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
Claims 1-30 are pending and are under examination.
This office action is FINAL.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) [ 1-30 ] have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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) [ 1 - 30 ]are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over [ Cheng et al. (Pub No. US 11159283), hereinafter “Cheng”, in view Parkvall et al. (Pub No. US 20170331577), hereinafter “Parkvall”, in further view of Bertizzolo et al. (US 12363650), hereinafter "Bertizzolo"].
As per claim 1, An apparatus for wireless communication (Wireless device 10 (FIG 5) [Cheng, Column 16 Line 21]), comprising:
a transceiver (Wireless device 10 includes a transceiver (FIG 5) [Cheng, Column 16 Line 21]);
one or more memories configured to, individually or in combination, store instructions (a transmitter comprises one or more interfaces, memory, and processing circuitry. [Cheng, Column 4 Lines 20-22]); and
one or more processors communicatively coupled with the one or more memories, wherein the one or more processors are, individually or in combination, configured to execute the instructions to cause the apparatus to (The processing circuitry is configured to execute instructions stored in the memory [Cheng, Column 4 Lines 22-23]):
multiplex message data, to be transmitted to a receiving node, with redundancy bits on a per-message or per-symbol basis transmission comprising a transport block (TB) comprising a plurality of code blocks (CBs) arranged in one or more code block groups (CBGs). [Cheng, Column 4 Lines 24-26]);
receive, from the receiving node, a negative-acknowledgement (NACK) feedback for at least a portion of the message data or redundancy bits (The transmitter is further configured to receive HARQ ACK or NACK feedback from the receiver [Cheng, Column 4 Lines 31-32]); and
retransmit, to the receiving node and based on receiving the NACK feedback, at least the portion of the message data or redundancy bits (determining the number of CBs or CBGs comprises sending a subset of CBGs of the TB to the receiver in the retransmission [Cheng, Column Lines 46-48]).
Cheng does not teach “transmit, to the receiving node, the multiplexed message data and redundancy bits in a different subset of assigned subcarriers in each of multiple symbols of a noncoherent transmission according to a duty cycle, wherein the noncoherent transmission includes less than all of the symbols allocated for transmitting the message data and at a transmit power that is inversely proportional to the duty cycle;”
However, Parkvall, in an analogous art, teaches transmit, to the receiving node, the multiplexed message data and redundancy bits in a different subset of assigned subcarriers in each of multiple symbols (receiving and processing second Layer 2 data on a second physical data channel (Parkvall PP [0012], [0015], [0023])) of a noncoherent transmission according to a duty cycle (transmitting system information (ATI/SSI) with added redundancy, placed in small, varying subsets of assigned subcarriers across successive symbols (candidate SSI positions) while other subcarriers carry data or reservation/dummy signals, and scheduling those transmissions under a low duty cycle (Parkvall PP [1003] and [1577]));
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the wireless communication device disclosed by Cheng, to transmit multiplexed message data and redundancy bits on varying subsets of assigned subcarriers across multiple symbols as disclosed by Parkvall. Furthermore, one skilled in the art would have been motivated by the teaching of Parkvall that use of a low duty cycle for non-coherent transmissions to conserve power and resources. Applying this technique would have been a predictable variation for someone of ordinary skill in the art to Cheng’s invention.
Cheng in view of Parkvall do not explicitly teach “wherein the noncoherent transmission includes less than all of the symbols allocated for transmitting the message data and at a transmit power that is inversely proportional to the duty cycle;”
However, Bertizzolo, in an analogous art, teaches wherein the noncoherent transmission includes less than all of the symbols allocated for transmitting the message data and at a transmit power that is inversely proportional to the duty cycle (In the case of a lower duty cycle, less frequent, or more sporadic transmission scheme (e.g., where transmission occurs infrequently, less than half of the time period, and so on), the wireless communication device may utilize a higher transmission level (greater than the average transmission power limit), referred to as Pmax , as these higher transmission levels are averaged out by periods of no transmission. [Bertizzolo PP 0025], if the duty cycle TDC 110 is 70%, the MTPLi 114 is set to a difference of Pmax and a product of 70% and a difference between Pmax and Pmin,i 112 . If the duty cycle TDC 110 is 30%, the MTPLi 114 is set to a difference of Pmax and a product of 30% and a difference between Pmax and Pmin,i 112. [Bertizzolo PP 0056]);
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the wireless communication device disclosed by Cheng in view of Parkvall, to increase transmission power for low duty cycle as disclosed by Bertizzolo. Furthermore, one skilled in the art would have been motivated by the teaching of Bertizzolo that the transmit power can be increased inversely to the duty cycle. Applying this technique would have been a predictable variation for someone of ordinary skill in the art to Cheng in view of Parkvall invention.
As per claim 2, Cheng teaches the apparatus (Each of the embodiments of the method, computer program product [Cheng, Column 4 Line 38]) of claim 1, wherein the message data and the redundancy bits are multiplexed as CRC bits or parity bits (transport block segmentation, and low-density parity-check (LDPC) codes [Cheng, Fig 3 below, Column 1 lines 21-25]) for FEC across the multiple symbols (TB fails a TB cyclic redundancy check in the receiver [Cheng, Column 4 Lines 42-43])
As per claim 3, Cheng teaches the apparatus of claim 2, wherein the one or more processors are, individually or in combination, configured to execute the instructions to cause the apparatus to receive the NACK feedback after transmitting all of the multiple symbols to the receiving node. (Receiving a negative acknowledgement from receiver for any code blocks that are not decoded correctly [Cheng, column 2 lines 28-38])
Figure 3 in reference Cheng et al. is reproduced here for quick reference.
PNG
media_image1.png
415
520
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As per claim 4, Cheng teaches the apparatus of claim 2, wherein the one or more processors are, individually or in combination, configured to execute the instructions to cause the apparatus to receive the NACK feedback in a second subset of the assigned subcarriers and in a configured number of symbols following a last symbol of the multiple symbols. (Upon reception of a PDCCH in a particular subframe n, a UE is required to decode the corresponding physical downlink share channel (PDSCH) and to send acknowledgement (ACK)/negative acknowledgement (NACK) feedback in a subsequent subframe n+k.[ Cheng, Column 1 Lines 36-40])
As per claim 5, Cheng teaches the apparatus of claim 4, wherein the one or more processors are, individually or in combination, configured to execute the instructions to cause the apparatus to transmit, to the receiving node, a configuration indicating the number of symbols. (The transmitter is further configured to determine a number of code blocks or code block groups to send to the receiver [Cheng, Column 4 lines 34-37]) (The transmission is sent to a receiver configured to use multi-bit hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) feedback per transport block. The transmitter is further configured to receive HARQ ACK or NACK feedback from the receiver for one or more of the one or more code block groups of the transport block. [Cheng, Column 4 Lines 28-34])
as per claim 6, Cheng teaches the apparatus of claim 2, wherein the NACK feedback includes feedback for other message data transmitted to the receiving node. (retransmission will contain coded bits for the entire transport block [Cheng, Column 2 lines 28-38]) (In some embodiments, determining the number of CBs or CBGs comprises sending all CBGs of the TB to the receiver in the retransmission. In some embodiments, determining the number of CBs or CBGs comprises sending a subset of CBGs of the TB to the receiver in the retransmission. [Cheng, Column 4 Lines 43-48])
As per claim 7 Cheng teaches the apparatus of claim 2, wherein the one or more processors are, individually or in combination, configured to execute the instructions to cause the apparatus to set, based on a number of the multiple symbols, an adaptive timer, wherein the NACK feedback is received during the adaptive timer. (the transmitter may delay sending the retransmission. In some cases, the transmitter may wait until further feedback (e.g., that the receiver has completed the decoding of the previous transport block) before sending the retransmission. In some cases, the transmitter may wait a predetermined amount of time or a predetermined number of feedback occasions to send the retransmission. [Cheng, Column 22 lines 30-37])
As per claim 8, Cheng teaches the apparatus of claim 2, wherein the one or more processors are, individually or in combination, configured to execute the instructions to cause the apparatus to retransmit at least all of the redundancy bits to the receiving node. (the transmitter may retransmit all code blocks and code block groups (message with the redundancy bits) [Cheng, Column 25 lines 8-22])
As per claim 9, Parkvall teaches the apparatus of claim 8, wherein the one or more processors are, individually or in combination, configured to execute the instructions to cause the apparatus to retransmit all of the message data to the receiving node, and retransmit all of the message data and the redundancy bits in the same subcarriers, as the different subset of assigned subcarriers in each of the multiple symbols, over a different set of multiple symbols. (Examples of these were provided above, where these first and second physical data channels were referred to as retransmittable and direct channels, or rPDCH and dPDCH, respectively. The receiving and processing of the first Layer 2 data comprises the use of soft HARQ combining, and the receiving and processing of the second Layer 2 data comprises no soft HARQ combining. (Parkvall PP [1878]))
As per claim 10, Cheng teaches the apparatus of claim 9, wherein the one or more processors are, individually or in combination, configured to execute the instructions to cause the apparatus to transmit, to the receiving node, a configuration indicating that the retransmitting includes retransmitting all of the message data and the redundancy bits. (In certain embodiments, the receiver requests retransmission of the entire TB by sending back all-NACK (i.e., NACK of every CBG) in HARQ response. When receiving such HARQ response, the transmitter may retransmit the full TB (using either incremental redundancy or chase combining) in the next transmission opportunity. Alternatively, in some embodiments, the transmitter retransmit a subset of the CBG of the full TB. [Cheng, Column 18 lines 34-41])
As per claim 11, Cheng teaches the apparatus of claim 8, wherein the one or more processors are, individually or in combination, configured to execute the instructions to cause the apparatus to retransmit (The NR data channel uses low-density parity-check (LDPC) codes suitable for incremental redundancy retransmissions [Column 2 lines 54-56], refer to figure 3 above) (Accordingly, the decoding latency of the combined codeword with this code rate is almost 6 times higher than the initial transmission, if incremental redundancy is used for the retransmission. [Cheng, Column 8 lines 22-25]) additional redundancy bits to the receiving node. (The receiver may then provide NACK feedback for all CBs and CBGs. In response, the transmitter may retransmit all CBs and CBGs. [Cheng, Column 25 lines 15-17]).
Cheng in view of Parkvall do not explicitly teach “all of the redundancy bits and including”
However, Bertizzolo, in an analogous art, teaches all of the redundancy bits and including (if less transmission power than the average transmission power limit is used at a first time, then the difference between that less transmission power and the average transmission power limit, referred to herein as “residual” transmission power, may be applied to the next transmission at a second time. [Bertizzolo PP 0026], the electronic device 10 may receive or determine an average transmission power limit or Plimit,avg (e.g., corresponding to exposure requirements) for a time period, and determines a first MTPL … ransmit a signal at the first time using a first transmission power not to exceed the first MTPL. If the first transmission power is less than the first MTPL, then the electronic device 10 device determines residual transmission power based on a difference [Bertizzolo PP 0043])
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the wireless communication device disclosed by Cheng in view of Parkvall, to increase transmission power for low duty cycle as disclosed by Bertizzolo. Furthermore, one skilled in the art would have been motivated by the teaching of Bertizzolo that the transmit power can be increased inversely to the duty cycle. Applying this technique would have been a predictable variation for someone of ordinary skill in the art to Cheng in view of Parkvall invention.
As per claim 12, Cheng teaches the apparatus of claim 11, wherein the one or more processors are, individually or in combination, configured to execute the instructions to cause the apparatus to transmit, to the receiving node, a configuration indicating that the retransmitting includes retransmitting additional redundancy bits. (In certain embodiments, said different HARQ feedback timings include using a shorter HARQ feedback timing for retransmitting a redundancy [Cheng, Column 11 Lines 47-49]).
As per claim 13, Cheng teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are, individually or in combination, configured to execute the instructions to cause the apparatus to multiplex block data of the message data in each symbol with the redundancy bits as cyclic redundancy check (CRC) bits or parity bits (transport block segmentation, and low-density parity-check (LDPC) codes [Cheng, Fig 3 above, Column 1 lines 21-25]) for forward error correction (FEC) for the block data (TB fails a TB cyclic redundancy check in the receiver [Cheng, Column 4 Lines 42-43]).
As per claim 14, Cheng teaches the apparatus of claim 13, wherein the one or more processors are, individually or in combination, configured to execute the instructions to cause the apparatus to receive the NACK feedback before transmitting a last symbol of the multiple symbols to the receiving node. (The method further comprises determining a number of code blocks or code block groups to send to the receiver in a retransmission based on at least the received HARQ ACK or NACK feedback.[Cheng, Column 3 Lines 64-68]).
As per claim 15, Cheng teaches the apparatus of claim 13, wherein the one or more processors are, individually or in combination, configured to execute the instructions to cause the apparatus to receive the NACK feedback for a portion of the multiple symbols before transmitting a last symbol of the multiple symbols to the receiving node. (The transmitter is further configured to receive HARQ ACK or NACK feedback from the receiver for one or more of the one or more code block groups of the transport block. [Cheng, Column 4 lines 31-34]).
As per claim 16, Cheng teaches the apparatus of claim 13, wherein the one or more processors are, individually or in combination, configured to execute the instructions to cause the apparatus to receive the NACK feedback in a second subset of the assigned subcarriers and in a configured number of symbols following a symbol to which the NACK feedback corresponds. (send acknowledgement (ACK)/negative acknowledgement (NACK) feedback in a subsequent subframe n+k. and further teaches a UE, is unable to decode the data, it may send HARQ feedback to the transmitter indicating that the data was not decoded [Cheng, Column 1 Lines 38-50]).
As per claim 17, Cheng teaches the apparatus of claim 16, wherein the one or more processors are, individually or in combination, configured to execute the instructions to cause the apparatus to transmit, to the receiving node, a configuration indicating the number of symbols. (The transmitter is further configured to determine a number of code blocks or code block groups to send to the receiver in a retransmission based on at least the received HARQ ACK or NACK feedback. [Cheng, Column 4 lines 34-37]).
As per claim 18, Parkvall teaches the apparatus of claim 16, wherein the number of symbols is different than a second number of symbols after which feedback is configured to be received for a second symbol in the multiple symbols (The MAC structure of each physical channel is the same for UL and DL. An example with two PDCHs, the first one having 1 transport block (TB) and the second one having two transport blocks is depicted in Parkvall, FIG. 21. PP [0577]).
As per claim 19, Cheng teaches the apparatus of claim 13, wherein the one or more processors are, individually or in combination, configured to execute the instructions to cause the apparatus to set an adaptive timer, wherein the NACK feedback is received during the adaptive timer. (As yet another example, the transmitter may delay sending the retransmission. In some cases, the transmitter may wait until further feedback (e.g., that the receiver has completed the decoding of the previous transport block) before sending the retransmission. In some cases, the transmitter may wait a predetermined amount of time or a predetermined number of feedback occasions to send the retransmission. [Cheng, Column 22 lines 30-37]).
As per claim 20, Cheng teaches the apparatus of claim 13, wherein the one or more processors are, individually or in combination, configured to execute the instructions to cause the apparatus to retransmit at least the portion of the message data and the redundancy bits as the block data and redundancy bits of one symbol of the multiple symbols. (the transmitter may retransmit the full TB (using either incremental redundancy or chase combining) in the next transmission opportunity. Alternatively, in some embodiments, the transmitter retransmit a subset of the CBG of the full TB. [Cheng, Column 14 Lines 37-41]).
As per claim 21, Cheng teaches the apparatus of claim 20, wherein the one or more processors are, individually or in combination, configured to execute the instructions to cause the apparatus to retransmit additional redundancy bits with the block data of the one symbol. (The NR data channel uses low-density parity-check (LDPC) codes suitable for incremental redundancy retransmissions [Column 2 lines 54-56], refer to figure 3 above) (Accordingly, the decoding latency of the combined codeword with this code rate is almost 6 times higher than the initial transmission, if incremental redundancy is used for the retransmission. [Cheng, Column 8 lines 22-25]) (The receiver may then provide NACK feedback for all CBs and CBGs. In response, the transmitter may retransmit all CBs and CBGs. [Cheng, Column 25 lines 15-17]).
As per claim 22, Cheng and Parkvall teach the apparatus of claim 20, wherein the one or more processors are, individually or in combination, configured to execute the instructions to cause the apparatus to retransmit, based on receiving the NACK feedback for the one symbol and NACK feedback for a second symbol of the multiple symbols(For FDD, the earliest re-transmission possibility is one subframe later than in TDD, due to the delayed ACK/NACK. To match the re-transmission delay of TDD, an extra-large timing advance can be used, which would give the eNB enough time to schedule a re-transmission in the next-next DL subframe (Parkvall, pp [0722])), block data and redundancy bits associated with the second symbol along with additional redundancy bits (The receiver may then provide NACK feedback for all CBs and CBGs. In response, the transmitter may retransmit all CBs and CBGs. Cheng [Cheng, Column 25 lines 15-17]) (The NR data channel uses low-density parity-check (LDPC) codes suitable for incremental redundancy retransmissions Cheng [Cheng, Column 2 lines 54-56], refer to figure 3 above).
As per claim 23, Cheng teaches the apparatus of claim 20, wherein the NACK feedback includes an identifier of the one symbol of the multiple symbols (NACK feedback from the receiver for one or more of the one or more code block groups of the transport block. [Cheng, Column 4 Lines 13-15]).
As per claim 24, an apparatus for wireless communication (Wireless device 10 (FIG 5)[Cheng, Column 16 Line 21]), comprising:
a transceiver (Wireless device 10 includes a transceiver [Cheng, Column 16 Line 21]);
one or more memories configured to, individually or in combination, store instructions (a receiver comprises one or more interfaces, memory, and processing circuitry. [Cheng, Column 5 Lines 52-53]); and
one or more processors communicatively coupled with the one or more memories, wherein the one or more processors are, individually or in combination, configured to execute the instructions to cause the apparatus to (The processing circuitry is configured to execute instructions stored in the memory [Cheng, Column 5 Lines 54-55]):
perform a cyclic redundancy check (CRC) or forward error correction (FEC) for at least a portion of the message data or redundancy bits (the method/computer program product/receiver further comprises providing HARQ NACK feedback for each of the CBGs when the TB fails a TB cyclic redundancy check in the receiver. [Cheng, Column 6 Lines 6-9]);
transmit, to the transmitting node, a negative-acknowledgement (NACK) feedback for at least the portion of the message data or redundancy bits (receiver comprises configuring the receiver to use multi-bit hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) feedback per transport block (TB) [Cheng, Column 5 Lines 29-31]); and
receive, from the transmitting node and based on transmitting the NACK feedback, a retransmission of at least the portion of the message data or redundancy bits (In some embodiments, the method/computer program product/receiver further comprises receiving a re-transmission of all CBs or CBGs of the TB. [Cheng, Column 6 Lines 9-12]).
Cheng does not teach “receive, from a transmitting node, message data and redundancy bits multiplexed in a different subset of assigned subcarriers in each of multiple symbols of a noncoherent transmission that is transmitted according to a duty cycle, wherein the noncoherent transmission includes less than all of the symbols allocated for transmitting the message data at a transmit power that is inversely proportional to the duty cycle;”
However, Parkvall, in an analogous art, teaches receive, from a transmitting node, message data and redundancy bits multiplexed in a different subset of assigned subcarriers in each of multiple (receiving and processing second Layer 2 data on a second physical data channel (Parkvall PP [0012], [0015], [0023])) symbols of a noncoherent transmission that is transmitted according to a duty cycle (transmitting system information (ATI/SSI) with added redundancy, placed in small, varying subsets of assigned subcarriers across successive symbols (candidate SSI positions) while other subcarriers carry data or reservation/dummy signals, and scheduling those transmissions under a low duty cycle (Parkvall, PP [1003] and [1577]))
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the wireless communication device disclosed by Cheng, to receive multiplexed message data and redundancy bits on varying subsets of assigned subcarriers across multiple symbols as disclosed by Parkvall. Furthermore, one skilled in the art would have been motivated by the teaching of Parkvall that use of a low duty cycle for non-coherent transmissions to conserve power and resources. Applying this technique would have been a predictable variation for someone of ordinary skill in the art to Cheng’s invention.
Cheng in view of Parkvall do not explicitly teach “wherein the noncoherent transmission includes less than all of the symbols allocated for transmitting the message data at a transmit power that is inversely proportional to the duty cycle;”
However, Bertizzolo, in an analogous art, teaches wherein the noncoherent transmission includes less than all of the symbols allocated for transmitting the message data at a transmit power that is inversely proportional to the duty cycle (In the case of a lower duty cycle, less frequent, or more sporadic transmission scheme (e.g., where transmission occurs infrequently, less than half of the time period, and so on), the wireless communication device may utilize a higher transmission level (greater than the average transmission power limit), referred to as Pmax , as these higher transmission levels are averaged out by periods of no transmission. [Bertizzolo PP 0025], if the duty cycle TDC 110 is 70%, the MTPLi 114 is set to a difference of Pmax and a product of 70% and a difference between Pmax and Pmin,i 112 . If the duty cycle TDC 110 is 30%, the MTPLi 114 is set to a difference of Pmax and a product of 30% and a difference between Pmax and Pmin,i 112. [Bertizzolo PP 0056]);
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the wireless communication device disclosed by Cheng in view of Parkvall, to increase transmission power for low duty cycle as disclosed by Bertizzolo. Furthermore, one skilled in the art would have been motivated by the teaching of Bertizzolo that the transmit power can be increased inversely to the duty cycle. Applying this technique would have been a predictable variation for someone of ordinary skill in the art to Cheng in view of Parkvall invention.
As per claim 25, Cheng discloses the apparatus (Each of the embodiments of the method, computer program product [Cheng, Column 4 Line 38]) of claim 24, wherein the message data and the redundancy bits are multiplexed as CRC bits or parity bits (transport block segmentation, and low-density parity-check (LDPC) codes [Cheng, Fig 3 above, Column 1 lines 21-25]) for FEC across the multiple symbols (TB fails a TB cyclic redundancy check in the receiver [Cheng, Column 4 Lines 42-43]).
As per claim 26, Cheng discloses the apparatus of claim 25, wherein the one or more processors are, individually or in combination, configured to execute the instructions to cause the apparatus to perform the CRC or FEC over the message data and redundancy bits received in all of the multiple symbols, and wherein the one or more processors are, individually or in combination, configured to execute the instructions to cause the apparatus to transmit the NACK feedback after performing the CRC or FEC. (the method/computer program product/receiver further comprises providing HARQ NACK feedback for each of the CBGs when the TB fails a TB cyclic redundancy check [Cheng, Column 6 Lines 6-9]).
As per claim 27, Cheng teaches a method (According to certain embodiments, a method for use in
a transmitter [Cheng, Column 3 Lines 53-54]) for wireless communication at a transmitting node, comprising:
multiplexing message data, to be transmitted to a receiving node, with redundancy bits on a per-message or per-symbol basis (sending a transmission comprising a transport block (TB) comprising a plurality of code blocks (CBs) arranged in one or more code block groups (CBGs) [Cheng, Column 3 Lines 54-56]);
receiving, from the receiving node, a negative-acknowledgement (NACK) feedback for at least a portion of the message data or redundancy bits (The method further comprises receiving HARQ ACK or NACK feedback from the receiver for one or more of the one or more code block groups of the transport block. [Cheng, Column 3 Lines 61-64]);
and retransmitting, to the receiving node and based on receiving the NACK feedback, at least the portion of the message data or redundancy bits (The method further comprises determining a number of code blocks or code block groups to send to the receiver in a retransmission based on at least the received HARQ ACK or NACK feedback. [Cheng, Column 3 Lines 64-67]).
Cheng does not teach “transmitting, to the receiving node, the multiplexed message data and redundancy bits in a different subset of assigned subcarriers in each of multiple symbols of a noncoherent transmission according to a duty cycle, wherein the noncoherent transmission includes less than all of the symbols allocated for transmitting the message data and at a transmit power that is inversely proportional to the duty cycle;”
However, Parkvall, in analogous art, teaches transmitting, to the receiving node, the multiplexed message data and redundancy bits in a different subset of assigned subcarriers in each of multiple symbols (receiving and processing second Layer 2 data on a second physical data channel (Parkvall, PP [0012], [0015], [0023])) of a noncoherent transmission according to a duty cycle (transmitting system information (ATI/SSI) with added redundancy, placed in small, varying subsets of assigned subcarriers across successive symbols (candidate SSI positions) while other subcarriers carry data or reservation/dummy signals, and scheduling those transmissions under a low duty cycle (Parkvall, PP [1003] and [1577]));
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the wireless communication device disclosed by Cheng, to transmit multiplexed message data and redundancy bits on varying subsets of assigned subcarriers across multiple symbols as disclosed by Parkvall. Furthermore, one skilled in the art would have been motivated by the teaching of Parkvall that use of a low duty cycle for non-coherent transmissions to conserve power and resources. Applying this technique would have been a predictable variation for someone of ordinary skill in the art to Cheng’s invention.
Cheng in view of Parkvall do not explicitly teach “wherein the noncoherent transmission includes less than all of the symbols allocated for transmitting the message data and at a transmit power that is inversely proportional to the duty cycle;”
However, Bertizzolo, in an analogous art, teaches wherein the noncoherent transmission includes less than all of the symbols allocated for transmitting the message data and at a transmit power that is inversely proportional to the duty cycle (In the case of a lower duty cycle, less frequent, or more sporadic transmission scheme (e.g., where transmission occurs infrequently, less than half of the time period, and so on), the wireless communication device may utilize a higher transmission level (greater than the average transmission power limit), referred to as Pmax , as these higher transmission levels are averaged out by periods of no transmission. [Bertizzolo PP 0025], if the duty cycle TDC 110 is 70%, the MTPLi 114 is set to a difference of Pmax and a product of 70% and a difference between Pmax and Pmin,i 112 . If the duty cycle TDC 110 is 30%, the MTPLi 114 is set to a difference of Pmax and a product of 30% and a difference between Pmax and Pmin,i 112. [Bertizzolo PP 0056]);
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the wireless communication device disclosed by Cheng in view of Parkvall, to increase transmission power for low duty cycle as disclosed by Bertizzolo. Furthermore, one skilled in the art would have been motivated by the teaching of Bertizzolo that the transmit power can be increased inversely to the duty cycle. Applying this technique would have been a predictable variation for someone of ordinary skill in the art to Cheng in view of Parkvall invention.
As per claim 28, Cheng discloses the method (Each of the embodiments of the method [Cheng, Column 4 Line 38]) of claim 27, wherein the multiplexing includes multiplexing the message data with the redundancy bits as cyclic redundancy check (CRC) bits or parity bits (transport block segmentation, and low-density parity-check (LDPC) codes [Cheng, Fig 3 above, Column 1 lines 21-25]) for forward error correction (FEC) across the multiple symbols (TB fails a TB cyclic redundancy check in the receiver [Cheng, Column 4 Lines 42-43]).
As per claim 29, Cheng discloses a method (a method for use in a receiver [Cheng, Column 5 Lines 28-29]) for wireless communication at a receiving node, comprising:
performing a cyclic redundancy check (CRC) or forward error correction (FEC) for at least a portion of the message data or redundancy bits (the method/computer program product/receiver further comprises providing HARQ NACK feedback for each of the CBGs when the TB fails a TB cyclic redundancy check in the receiver. [Cheng, Column 6 Lines 6-9]);
transmitting, to the transmitting node, a negative-acknowledgement (NACK) feedback for at least the portion of the message data or redundancy bits (receiver comprises configuring the receiver to use multi-bit hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) feedback per transport block (TB) [Cheng, Column 5 Lines 29-31]);
and receiving, from the transmitting node and based on transmitting the NACK feedback, a retransmission of at least the portion of the message data or redundancy bits (In some embodiments, the method/computer program product/receiver further comprises receiving a re-transmission of all CBs or CBGs of the TB. [Cheng, Column 6 Lines 9-12]).
Cheng does not teach “receiving, from a transmitting node, message data and redundancy bits multiplexed in a different subset of assigned subcarriers in each of multiple symbols of a noncoherent transmission that is transmitted according to a duty cycle, wherein the noncoherent transmission includes less than all of the symbols allocated for transmitting the message data at a transmit power that is inversely proportional to the duty cycle;”
However, Parkvall, in an analogous art, teaches receiving, from a transmitting node, message data and redundancy bits multiplexed in a different subset of assigned subcarriers in each of multiple symbols (receiving and processing second Layer 2 data on a second physical data channel (Parkvall PP [0012], [0015], [0023 of a noncoherent transmission that is transmitted according to a duty cycle (transmitting system information (ATI/SSI) with added redundancy, placed in small, varying subsets of assigned subcarriers across successive symbols (candidate SSI positions) while other subcarriers carry data or reservation/dummy signals, and scheduling those transmissions under a low duty cycle (Parkvall, PP [1003] and [1577]);
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the wireless communication device disclosed by Cheng, to receive multiplexed message data and redundancy bits on varying subsets of assigned subcarriers across multiple symbols as disclosed by Parkvall. Furthermore, one skilled in the art would have been motivated by the teaching of Parkvall that use of a low duty cycle for non-coherent transmissions to conserve power and resources. Applying this technique would have been a predictable variation for someone of ordinary skill in the art to Cheng’s invention.
Cheng in view of Parkvall do not explicitly teach “wherein the noncoherent transmission includes less than all of the symbols allocated for transmitting the message data at a transmit power that is inversely proportional to the duty cycle;”
However, Bertizzolo, in an analogous art, teaches wherein the noncoherent transmission includes less than all of the symbols allocated for transmitting the message data at a transmit power that is inversely proportional to the duty cycle (In the case of a lower duty cycle, less frequent, or more sporadic transmission scheme (e.g., where transmission occurs infrequently, less than half of the time period, and so on), the wireless communication device may utilize a higher transmission level (greater than the average transmission power limit), referred to as Pmax , as these higher transmission levels are averaged out by periods of no transmission. [Bertizzolo PP 0025], if the duty cycle TDC 110 is 70%, the MTPLi 114 is set to a difference of Pmax and a product of 70% and a difference between Pmax and Pmin,i 112 . If the duty cycle TDC 110 is 30%, the MTPLi 114 is set to a difference of Pmax and a product of 30% and a difference between Pmax and Pmin,i 112. [Bertizzolo PP 0056]);
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the wireless communication device disclosed by Cheng in view of Parkvall, to increase transmission power for low duty cycle as disclosed by Bertizzolo. Furthermore, one skilled in the art would have been motivated by the teaching of Bertizzolo that the transmit power can be increased inversely to the duty cycle. Applying this technique would have been a predictable variation for someone of ordinary skill in the art to Cheng in view of Parkvall invention.
As per claim 30, Cheng teaches the method (Each of the embodiments of the method [Cheng, Column 4 Line 38]) of claim 27, wherein the multiplexing includes multiplexing the message data with the redundancy bits as cyclic redundancy check (CRC) bits or parity bits (transport block segmentation, and low-density parity-check (LDPC) codes [Cheng Fig 3 above, Column 1 lines 21-25]) for forward error correction (FEC) across the multiple symbols (TB fails a TB cyclic redundancy check in the receiver [Cheng, Column 4 Lines 42-43]).
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 KAREEM FUAD ALHWAMDEH whose telephone number is (571)272-5501. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:30-5:00.
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, Albert Decady can be reached at (571) 272-3819. 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.
/KAREEM FUAD ALHWAMDEH/Examiner, Art Unit 2112
/ALBERT DECADY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2112
Prosecution Insights