DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The instant application No. 18694179 has claims 14-20 are pending.
2 The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
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.
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: “control unit….” And “transmitter unit…” in claim 14 and 19.
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 § 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.
The factual inquiries 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.
Claim(s) 14-15, 17-18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou et al. (Pub. No. US 2021/0219329 A1; hereinafter Zhou) in view of Wu et al. (Pub. No. US 2023/0239869 A1; hereinafter Wu).
Regarding claims 14 and 20, Zhou discloses a terminal comprising: a control unit (See ¶0177, processor) configured to control activation of SPS (Semi-Persistent Scheduling); (20210219329 -See ¶0459, the DCI includes DCI for activating and/or releasing an SPS process) and a transmission unit (See ¶0917, transceiver) configured to transmit, to a base station, feedback information always indicating a specific value in response to reception of a first SPS PDSCH after the activation (See ¶0572, UE determining that corresponding HARQ-ACK feedback is transmitted after each PDSCH reception, according to the number of HARQ processes indicated by the DCI being 1, the HARQ-ACK feedback carrying 1-bit ACK/NACK information; the HARQ ID indicated by the DCI is an ID of an HARQ process for each PDSCH reception.)
However, Zhou fails to disclose in a case where deactivation of feedback corresponding to a PDSCH (Physical Downlink Shared Channel) is configured in the terminal.
Wu discloses in a case where deactivation of feedback corresponding to a PDSCH (Physical Downlink Shared Channel) is configured in the terminal. (2023/0239869 a1-See ¶0284, he base station may configure to disable or enable the downlink HARQ feedback function according to the HARQ process number. For example, the base station may configure the enabling or disabling of the downlink HARQ feedback function only for HARQ process #0)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify by disable the uplink control information feedback function as needed, for example, when the network bandwidth is insufficient or the load of the base station is heavy, which is more beneficial for the downlink scheduling of the base station, thereby further improving the problem of reduced downlink transmission efficiency (See ¶0274).
Regarding claim 15, Zhou discloses the specific value is a value indicating either ACK or NACK. (See ¶0572, UE determining that corresponding HARQ-ACK feedback is transmitted after each PDSCH reception, according to the number of HARQ processes indicated by the DCI being 1, the HARQ-ACK feedback carrying 1-bit ACK/NACK information; the HARQ ID indicated by the DCI is an ID of an HARQ process for each PDSCH reception.)
Regarding claim 17, Zhou discloses the feedback is HARQ (Hybrid Automatic Repeat reQuest) feedback, (See ¶0572, UE determining that corresponding HARQ-ACK feedback is transmitted after each PDSCH reception, according to the number of HARQ processes indicated by the DCI being 1, the HARQ-ACK feedback carrying 1-bit ACK/NACK information; the HARQ ID indicated by the DCI is an ID of an HARQ process for each PDSCH reception.)
Zhou fails to disclose the deactivation of the feedback is configured for each HARQ process for the PDSCH.
Wu discloses the deactivation of the feedback is configured for each HARQ process for the PDSCH. (2023/0239869-See ¶0284, base station may configure the enabling or disabling of the downlink HARQ feedback function for each HARQ process)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify by disable the uplink control information feedback function as needed, for example, when the network bandwidth is insufficient or the load of the base station is heavy, which is more beneficial for the downlink scheduling of the base station, thereby further improving the problem of reduced downlink transmission efficiency (See ¶0274).
Regarding claim 18, Zhou discloses the activation of the SPS PDSCH is performed based on downlink control information transmitted from the base station. (20210219329 -See ¶0459, the DCI includes DCI for activating and/or releasing an SPS process)
Claim(s) 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou in view of Wu, and further in view of Seo et al. (Pub. No US 2020/0127768 A1; hereinafter Seo).
Regarding claim 16, Zhou in view Wu fails to disclose the specific value indicated by the feedback information is determined regardless of a decoding result of the first SPS PDSCH.
Seo discloses the specific value indicated by the feedback information is determined regardless of a decoding result of the first SPS PDSCH. (2020/0127768-See ¶0171, HARQ-ACK/NACK information generated by the remote UE 1210 is transferred to the eNB 1230 through the uplink via the relay UE 1220 through the sidelink and since the sidelink and the uplink are links to which separate timings are applied, even though specific ACK/NACK information is transferred to the eNB 1230)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify in order to efficiently decides to retransmit the packet or not based on the feedback information (See ¶0165).
Claim(s) 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Su et al. (Pub. No. US 2021/0007126 A1; hereinafter Su) in view of Wu et al. (Pub. No. US 2023/0239869 A1; hereinafter Wu).
Regarding claim 19, Su discloses a terminal comprising: a control unit (See ¶0059, the processor)
configured to control activation of SPS (Semi-Persistent Scheduling);( 20210007126-See ¶0035, the DCI includes information indicating uplink semi-persistent scheduling SPS activation or deactivation; and sending the DCI to user equipment.) and a transmission unit (See ¶101, transceiver) configured to transmit, to a base station, feedback information in accordance with a decoding result of a first SPS PDSCH in response to reception of the first SPS PDSCH after the activation (See ¶0106, in downlink, after the UE receives, in a subframe #n, a TB carried in a PDSCH, if decoding is correct, the UE feeds back a positive acknowledgment (acknowledgement, ACK) on an uplink in a subframe #n+k; if the decoding fails, a negative acknowledgment (negative acknowledgment, NACK) is fed back on an uplink)
However, Su fails to disclose in a case where deactivation of feedback corresponding to a PDSCH (Physical Downlink Shared Channel) is configured in the terminal.
Wu discloses in a case where deactivation of feedback corresponding to a PDSCH (Physical Downlink Shared Channel) is configured in the terminal. (2023/0239869 a1-See ¶0284, he base station may configure to disable or enable the downlink HARQ feedback function according to the HARQ process number. For example, the base station may configure the enabling or disabling of the downlink HARQ feedback function only for HARQ process #0)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify by disable the uplink control information feedback function as needed, for example, when the network bandwidth is insufficient or the load of the base station is heavy, which is more beneficial for the downlink scheduling of the base station, thereby further improving the problem of reduced downlink transmission efficiency (See ¶0274).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kim (Pub. No. US 2021/0006328 A1)-See ¶0193, he HARQ deactivation function may mean that the HARQ function is deactivated in a data transmission procedure between the non-terrestrial node and the terminal. The HARQ deactivation function may be applied to each HARQ processes (e.g., HARQ process ID or HARQ process number), logical channel, transport block, or code block. Even when the HARQ function is deactivated in the data transmission procedure, the operation of (re)starting or stopping each of the H-RTT-timer shown in FIG. 7 (e.g., terrestrial H-RTT-timer), the H-RTT-timer shown in FIG. 8 (e.g., non-terrestrial H-RTT-timer), and/or the ReTx-timer may not be performed. When the HARQ function is deactivated, the terminal may start the Inact-timer at a time when the DL/UL communication operation is performed. When a downlink reception operation or an uplink transmission operation is not performed until the Inact-timer expires, or when the on-duration (e.g., on-duration #2 shown in FIG. 8) ends, the terminal may perform a DRX operation based on a preconfigured DRX cycle and DRX parameter(s).
Park et al. (Pub. No. US 2020/0313809 A1)-See ¶0013, downlink control information (DCI) indicating a plurality of semi persistent scheduling (SPS) physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) releases, and receiving, from the terminal, a hybrid automatic repeat request acknowledgement (HARQ-ACK) codebook including a HARQ-ACK information bit corresponding to the DCI, wherein a location in the HARQ-ACK codebook for the HARQ-ACK information bit corresponding to the DCI is same as for a corresponding SPS PDSCH reception with a lowest SPS index among the plurality of SPS PDSCH releases.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TEJIS DAYA whose telephone number is (571)270-7817. The examiner can normally be reached 6:30-4:30.
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, Nicholas Jensen can be reached at 571-270-5443. 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.
/Tejis Daya/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2472