CTNF 18/806,971 CTNF 95519 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Double Patenting 08-33 AIA The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg , 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman , 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi , 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum , 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel , 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington , 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA/25, or PTO/AIA/26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. 08-34 AIA Claim s 34-45 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim s 1, 3-4, 17 and 19-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,068,859 B2 . Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both claims are directed to scheduling multiple PDSCH corresponding to one of a plurality of component carriers via DCI transmitted on PDCCH. Below is a table showing the correspondence between instant Claims 34-37 and Claims 1 and 3-4 of the conflicting Patent, with differences underlined . Claim No. instant application (18/806,971) Conflicting Patent (US 12,068,859 B2) Claim No. 34 An apparatus comprising processing circuitry configured to: A user equipment (UE), comprising: a transceiver configured to communicate with a base station; and processor communicatively coupled to the transceiver and configured to perform operations comprising: 1 process, based on signaling from a base station, a plurality of downlink control information (DCI) transmissions during a corresponding plurality of physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) monitoring occasions, receiving a plurality of downlink control information (DCI) transmissions during a corresponding plurality of physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) monitoring occasions from the base station, wherein each DCI transmission schedules multiple physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) transmissions on a corresponding one of a plurality of component carriers (CCs); wherein each DCI transmission schedules multiple physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) transmissions on a corresponding one of a plurality of component carriers (CCs); receiving a time domain resource allocation (TDRA) table configuration from the base station; determine a maximum number of PDSCH transmissions per CC; determining a maximum number of PDSCH transmissions per CC based on the TDRA table configuration; group the CCs into one or more CC groups; grouping the plurality of CCs together, wherein CCs having the same maximum number of PDSCH transmissions per CC are grouped together, and wherein a maximum number of PDSCH transmissions per group is equivalent to the maximum number of PDSCH transmissions per CC; determine a hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ)-acknowledgement (ACK) codebook size; and determining a hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ)-acknowledgement (ACK) codebook size based on a number of the multiple PDSCH transmissions, the maximum number of PDSCH transmissions, and a resulting ACK or negative acknowledgement (NACK) for each of the multiple PDSCH transmissions ; and generate a plurality of HARQ bits for each of the multiple PDSCH transmissions, wherein the plurality of HARQ bits is equal to the maximum number of PDSCH transmissions per CC group. generating a plurality of HARQ bits for each of the multiple PDSCH transmissions, wherein the plurality of HARQ bits is equal to the maximum number of PDSCH transmissions per group. 35 The apparatus of claim 34, wherein each HARQ bit corresponds to an acknowledgment (ACK) or a negative acknowledgement (NACK) based on decoding each of the multiple PDSCH transmissions. A user equipment (UE), comprising: … determining a hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ)-acknowledgement (ACK) codebook size based on a number of the multiple PDSCH transmissions, the maximum number of PDSCH transmissions, and a resulting ACK or negative acknowledgement (NACK) for each of the multiple PDSCH transmissions; and 1 36 The apparatus of claim 34, wherein the plurality of HARQ bits includes a decoding acknowledgement (ACK) for each of the multiple PDSCH transmissions and The UE of claim 1, wherein the plurality of HARQ bits includes a decoding acknowledgement for each of the multiple PDSCH transmissions and 3 one or more negative acknowledgement (NACK) bits corresponding to a difference between the plurality of multi-PDSCH transmissions and the maximum number of PDSCH transmissions per CC group. one or more NACK bits corresponding to the difference between the plurality of multi-PDSCH transmission and the maximum number of PDSCH transmissions per group. 37 The apparatus of claim 36, wherein the HARQ-ACK codebook size is based on total downlink assignment indicators (T-DAIs) of a last PDCCH monitoring occasion and the maximum number of PDSCH transmissions per CC group. The UE of claim 3, wherein the HARQ-ACK codebook size is the product of a total DAI (T-DAI) indicating a total number of PDCCH monitoring occasions in a CC group of a last PDCCH monitoring occasion and the maximum number of PDSCH transmissions per group. 4 The instant Claims 38-45 can be similarly mapped to Claims 1, 3-4, 17 and 19-20 of the conflicting Patent and are rejected based on the overlap. As indicated above, the subject matter claimed in the instant application is fully disclosed in the conflicting Patent and is covered by the conflicting Patent. The instant application and the conflicting Patent are claiming common subject matter, and the difference in limitation(s) are merely differences in wording. Therefore, Claims 34-45 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness type double patenting in light of the conflicting Patent Claims ## . Allowable Subject Matter Claim(s) 34-45 are objected to as being rejected under the doctrine of double patenting, but would be allowable upon the filing of a terminal disclaimer due to a lack of prior art reading upon the claims as filed. 13-03-01 AIA The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: a thorough and complete search has been conducted and no prior art has been found that solely, or in any reasonable combination, reads on each element of the indicated claim(s). In particular, the language of independent Claim 34, namely “ generate a plurality of HARQ bits for each of the multiple PDSCH transmissions, wherein the plurality of HARQ bits is equal to the maximum number of PDSCH transmissions per CC group. ”, overcomes the prior art by performing a step not contemplated by the prior art. The closest reference found is Jang (US 2023/0318761 A1) which is in the same field of invention of PDCCH monitoring via DCI scheduling and transmission of PDSCH via component carriers. See Jang Fig 20 and 23 as well as [0130] which teaches a plurality of DCI repetitions during PDCCH monitoring to schedule PDSCH. Jang does not teach generating a plurality of HARQ bits for each of the multiple PDSCH transmissions, wherein the HARQ bits are equal to a maximum number of PDSCH transmissions per component carrier group. No other art was found, alone or in combination with Jang, that would read upon this limitation . For at least these reason(s), Claims 34-45 are in condition for allowance over the prior art. Upon overcoming the above double patenting rejection(s), either by filing a terminal disclaimer or amendment, the claims will be in condition for allowance. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHAWN D MILLER whose telephone number is (571)272-8599. The examiner can normally be reached M-TR 8-5. 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, Charles C Jiang can be reached at (571) 270-7191. 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. /SHAWN D MILLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2412 Application/Control Number: 18/806,971 Page 2 Art Unit: 2412 Application/Control Number: 18/806,971 Page 3 Art Unit: 2412 Application/Control Number: 18/806,971 Page 4 Art Unit: 2412 Application/Control Number: 18/806,971 Page 5 Art Unit: 2412 Application/Control Number: 18/806,971 Page 6 Art Unit: 2412
Prosecution Insights