrastructures. The suggestion/motivation would have been to improve resource allocation and signaling for wireless communications, especially pertaining to harq-ack codebooks (Wang II, paragraphs 1-16; Wang, paragraphs 1-25; Zhang, paragraphs 1-34). Furthermore, note that with regard to the claimed invention, especially the limitation above, all of the claimed elements have been shown to be known in the cited art, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art as of and before the effective filing date.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 6 is 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
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHI TANG P CHENG whose telephone number is (571)272-9021. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9:30AM - 6PM.
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, Asad M Nawaz can be reached at (571)272-3988. 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.
/CHI TANG P CHENG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2463
Prosecution Insights