DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments/Amendments
Applicant's arguments filed 7/01/26 have been fully considered but they are moot due to the new ground rejection shown below.
Claim Objections
Claim 36 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 36 recites “… wherein the transmission time unit is a slot, part of a slot or a number of slots”. This claim limitation needs clarity. It is suggestted replacing “time unit is a slot, part of a slot or a number of slots” with --time unit is one of a slot, part of a slot or a number of slots--.
Appropriate correction is required.
To continue prosecution on merit, the claims are interpreted as best understood.
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, 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.
Claims 1, 19, 21-29, 37, 55, 57-60 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Novlan (US 20160044665 A1) in view of D1 (3GPP R1-2100096, NPL dated on 2/28/24, 4 pages).
For claim 1, Novlan discloses a method implemented by a network node in a communication network (FIGs. 1-17 and the associated text, such as FIG. 7 or 17), the method comprising:
generating a time domain pattern information indicating a time domain pattern for a multiple transport block (TB) transmission (FIGs. 1-17 and the associated text, such as “[0136] FIG. 9 illustrates a resource pool with scheduling assignment (SA) and data resources in accordance with disclosed embodiments. Shown here is a single resource pool cycle 902 with a resource pool period 904. The resource pool cycle includes an SA cycle 906 and a data cycle 908. An SA pool 910 is present during SA cycle 906, and a data pool 912 is present during data cycle 908. [0137] In a “hybrid” deployment where the UEs both communicate with eNBs and with each other, disclosed embodiments provide resources allocation signaling for the D2D communication. …”), wherein the multiple TB transmission is a semi-persistently scheduled data transmission, where each data transmission occurs periodically according to a previously provided configuration of transmission time units available for transmission, and wherein the time domain pattern indicates which transmission time units of the multiple transmission time units are to be used for transmission (FIGs. 1-17 and the associated text, such as FIG. 9-16, “[0159] … The first and second time resource indicators can also be jointly indicated using one bit field. Table 7 shows an example of joint indication of time resource periodicity and M, where time resource periodicity and M indicator are jointly indicated … whereas the second set of time domain resources can be configured by the higher layer.“ in view of Table 7 which shows periodicity and “[0163] … The set of periodicities are chosen to match with the existing periodicities supported by semi-persistent scheduling of PDSCH …”);
sending the time domain pattern information to a wireless device (“[0159] … The first and second time resource indicators can also be jointly indicated using one bit field. Table 7 shows an example of joint indication of time resource periodicity and M, where time resource periodicity and M indicator are jointly indicated with a 6-bit field. … [0193] … For allocation by the eNB, the SA frequency resources may also be allocated in addition to the D2D data transport block resources by physical layer signaling (e.g. DCI) …”).
Novlan is silent but D1, in the same field of wireless communication, discloses scheduled data transmission over multiple transmission time units (p2, last para “TB processing over multiples slots is beneficial for coverage enhancement due to using a lower coding rate or higher PSD for transmission. In LTE NB-IOT, TB processing is performed over a set of resource units, each of which can be repeated by several times in the time domain”). OOSA would have been motivated to apply the teaching of D1 to the method by Novlan to yield a predictable result of coverage enhancement.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to OOSA before the effective filing date of the application to combine Novlan with D1 for the benefit of coverage enhancement (p2, last para of D1).
Claim 19 is rejected because is a claim of a network node that performs the method of claim 1 and has the same subject matter.
Claim 37 is rejected because is a claim of a method performed by a wireless devices associate with the network node in claim 1 and has the same subject matter.
For claim 37, Novlan discloses a method implemented by a wireless device in a communication network (FIGs. 1-17 and the associated text, such as FIG. 7 or 17), the method comprising:
receiving a time domain pattern information indicating a time domain pattern for multiple transport block (TB) transmission (FIGs. 1-17 and the associated text, such as “[0136] FIG. 9 illustrates a resource pool with scheduling assignment (SA) and data resources in accordance with disclosed embodiments. Shown here is a single resource pool cycle 902 with a resource pool period 904. The resource pool cycle includes an SA cycle 906 and a data cycle 908. An SA pool 910 is present during SA cycle 906, and a data pool 912 is present during data cycle 908. [0137] In a “hybrid” deployment where the UEs both communicate with eNBs and with each other, disclosed embodiments provide resources allocation signaling for the D2D communication. …”), wherein the multiple TB transmission is a semi-persistently scheduled data transmission, where each data transmission occurs periodically according to a previously provided configuration of transmission time units available for transmission, and wherein the time domain pattern indicates which transmission time units of the multiple transmission time units are to be used for transmission (FIGs. 1-17 and the associated text, such as FIG. 9-16, “[0159] … The first and second time resource indicators can also be jointly indicated using one bit field. Table 7 shows an example of joint indication of time resource periodicity and M, where time resource periodicity and M indicator are jointly indicated … whereas the second set of time domain resources can be configured by the higher layer.“ in view of Table 7 which shows periodicity and “[0163] … The set of periodicities are chosen to match with the existing periodicities supported by semi-persistent scheduling of PDSCH …”); and
applying the time domain pattern information to a multiple TB transmission (“[0159] … The first and second time resource indicators can also be jointly indicated using one bit field. Table 7 shows an example of joint indication of time resource periodicity and M, where time resource periodicity and M indicator are jointly indicated with a 6-bit field. … [0193] … For allocation by the eNB, the SA frequency resources may also be allocated in addition to the D2D data transport block resources by physical layer signaling (e.g. DCI) …”).
Novlan is silent but D1, in the same field of wireless communication, discloses scheduled data transmission over multiple transmission time units (p2, last para “TB processing over multiples slots is beneficial for coverage enhancement due to using a lower coding rate or higher PSD for transmission. In LTE NB-IOT, TB processing is performed over a set of resource units, each of which can be repeated by several times in the time domain”). OOSA would have been motivated to apply the teaching of D1 to the method by Novlan to yield a predictable result of coverage enhancement.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to OOSA before the effective filing date of the application to combine Novlan with D1 for the benefit of coverage enhancement (p2, last para of D1).
Claim 55 is rejected because is a claim of a wireless device that performs the method of claim 37 and has the same subject matter.
As to claims 20 and 56, Novlan in view of D1 discloses claims 19 and 55, Novlan further disclose: wherein the multiple transport block transmission is a semi-persistently scheduled data transmission, where each data transmission occurs periodically according to a previously provided configuration (“[0163] … The set of periodicities are chosen to match with the existing periodicities supported by semi-persistent scheduling of PDSCH for carrying VoIP traffic. …”).
As to claims 21 and 57, Novlan in view of D1 discloses claims 20 and 56, Novlan further disclose: wherein the semi-persistently scheduled data transmission is a semi-network node scheduled data transmission in downlink (“[0163] … The set of periodicities are chosen to match with the existing periodicities supported by semi-persistent scheduling of PDSCH for carrying VoIP traffic. …”).
As to claims 22 and 58, Novlan in view of D1 discloses claims 20 and 56, Novlan further disclose: wherein the semi-persistently scheduled data transmission is a configured grant data transmission in uplink (“[0163] … The set of periodicities are chosen to match with the existing periodicities supported by semi-persistent scheduling of PDSCH for carrying VoIP traffic. …” and “[0185] … The resource allocation information for frequency resources may utilized localized RB allocation since the D2D data transmission are based on the PUSCH structure. …”).
As to claims 23 and 59, Novlan in view of D1 discloses claims 20 and 56, D1 further disclose: wherein the time domain pattern information includes a bitmap to indicate the time domain pattern for the semi-persistently scheduled data transmission, where one bit in the bitmap corresponds to one transmission time unit in the data transmission (“[0007] … the SA includes at least one bit field for allocating both time-domain resources and frequency-domain resources. …” and “[0167] … the system can use a bitmap as described herein to define the transmission time pattern …” in view of the parent claims). The motivation of combining D1 and Novlan is the same as stated in the parent claims.
As to claims 24 and 60, Novlan in view of D1 discloses claims 23 and 59, Novlan further disclose: wherein the bitmap has the same length as the period of the data transmission, where each bit in the bitmap corresponds to each transmission time unit in the period of the data transmission (“[0007] … the SA includes at least one bit field for allocating both time-domain resources and frequency-domain resources. …” and “[0200] … a bitmap may correspond to a set of valid D2D subframes and a ‘1’ in the bitmap indicates a transmission opportunity, while a ‘0’ in the bitmap indicates a transmission is not performed by the Tx UE”).
As to claim 25, Novlan in view of D1 discloses claim 23, wherein the bitmap is shorter than the period of the data transmission, where the bitmap of Nbitmap bits is applied to the first Nbitmap transmission time units in a given period, and no data transmission in the remaining transmission time units in the given period (These claim limitations are design choice and is obvious to OOSA according MPEP 2143(F)).
As to claim 26, Novlan in view of D1 discloses claim 20, D1 further disclose: wherein the time domain pattern information includes the period of the semi-persistent data transmission (“[0007] … the SA includes at least one bit field for allocating both time-domain resources and frequency-domain resources. …” and “[0167] … the system can use a bitmap as described herein to define the transmission time pattern …”). The motivation of combining D1 and Novlan is the same as stated in the parent claims.
As to claim 27, Novlan in view of D1 discloses claim 20, Novlan further disclose: wherein the data transmission is transmitted with repetition, and the time domain pattern information includes the number of repetitions of the data transmission (“[0204] … The number of repetitions may correspond to the number of transmissions of a new data transmission including any retransmissions”).
As to claim 28, Novlan in view of D1 discloses claim 27, D1 further disclose: wherein the repetition is performed for each data transmission in consecutive transmission time units (Section 2.1, 1st bullet, 1st para “… A repetition, the UE shall repeat the TB across the K consecutive slots applying the same symbol allocation in each slot when the number of repetitions K is larger than 1. …”). The motivation of combining Novlan and D1 is the same as stated in the parent claim.
As to claim 29, Novlan in view of D1 discloses claim 27, D1 further disclose: wherein the repetition is performed across different periods of the data transmission (Section 2.1, 1st bullet, 1st para “… For repetition type B, the nominal repetition is back-to-back transmitted while one nominal repetition could be segmented to multiple actual transmissions if the nominal repetition across slot boundary or colliding with invalid symbols …”). The motivation of combining Novlan and D1 is the same as stated in the parent claim.
Claims 30-35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Novlan in view of D1, further in view of D2 (3GPP R1-1908615, NPL dated on 2/28/24, 7 pages).
As to claim 30, D1 Novlan in view of D1 discloses claim 20, and is silent but D2, in the same field of endeavor of wireless communication, disclose: wherein a hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) acknowledgement-(ACK) is generated by the wireless device and transmitted on the uplink in response to a downlink data transmission, and the time domain pattern information includes HARQ-ACK transmission parameters (Section 3.2, 1st para “… it was agreed that HARQ-ACK feedback bundling on PUCCH can be enabled or disabled by [RRC and/or DCI] for CE mode A …”, Section 3.2, 2nd para “The size of HARQ-ACK bundle is one of the remaining details. Therefore, it’s proposed to assume the bundle size equal to the number of scheduled TBs if HARQ-ACK feedback bundling is enabled. …” and Section 3.2, proposal 3, 3rd bullet “The bundle size is equal to the number of scheduled TBs signaled in multi-TB DCI”; note that HARQ-ACK bundle includes parameters). OOSA would have been motivated to apply the teaching of D2 above to the wireless system taught by D1 in view of Novlan to yield a predictable result of reducing signaling.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to OOSA before the effective filing date of the application to combine D2 with Novlan in view of D1 for the benefit of reducing signaling (Section 3.2, 2nd para of D2).
As to claim 31, Novlan in view of D1 and D2 discloses claim 30, D1 further disclose: wherein the HARQ-ACK transmission parameters include the timing of the HARQ-ACK transmission, the uplink resources for carrying the HARQ-ACK, the carrier for the HARQ-ACK transmission or the number of repetitions of the uplink for carrying the HARQ-ACK (Section 3.2, proposal 3, 3rd bullet “The bundle size is equal to the number of scheduled TBs signaled in multi-TB DCI”). The motivation of combining Novlan and D1 with D2 is the same as stated in the parent claim.
As to claim 32, Novlan in view of D1 and D2 discloses claim 30, D1 further disclose: wherein one HARQ-ACK bit is generated for each downlink data transmission individually (suggested by Section 3.2, 2nd para “The size of HARQ-ACK bundle is one of the remaining details. Therefore, it’s proposed to assume the bundle size equal to the number of scheduled TBs if HARQ-ACK feedback bundling is enabled. …”; note that using a bit to indicate the present/absent of each downlink data transmission is a design choice and is obvious to OOSA according MPEP 2143(F); Using a bit of a digital field to indicate the present/absent of a particular object is a common practice in the art, Examiner takes an official notice on this statement. For example, Novlan discloses it in [0007]). The motivation of combining Novlan and D1 with D2 is the same as stated in the parent claim.
As to claim 33, Novlan in view of D1 and D2 discloses claim 30, D1 further disclose: wherein one HARQ-ACK bit is generated for a group of downlink data transmissions (suggested by Section 3.2, 2nd para “The size of HARQ-ACK bundle is one of the remaining details. Therefore, it’s proposed to assume the bundle size equal to the number of scheduled TBs if HARQ-ACK feedback bundling is enabled. …”; note that using a bit in HARQ-ACK to indicate the present/absent of a group of downlink data transmissions is a design choice and is obvious to OOSA according MPEP 2143(F). Using a bit of a digital field to indicate the present/absent of a particular object is a common practice in the art, Examiner takes an official notice on this statement. For example, Novlan discloses it in [0007]).
As to claim 34, Novlan in view of D1 and D2 discloses claim 30, D1 further disclose: wherein one HARQ-ACK bit is generated for each downlink data transmission individually, including its repetitions (suggested by Section 3.2, 2nd para “The size of HARQ-ACK bundle is one of the remaining details. Therefore, it’s proposed to assume the bundle size equal to the number of scheduled TBs if HARQ-ACK feedback bundling is enabled. …”; note that using a bit to indicate the present/absent of each downlink data transmission is a design choice and is obvious to OOSA according MPEP 2143(F); Using a bit of a digital field to indicate the present/absent of a particular object is a common practice in the art, Examiner takes an official notice on this statement. For example, Novlan discloses it in [0007]). The motivation of combining Novlan and D1 with D2 is the same as stated in the parent claim.
As to claim 35, Novlan in view of D1 and D2 discloses claim 30, D1 further disclose: wherein one HARQ-ACK bit is generated for a group of downlink data transmissions including their repetitions (suggested by Section 3.2, 2nd para “The size of HARQ-ACK bundle is one of the remaining details. Therefore, it’s proposed to assume the bundle size equal to the number of scheduled TBs if HARQ-ACK feedback bundling is enabled. …”; note that using a bit to indicate the present/absent of a group of downlink data transmissions including their repetitions is a design choice and is obvious to OOSA according MPEP 2143(F); Using a bit of a digital field to indicate the present/absent of a particular object is a common practice in the art, Examiner takes an official notice on this statement. For example, Novlan discloses it in [0007]). The motivation of combining Novlan and D1 with D2 is the same as stated in the parent claim.
Claim 36 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Novlan in view of D1, further in view of D3 (3GPP R1- 2107257, NPL dated on 2/28/24, 8 pages).
As to claim 36, Novlan in view of D1 discloses claim 23, and is silent but D3, in the same field of endeavor of wireless communication, disclose: wherein the transmission time unit is a slot, part of a slot or a number of slots (Section 2.4, 3rd para “In the above, it is using time unit of slot as we firstly consider Repetition type A. …”). OOSA would have been motivated to apply the teaching of D2 above to the wireless system taught by Novlan in view of D1 to yield a predictable result of determining TB size.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to OOSA before the effective filing date of the application to combine D3 with Novlan in view of D1 for the benefit of determining TB size (Section 2.4 of D3).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JIANYE WU whose telephone number is (571)270-1665. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH 8am-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, Yemane Mesfin can be reached at (571) 272-3927. 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.
/JIANYE WU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2462
Prosecution Insights