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 .
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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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, 2, 4, 5, 7, 9-11, 15-17, 19, 20 and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Chen (US 12,549,288).
Regarding Claim 1, 9, 15 and 16, Chen teaches a user equipment (UE) for wireless communication (figure 24, #70, see specifically terminal), comprising:
at least one memory; and
at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory and configured to cause the UE to (figure 24, #701, see specifically processor):
receive, Hybrid Automatic Repeat request (HARQ} configuration and a control signal scheduling one or more transport blocks (column 17, lines 30-55, see specifically, schedules one or more transport blocks, and HARQ feedback information),
wherein each of the scheduled one or more transport blocks is associated with a HARQ process number (column 23, line 35-50, see specifically HARQ feedback and HARQ processes); and
receive, the scheduled one or more transport blocks block(s) based on the control signal (column 23, line 35-50, see specifically HARQ feedback and HARQ processes).
Regarding Claim 2, 10 and 17, Chen teaches determine HARQ feedback for each of the scheduled transport block based on the associated HARQ process number and the HARQ configuration (column 23, line 35-50, see specifically HARQ feedback and HARQ processes).
Regarding Claims 4, 11 and 19, Chen teaches the HARQ configuration indicates number of HARQ processes with HARQ feedback enabled or the number of HARQ processes with HARQ feedback disabled (column 23, line 45-67, see specifically N processes with HARQ process enabled.)
Regarding Claim 5 and 20, Chen teaches the determine the HARQ processes with HARQ feedback enabled and with HARQ feedback disabled according to the number of HARQ processes with HARQ feedback enabled or the number of HARQ processes with HARQ feedback disabled (column 23, line 45 – column 24, line 20, see specifically skips disabled feedback).
Regarding Claim 7 and 22, Chen teaches the association of the scheduled one or more transport blocks TB(s) and the one or more HARQ process number is determined by an indicated HARQ process number in the control signal and the corresponding HARQ processes with HARQ feedback enabled or disabled (column 21, line 55 – column 22, line 5 see specifically RRC and figure 8).
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 3 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (US 12,549,288) in view of Yoshioka (US 2025/0141602)
Regarding Claim 3 and 18, Chen fails to explicitly teach the HARQ configuration indicates the HARQ processes with HARQ feedback enabled or disabled via bitmap manner.
Yoshioka from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches the HARQ configuration indicates the HARQ processes with HARQ feedback enabled or disabled via bitmap manner (¶ [0088], see specifically one bit information.)
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of telecommunications at the time of the filing of the invention to use a bitmap to convey HARQ disabled as single bit information for a process in the system of Chen as taught by Yoshioka.
The motivation is that a bitmap is a way to convey large amounts of information in single bit fashion and it would be obvious to use it to disable HARQ feedback on a per process basis as this would be a single variable per process.
Claim(s) 6 and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (US 12,549,288) in view of Yamamoto (US 2023/0308214).
Regarding Claims 6 and 21, Chen fails to explicitly teach receive, via the receiver, the scheduled transport block(s) with a transmission order determined by the HARQ process numbers and corresponding HARQ feedback enabled or disabled.
Yamamoto from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches receive, via the receiver, the scheduled transport block(s) with a transmission order determined by the HARQ process numbers and corresponding HARQ feedback enabled or disabled (¶ [0255], see specifically HARQ process number order).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of telecommunications at the time of the filing of the invention to transmit the blocks in process number order in the system of Chen as taught by Yamamoto.
The motivation is that maintaining an order reduces complexity in the system of Chen as it doesn’t require the system to maintain which block received belongs to which process.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8 and 23 are 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 ROBERT M MORLAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5674. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 10 AM - 4PM.
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, Hadi Armouche can be reached at 571-270-3618. 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.
/ROBERT M MORLAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2409
ROBERT M. MORLAN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2409
Prosecution Insights