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 .
DETAILED ACTION
EXAMINER’S AMENDMENT
An examiner’s amendment on 3/19/2026 is moot. After further search and further consideration the application is no longer in condition for allowance and that an office action with claim rejections will be forthcoming.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “mechanism” in claims 1, 13, 25. Therefore, claims 1, 13, 25 invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f).
a. “mechanism” is a generic, nonce term;
b. Each claim recites only the function of the mechanism, without reciting any structure; and
C. There is no indication in the claims as to how the mechanism is implemented (e.g., hardware, software, circuitry).
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1, 13, 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph, because the claim purports to invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, but fails to recite a combination of elements as required by that statutory provision and thus cannot rely on the specification to provide the structure, material or acts to support the claimed function. As such, the claim recites a function that has no limits and covers every conceivable means for achieving the stated function, while the specification discloses at most only those means known to the inventor. Accordingly, the disclosure is not commensurate with the scope of the claim.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim limitation “mechanism” in claims 1, 13, 25 invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. . “mechanism” is a generic, nonce term; Each claim recites only the function of the mechanism, without reciting any structure; and there is no indication in the claims as to how the mechanism is implemented (e.g., hardware, software, circuitry). Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
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 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-8, 13-15, 19-21, 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) based upon a public use or sale or other public availability of the invention as being anticipated by US Patent Application Publication 20210307049 (hereinafter referred to as Venugopal).
Consider claim 1, Venugopal teaches an electronic apparatus for wireless communications (see at least ¶ [0146], Fig. 12, 13, 15, “…The device 1205 may be an example of aspects of a base station 105…”) comprising:
at least one processor (see at least ¶ [0168], Fig. 15, “…processor 1540…”); and
at least one memory including computer program code, where the at least one memory and the computer program code are configured (see at least ¶ [0175], “…The memory 1530 may store computer-readable code 1535 including instructions that, when executed by a processor (e.g., the processor 1540) cause the device to perform various functions…”), with the at least one processor, to cause the electronic apparatus to at least:
in a process during which first information about a first timing advance (see at least ¶ [0099], “…apply to a current timing advance value (e.g., the initial timing advance value)…”) of user equipment (see at least ¶ [0099], “…the UE 115-b…”) within a service range of a device related to the electronic apparatus (see at least ¶ [0095], “…a coverage area 110-b…, … the base station 105-b may dynamically indicate a timing advance for the UE 115-b…”) is to be retransmitted to the user equipment using Hybrid Automatic Repeat Request, HARQ (see at least ¶ [0086], “…The UEs 115 and the base stations 105 may support retransmissions…, … retransmission (e.g., automatic repeat request (ARQ)). HARQ…” and further see at least ¶ [0099], “…the base station 105-b may signal the differential timing advance value to the UE 115-b in a HARQ feedback transmission…”), transmit second information about a second timing advance to the user equipment (see at least ¶ [0099], “…The UE 115-b may receive the differential timing advance value …”) in a case where the first timing advance is updated, wherein the second timing advance is an updated first timing advance (see at least ¶ [0099], “…may adjust a timing advance at the UE (e.g., add or subtract the differential timing advance value to the current timing advance value). The UE 115-b may then transmit subsequent uplink transmissions to the base station 105-b using the updated timing advance value…” and further see at least ¶ [0111], “…the base station 105-e may transmit, and the UE 115-e may receive, flow control feedback indicating the second timing advance for subsequent uplink transmissions associated with the TCI state from the UE 115-e. In particular, the flow control feedback may indicate a delta between the first timing advance and the second timing advance…”).
Consider claim 13, Venugopal teaches an electronic apparatus for wireless communications (see at least ¶ [0112], Fig. 8, 9, 11, “…The device 805 may be an example of aspects of a UE 115…”) comprising :
at least one processor (see at least ¶ [0136], Fig. 11, “…processor 1140…”); and
at least one memory including computer program code, where the at least one memory and the computer program code are configured, with the at least one processor (see at least ¶ [0144], “…The processor 1140 may be configured to execute computer-readable instructions stored in a memory (e.g., the memory 1130) to cause the device 1105 to perform various functions…”), to cause the electronic apparatus to at least:
in a process during which first information about a first timing advance (see at least ¶ [0111], “…identify a first timing advance for the first uplink transmission…”) of the electronic apparatus is to be re-received from a network side apparatus (see at least ¶ [0111], “…control feedback indicating the second timing advance for subsequent uplink transmissions…”) serving the electronic apparatus using Hybrid Automatic Repeat Request, HARQ (see at least ¶ [0086], “…The UEs 115 and the base stations 105 may support retransmissions…, … retransmission (e.g., automatic repeat request (ARQ)). HARQ…” and further see at least ¶ [0099], “…the base station 105-b may signal the differential timing advance value to the UE 115-b in a HARQ feedback transmission…”), receive second information about a second timing advance from the network side apparatus in a case where the first timing advance is updated, wherein the second timing advance is an updated first timing advance (see at least ¶ [0099], “…may adjust a timing advance at the UE (e.g., add or subtract the differential timing advance value to the current timing advance value). The UE 115-b may then transmit subsequent uplink transmissions to the base station 105-b using the updated timing advance value…” and further see at least ¶ [0111], “…the base station 105-e may transmit, and the UE 115-e may receive, flow control feedback indicating the second timing advance for subsequent uplink transmissions associated with the TCI state from the UE 115-e. In particular, the flow control feedback may indicate a delta between the first timing advance and the second timing advance…”).
Consider claim 25 , Venugopal teaches a method for wireless communications, comprising:
in a process during which first information about a first timing advance (see at least ¶ [0099], “…apply to a current timing advance value (e.g., the initial timing advance value)…”) of user equipment (see at least ¶ [0099], “…the UE 115-b…”) within a service range of a device related to an electronic apparatus (see at least ¶ [0095], “…a coverage area 110-b…, … the base station 105-b may dynamically indicate a timing advance for the UE 115-b…”) is to be retransmitted to the user equipment using Hybrid Automatic Repeat Request, HARQ (see at least ¶ [0086], “…The UEs 115 and the base stations 105 may support retransmissions…, … retransmission (e.g., automatic repeat request (ARQ)). HARQ…” and further see at least ¶ [0099], “…the base station 105-b may signal the differential timing advance value to the UE 115-b in a HARQ feedback transmission…”), transmitting second information about a second timing advance to the user equipment (see at least ¶ [0099], “…The UE 115-b may receive the differential timing advance value …”) in a case where the first timing advance is updated, wherein the second timing advance is an updated first timing advance (see at least ¶ [0099], “…may adjust a timing advance at the UE (e.g., add or subtract the differential timing advance value to the current timing advance value). The UE 115-b may then transmit subsequent uplink transmissions to the base station 105-b using the updated timing advance value…” and further see at least ¶ [0111], “…the base station 105-e may transmit, and the UE 115-e may receive, flow control feedback indicating the second timing advance for subsequent uplink transmissions associated with the TCI state from the UE 115-e. In particular, the flow control feedback may indicate a delta between the first timing advance and the second timing advance…”).
Consider claim 2 (depends on at least claim 1), Venugopal discloses the limitations of claim 1 as applied to claim rejection 1 above and further discloses:
Venugopal teaches wherein the at least one memory and the computer program code are configured, with the at least one processor, to cause the electronic apparatus to call, in a case where information to be transmitted in a first HARQ process for retransmission is the first information (see at least ¶ [0099], “…apply to a current timing advance value (e.g., the initial timing advance value)…”), a second HARQ process different from the first HARQ process to transmit the second information (see at least ¶ [0099], “…a HARQ feedback transmission. …receive the differential timing advance value and may adjust a timing advance…”).
Consider claim 3 (depends on at least claim 1), Venugopal discloses the limitations of claim 1 as applied to claim rejection 1 above and further discloses:
Venugopal teaches wherein the first information is a value of the first timing advance (see at least ¶ [0099], “…a current timing advance value (e.g., the initial timing advance value)…”), and the second information is a value of the second timing advance (see at least ¶ [0099], “…the differential timing advance value to the … feedback transmission. …receive the differential timing advance value and may adjust a timing advance … (e.g., add or subtract the differential timing advance value to the current timing advance value). The UE 115-b may then transmit subsequent uplink transmissions to the base station 105-b using the updated timing advance value…”).
Consider claim 4 (depends on at least claim 1), Venugopal discloses the limitations of claim 1 as applied to claim rejection 1 above and further discloses:
Venugopal teaches wherein the first information is a difference value between the first timing advance and an initial timing advance at the time of initial access of the user equipment to the device (see at least ¶ [0099], “…the base station 105-b may multiplex HARQ feedback with a differential timing advance value (e.g., +/−advance) for the UE 115-b to apply to a current timing advance value (e.g., the initial timing advance value)…”), and the second information is a difference value between the second timing advance and the initial timing advance (see at least ¶ [0099], “…The UE 115-b may receive the differential timing advance value and may adjust a timing advance at the UE (e.g., add or subtract the differential timing advance value to the current timing advance value)…”).
Consider claim 5 (depends on at least claim 1), Venugopal discloses the limitations of claim 1 as applied to claim rejection 1 above and further discloses:
Venugopal teaches wherein the second information is a difference value between the second timing advance and a timing advance correctly received and used by the user equipment, and the at least one memory and the computer program code are configured, with the at least one processor, to cause the electronic apparatus to inform, through Downlink Control Information, DCI, signaling, the user equipment of: ignoring information about a timing advance received in the first HARQ process, and obtaining the second timing advance based on the received second information and the timing advance correctly received and used by the user equipment (see at least ¶ [0098], “…the base station 105-b may signal a single bit in DCI used to schedule an uplink transmission to indicate whether the UE 115-b is to use different timing advance values …” and see at least ¶ [0099], “…the differential timing advance value to the UE in a HARQ feedback transmission. …receive the differential timing advance value and may adjust a timing advance … (e.g., add or subtract the differential timing advance value to the current timing advance value). The UE 115-b may then transmit subsequent uplink transmissions to the base station 105-b using the updated timing advance value…”).
Consider claim 6 (depends on at least claim 1), Venugopal discloses the limitations of claim 1 as applied to claim rejection 1 above and further discloses:
Venugopal teaches wherein the second information is a difference value between the second timing advance and a timing advance correctly received and used by the user equipment, and the at least one memory and the computer program code are configured, with the at least one processor, to cause the electronic apparatus to send Downlink Control Information, DCI, scrambled by Scrambled Transmission-Radio Network Temporary Identifier, INT-RNTI, to the user equipment, so as to inform the user equipment that a time-frequency resource where a Medium Access Control Element, MAC CE, carrying the first information and transmitted in the first HARQ process lies is invalid, to inform the user equipment of obtaining the second timing advance based on the second information and the timing advance correctly received and used by the user equipment (see at least ¶ [0092], “…the base station 105-a may signal the first mapping and the second mapping to the UE 115-a. … the actual delta values may be signaled in a MAC control element (MAC-CE)…” and see at least ¶ [0098], “…the base station 105-b may signal a single bit in DCI used to schedule an uplink transmission to indicate whether the UE 115-b is to use different timing advance values …” and see at least ¶ [0099], “…the differential timing advance value to the UE in a HARQ feedback transmission. …receive the differential timing advance value and may adjust a timing advance … (e.g., add or subtract the differential timing advance value to the current timing advance value). The UE 115-b may then transmit subsequent uplink transmissions to the base station 105-b using the updated timing advance value…”).
Consider claim 7 (depends on at least claim 1), Venugopal discloses the limitations of claim 1 as applied to claim rejection 1 above and further discloses:
Venugopal teaches wherein the at least one memory and the computer program code are configured, with the at least one processor, to cause the electronic apparatus to transmit the second information and not transmit the first information in a first HARQ process for retransmission in a case where information to be transmitted in the first HARQ process for retransmission is the first information (see at least ¶ [0099], “…a current timing advance value (e.g., the initial timing advance value)…” and “…the differential timing advance value to the UE in a HARQ feedback transmission. …receive the differential timing advance value and may adjust a timing advance … (e.g., add or subtract the differential timing advance value to the current timing advance value)…”).
Consider claim 8 (depends on at least claim 1), Venugopal discloses the limitations of claim 1 as applied to claim rejection 1 above and further discloses:
Venugopal teaches wherein the at least one memory and the computer program code are configured, with the at least one processor, to cause the electronic apparatus to send downlink control information, DCI, scrambled by Scrambled Transmission-Radio Network Temporary Identifier, INT-RNTI, to the user equipment, so as to inform the user equipment that a time-frequency resource where a Medium Access Control Element, MAC CE, carrying the first information and transmitted in a first HARQ process for initial transmission lies is invalid, to inform the user equipment of not soft combing the first information and the second information after receiving the second information (see at least ¶ [0092], “…the base station 105-a may signal the first mapping and the second mapping to the UE 115-a. … the actual delta values may be signaled in a MAC control element (MAC-CE)…” and see at least ¶ [0098], “…the base station 105-b may signal a single bit in DCI used to schedule an uplink transmission to indicate whether the UE 115-b is to use different timing advance values …” and see at least ¶ [0099], “…the differential timing advance value to the UE in a HARQ feedback transmission. …receive the differential timing advance value and may adjust a timing advance … (e.g., add or subtract the differential timing advance value to the current timing advance value). The UE 115-b may then transmit subsequent uplink transmissions to the base station 105-b using the updated timing advance value…”).
Consider claim 9 (depends on at least claim 1), Venugopal discloses the limitations of claim 1 as applied to claim rejection 1 above and further discloses:
Venugopal teaches transmit the second information based on a Code Block Group, CBG, and in Downlink Control Information, DCI, for indicating the retransmission, set Code Bock Group Flushing-out Information, CBGFI, to a value indicating that none of CBGs transmitted in a first HARQ process for retransmission is soft combined with corresponding CBG transmitted in a first HARQ process for initial transmission.
Consider claim 14 (depends on at least claim 13), Venugopal discloses the limitations of claim 13 as applied to claim rejection 13 above and further discloses:
Venugopal teaches wherein the at least one memory and the computer program code are configured, with the at least one processor, to cause the electronic apparatus to receive, in a case where information received via a first HARQ process for retransmission is the first information (see at least ¶ [0099], “…apply to a current timing advance value (e.g., the initial timing advance value)…”), the second information via a second HARQ process different from the first HARQ process (see at least ¶ [0099], “…a HARQ feedback transmission. …receive the differential timing advance value and may adjust a timing advance…”).
Consider claim 15 (depends on at least claim 13), Venugopal discloses the limitations of claim 13 as applied to claim rejection 13 above and further discloses:
Venugopal teaches wherein the first information is a value of the first timing advance (see at least ¶ [0099], “…a current timing advance value (e.g., the initial timing advance value)…”), and the second information is a value of the second timing advance (see at least ¶ [0099], “…the differential timing advance value to the UE in a HARQ feedback transmission. …receive the differential timing advance value and may adjust a timing advance … (e.g., add or subtract the differential timing advance value to the current timing advance value). The UE 115-b may then transmit subsequent uplink transmissions to the base station 105-b using the updated timing advance value…”), or
wherein the first information is a difference value between the first timing advance and an initial timing advance at the time of initial access of the electronic apparatus to the network side apparatus (see at least ¶ [0099], “…the base station 105-b receives the uplink transmission and determines that a different timing advance value is appropriate…”), and the second information is a difference value between the second timing advance and the initial timing advance (see at least ¶ [0099], “…the differential timing advance value to the UE in a HARQ feedback transmission. …receive the differential timing advance value and may adjust a timing advance … (e.g., add or subtract the differential timing advance value to the current timing advance value). The UE 115-b may then transmit subsequent uplink transmissions to the base station 105-b using the updated timing advance value…”), or
wherein the second information is a difference value between the second timing advance and a timing advance correctly received and used by the electronic apparatus, and the at least one memory and the computer program code are configured, with the at least one processor, to cause the electronic apparatus to be informed, through Downlink Control Information, DCI, signaling, of: ignoring information about a timing advance received in the first HARQ process, and obtaining the second timing advance based on the received second information and the timing advance correctly received and used by the electronic apparatus, or
wherein the second information is a difference value between the second timing advance and a timing advance correctly received and used by the electronic apparatus, and the at least one memory and the computer program code are configured, with the at least one processor, to cause the electronic apparatus to be informed, via Downlink Control Information, DCI, scrambled by Scrambled Transmission-Radio Network Temporary Identifier, INT-RNTI, that:
a time-frequency resource where a Medium Access Control Element, MAC CE, carrying the first information and transmitted by the network side apparatus in the first HARQ process lies is invalid, so that the electronic apparatus obtains the second timing advance based on the second information and the timing advance correctly received and used by the electronic apparatus (see at least ¶ [0092], “…the base station 105-a may signal the first mapping and the second mapping to the UE 115-a. … the actual delta values may be signaled in a MAC control element (MAC-CE)…” and see at least ¶ [0098], “…the base station 105-b may signal a single bit in DCI used to schedule an uplink transmission to indicate whether the UE 115-b is to use different timing advance values …” and see at least ¶ [0099], “…the differential timing advance value to the UE in a HARQ feedback transmission. …receive the differential timing advance value and may adjust a timing advance … (e.g., add or subtract the differential timing advance value to the current timing advance value). The UE 115-b may then transmit subsequent uplink transmissions to the base station 105-b using the updated timing advance value…”).
Consider claim 19 (depends on at least claim 13), Venugopal discloses the limitations of claim 13 as applied to claim rejection 13 above and further discloses:
Venugopal teaches wherein the at least one memory and the computer program code are configured, with the at least one processor, to cause the electronic apparatus to receive the second information, not the first information, via a first HARQ process for retransmission (see at least ¶ [0099], “…a current timing advance value (e.g., the initial timing advance value)…” and “…the differential timing advance value to the UE in a HARQ feedback transmission. …receive the differential timing advance value and may adjust a timing advance … (e.g., add or subtract the differential timing advance value to the current timing advance value)…”).
Consider claim 20 (depends on at least claim 19), Venugopal discloses the limitations of claim 19 as applied to claim rejection 19 above and further discloses:
Venugopal teaches wherein the at least one memory and the computer program code are configured, with the at least one processor, to cause the electronic apparatus to be informed, via downlink control information, DCI, scrambled by Scrambled Transmission-Radio Network Temporary Identifier, INT-RNTI, that a time-frequency resource where a Medium Access Control Element, MAC CE, carrying the first information and transmitted by the network side apparatus in a first HARQ process for initial transmission lies is invalid, so that the electronic apparatus does not soft combine the first information and the second information after receiving the second information (see at least ¶ [0092], “…the base station 105-a may signal the first mapping and the second mapping to the UE 115-a. … the actual delta values may be signaled in a MAC control element (MAC-CE)…” and see at least ¶ [0098], “…the base station 105-b may signal a single bit in DCI used to schedule an uplink transmission to indicate whether the UE 115-b is to use different timing advance values …” and see at least ¶ [0099], “…the differential timing advance value to the UE in a HARQ feedback transmission. …receive the differential timing advance value and may adjust a timing advance … (e.g., add or subtract the differential timing advance value to the current timing advance value). The UE 115-b may then transmit subsequent uplink transmissions to the base station 105-b using the updated timing advance value…”).
Consider claim 21 (depends on at least claim 20), Venugopal discloses the limitations of claim 20 as applied to claim rejection 20 above and further discloses:
Venugopal teaches wherein the at least one memory and the computer program code are configured, with the at least one processor, to cause the electronic apparatus further to soft combine information, among information received via a first HARQ process for retransmission, other than the second information, with corresponding information received via a first HARQ process for initial transmission (see at least ¶ [0099], “…the differential timing advance value to the UE in a HARQ feedback transmission. …receive the differential timing advance value and may adjust a timing advance … (e.g., add or subtract the differential timing advance value to the current timing advance value). The UE 115-b may then transmit subsequent uplink transmissions to the base station 105-b using the updated timing advance value…”).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 of this title, 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 9-11, 22, 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Application Publication 20210307049 (hereinafter referred to as Venugopal) in view of US Patent Application Publication 20230039872 (hereinafter referred to as Khoshkholgh).
Consider claim 9 (depends on at least claim 7), Venugopal discloses the limitations of claim 7 as applied to claim rejection 7 above and further discloses:
Venugopal disclose all the subject matters of the claimed invention concept. However, Venugopal does not particularly disclose transmit the second information based on a Code Block Group, CBG, and in Downlink Control Information, DCI, for indicating the retransmission, set Code Bock Group Flushing-out Information, CBGFI, to a value indicating that none of CBGs transmitted in a first HARQ process for retransmission is soft combined with corresponding CBG transmitted in a first HARQ process for initial transmission. In an analogous field of endeavor, attention is directed to Khoshkholgh, which teaches transmit the second information based on a Code Block Group, CBG, and in Downlink Control Information, DCI, for indicating the retransmission, set Code Bock Group Flushing-out Information, CBGFI, to a value indicating that none of CBGs transmitted in a first HARQ process for retransmission is soft combined with corresponding CBG transmitted in a first HARQ process for initial transmission (see Khoshkholgh, at least ¶ [0242], “…the HARQ process which the downlink and/or uplink transmission … a DCI scheduling a downlink transmission (or downlink assignment, or downlink signal, or downlink channel) may indicate the corresponding HARQ process. …HARQ process number/id; new-data indicator (NDI); code block group (CBG) transmit indicator (CBGTI) and CBG flush indicator (CB_GFI) in case per-CBG retransmission …”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious a finding that one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention could have combined the elements as claimed by the know method, and that in combination. Each element merely performs the same function as it does separately; Venugopal disclosed invention, and have transmit the second information based on a Code Block Group, CBG, and in Downlink Control Information, DCI, for indicating the retransmission, set Code Bock Group Flushing-out Information, CBGFI, to a value indicating that none of CBGs transmitted in a first HARQ process for retransmission is soft combined with corresponding CBG transmitted in a first HARQ process for initial transmission, as taught by Khoshkholgh, thereby, to provide specific settings in a device that effect the operational characteristics of the device whether the device is in an operational or non-operational state, as discussed by Khoshkholgh, (see at least ¶ [0047]).
Consider claim 10 (depends on at least claim 7), Venugopal discloses the limitations of claim 7 as applied to claim rejection 7 above and further discloses:
Venugopal disclose all the subject matters of the claimed invention concept. However, Venugopal does not particularly disclose transmit the second information based on a Code Block Group, CBG, and extend the number of bits of Code Bock Group Flushing-out Information, CBGFI, in Downlink Control Information, DCI, for indicating the retransmission to be the same as the number of bits of Code Bock Group Transmission Information, CBGTI, and set bits in the CBGFI, which correspond to bits in the CBGTI indicating a CBG including the second information, to a value indicating that a CBG including the second information transmitted in a first HARQ process for retransmission is not soft combined with a corresponding CBG transmitted in a first HARQ process for initial transmission. In an analogous field of endeavor, attention is directed to Khoshkholgh, which teaches transmit the second information based on a Code Block Group, CBG, and extend the number of bits of Code Bock Group Flushing-out Information, CBGFI, in Downlink Control Information, DCI, for indicating the retransmission to be the same as the number of bits of Code Bock Group Transmission Information, CBGTI, and set bits in the CBGFI, which correspond to bits in the CBGTI indicating a CBG including the second information, to a value indicating that a CBG including the second information transmitted in a first HARQ process for retransmission is not soft combined with a corresponding CBG transmitted in a first HARQ process for initial transmission (see Khoshkholgh, at least ¶ [0242], “…the HARQ process which the downlink and/or uplink transmission … a DCI scheduling a downlink transmission (or downlink assignment, or downlink signal, or downlink channel) may indicate the corresponding HARQ process. …HARQ process number/id; new-data indicator (NDI); code block group (CBG) transmit indicator (CBGTI) and CBG flush indicator (CB_GFI) in case per-CBG retransmission …”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious a finding that one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention could have combined the elements as claimed by the know method, and that in combination. Each element merely performs the same function as it does separately; Venugopal disclosed invention, and have transmit the second information based on a Code Block Group, CBG, and extend the number of bits of Code Bock Group Flushing-out Information, CBGFI, in Downlink Control Information, DCI, for indicating the retransmission to be the same as the number of bits of Code Bock Group Transmission Information, CBGTI, and set bits in the CBGFI, which correspond to bits in the CBGTI indicating a CBG including the second information, to a value indicating that a CBG including the second information transmitted in a first HARQ process for retransmission is not soft combined with a corresponding CBG transmitted in a first HARQ process for initial transmission, as taught by Khoshkholgh, thereby, to provide specific settings in a device that effect the operational characteristics of the device whether the device is in an operational or non-operational state, as discussed by Khoshkholgh, (see at least ¶ [0047]).
Consider claim 11 (depends on at least claim 10), Venugopal discloses the limitations of claim 10 as applied to claim rejection 10 above and further discloses:
Venugopal disclose all the subject matters of the claimed invention concept. However, Venugopal does not particularly disclose set bits of the CBGFI, among bits corresponding to CBGs transmitted in a first HARQ process for retransmission, other than the bits corresponding to the CBG including the second information, to a value indicating that CBGs transmitted in the first HARQ process for retransmission are soft combined with corresponding CBGs transmitted in the first HARQ process for initial transmission. In an analogous field of endeavor, attention is directed to Khoshkholgh, which teaches set bits of the CBGFI, among bits corresponding to CBGs transmitted in a first HARQ process for retransmission, other than the bits corresponding to the CBG including the second information, to a value indicating that CBGs transmitted in the first HARQ process for retransmission are soft combined with corresponding CBGs transmitted in the first HARQ process for initial transmission (see Khoshkholgh, at least ¶ [0242], “…the HARQ process which the downlink and/or uplink transmission … a DCI scheduling a downlink transmission (or downlink assignment, or downlink signal, or downlink channel) may indicate the corresponding HARQ process. …HARQ process number/id; new-data indicator (NDI); code block group (CBG) transmit indicator (CBGTI) and CBG flush indicator (CB_GFI) in case per-CBG retransmission …” and further see at least ¶ [0249], “…field may comprise one or more NDI bits per TB (and/or CBG)…” and see at least ¶ [0251], “…bits of multiple TBs and/or CBGs into one multi-bit HARQ…”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious a finding that one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention could have combined the elements as claimed by the know method, and that in combination. Each element merely performs the same function as it does separately; Venugopal disclosed invention, and have set bits of the CBGFI, among bits corresponding to CBGs transmitted in a first HARQ process for retransmission, other than the bits corresponding to the CBG including the second information, to a value indicating that CBGs transmitted in the first HARQ process for retransmission are soft combined with corresponding CBGs transmitted in the first HARQ process for initial transmission, as taught by Khoshkholgh, thereby, to provide specific settings in a device that effect the operational characteristics of the device whether the device is in an operational or non-operational state, as discussed by Khoshkholgh, (see at least ¶ [0047]).
Consider claim 22 (depends on at least claim 19), Venugopal discloses the limitations of claim 19 as applied to claim rejection 19 above and further discloses:
Venugopal disclose all the subject matters of the claimed invention concept. However, Venugopal does not particularly disclose receive the second information based on a Code Block Group, CBG, and receive Downlink Control Information, DCI, for indicating the retransmission from the network side apparatus, wherein in the DCI, Code Block Group Flushing-out Information CBGFI is set to a value indicating that none of CBGs transmitted in a first HARQ process for retransmission is soft combined with a corresponding CBG transmitted in a first HARQ procedure for initial transmission. In an analogous field of endeavor, attention is directed to Khoshkholgh, which teaches receive the second information based on a Code Block Group, CBG, and receive Downlink Control Information, DCI, for indicating the retransmission from the network side apparatus, wherein in the DCI, Code Block Group Flushing-out Information CBGFI is set to a value indicating that none of CBGs transmitted in a first HARQ process for retransmission is soft combined with a corresponding CBG transmitted in a first HARQ procedure for initial transmission (see Khoshkholgh, at least ¶ [0242], “…the HARQ process which the downlink and/or uplink transmission … a DCI scheduling a downlink transmission (or downlink assignment, or downlink signal, or downlink channel) may indicate the corresponding HARQ process. …HARQ process number/id; new-data indicator (NDI); code block group (CBG) transmit indicator (CBGTI) and CBG flush indicator (CB_GFI) in case per-CBG retransmission …”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious a finding that one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention could have combined the elements as claimed by the know method, and that in combination. Each element merely performs the same function as it does separately; Venugopal disclosed invention, and have receive the second information based on a Code Block Group, CBG, and receive Downlink Control Information, DCI, for indicating the retransmission from the network side apparatus, wherein in the DCI, Code Block Group Flushing-out Information CBGFI is set to a value indicating that none of CBGs transmitted in a first HARQ process for retransmission is soft combined with a corresponding CBG transmitted in a first HARQ procedure for initial transmission, as taught by Khoshkholgh, thereby, to provide specific settings in a device that effect the operational characteristics of the device whether the device is in an operational or non-operational state, as discussed by Khoshkholgh, (see at least ¶ [0047]).
Consider claim 23 (depends on at least claim 19), Venugopal discloses the limitations of claim 19 as applied to claim rejection 19 above and further discloses:
Venugopal disclose all the subject matters of the claimed invention concept. However, Venugopal does not particularly disclose receive the second information based on a Code Block Group, CBG, and receive Downlink Control Information, DCI, for indicating the retransmission from the network side apparatus, wherein in the DCI, the number of bits of Code Bock Group Flushing-out Information, CBGFI, in the Downlink Control Information, DCI, for indicating the retransmission is extended to be the same as the number of bits of Code Bock Group Transmission Information, CBGTI, and bits in the CBGFI, which correspond to bits in the CBGTI indicating a CBG including the second information, are set to a value indicating that a CBG including the second information transmitted in a first HARQ process for retransmission is not soft combined with a corresponding CBG transmitted in a first HARQ process for initial transmission. In an analogous field of endeavor, attention is directed to Khoshkholgh, which teaches receive the second information based on a Code Block Group, CBG, and receive Downlink Control Information, DCI, for indicating the retransmission from the network side apparatus, wherein in the DCI, the number of bits of Code Bock Group Flushing-out Information, CBGFI, in the Downlink Control Information, DCI, for indicating the retransmission is extended to be the same as the number of bits of Code Bock Group Transmission Information, CBGTI, and bits in the CBGFI, which correspond to bits in the CBGTI indicating a CBG including the second information, are set to a value indicating that a CBG including the second information transmitted in a first HARQ process for retransmission is not soft combined with a corresponding CBG transmitted in a first HARQ process for initial transmission (see Khoshkholgh, at least ¶ [0242], “…the HARQ process which the downlink and/or uplink transmission … a DCI scheduling a downlink transmission (or downlink assignment, or downlink signal, or downlink channel) may indicate the corresponding HARQ process. …HARQ process number/id; new-data indicator (NDI); code block group (CBG) transmit indicator (CBGTI) and CBG flush indicator (CB_GFI) in case per-CBG retransmission …” and further see at least ¶ [0249], “…field may comprise one or more NDI bits per TB (and/or CBG)…” and see at least ¶ [0251], “…bits of multiple TBs and/or CBGs into one multi-bit HARQ…”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious a finding that one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention could have combined the elements as claimed by the know method, and that in combination. Each element merely performs the same function as it does separately; Venugopal disclosed invention, and have receive the second information based on a Code Block Group, CBG, and receive Downlink Control Information, DCI, for indicating the retransmission from the network side apparatus, wherein in the DCI, the number of bits of Code Bock Group Flushing-out Information, CBGFI, in the Downlink Control Information, DCI, for indicating the retransmission is extended to be the same as the number of bits of Code Bock Group Transmission Information, CBGTI, and bits in the CBGFI, which correspond to bits in the CBGTI indicating a CBG including the second information, are set to a value indicating that a CBG including the second information transmitted in a first HARQ process for retransmission is not soft combined with a corresponding CBG transmitted in a first HARQ process for initial transmission, as taught by Khoshkholgh, thereby, to provide specific settings in a device that effect the operational characteristics of the device whether the device is in an operational or non-operational state, as discussed by Khoshkholgh, (see at least ¶ [0047]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHUONG A NGO whose telephone number is (571)270-7264. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday from 5:30AM-3:30PM.
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, Anthony S Addy can be reached at (571) 272-7795. 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.
/CHUONG A NGO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2645
Prosecution Insights