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 []”. 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3,8-13,16-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Publication No. 2022/0078827 A1 to Zhang et al.
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 DCI indicating 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”; also see Fig. 5, paragraphs 153-160),
wherein the DCI indicating HARQ-ACK retransmission comprises an indication of 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 indication of 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 indication of the at least one HARQ-ACK transmission occasion for retransmission”, teaching this limitation; also see Fig. 5, paragraphs 153-160).
As to claim 2, Zhang discloses 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 discloses 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.
As to claims 16-18, please see rejections for claims 1-3, in the same order.
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) 4,5,7,14,15,19,20 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. 2021/0234643 A1 to Wang et al.
As to claim 4, Zhang discloses 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, 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 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, 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 discloses 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, 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.
As to claims 19-20, please see rejections for claims 4-5, in the same order.
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
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