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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the application filed on 07/25/2024.
Claims 1-20 are currently pending.
Claims 1, 7-15 are amended via a preliminary amendment.
Claims 16-20 are newly added.
Claims 1-20 are rejected.
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.
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Roya EBRAHIM Rezagah et al (US 20220224457 A1) in view of FARIS Alfarhan et al (WO 2021163330 A1).
For Claim 1, Rezagah discloses a method performed by a user equipment (UE) (Rezagah teaches, in Fig. 4, a Transmitting UE, TX UE), the method comprising:
transmitting a configuration for a one shot hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) feedback request (Rezagah teaches, in ¶ 0063, that the TX UE may send SCI and/or data to the RX UE);
one or more of a HARQ feedback request bit field in sidelink control information (SCI), a destination identifier (ID), a cast type indicator, or a bitmap indicating HARQ processes (Rezagah teaches, in ¶ 0184, that the TX UE to communicate with one or more receiving UEs, RX UEs, using the sidelink. Rezagah teaches, in ¶ 0088, ¶ 0094-¶ 0095, that the common control message parameters including one or more of: [0094] a destination ID, [0095] a cast type 0096] transmission procedure indicator e.g. blind-transmission or retransmission, or HARQ enabled transmission); and
receiving the one shot HARQ feedback report associated with a subset of HARQ processes of a plurality of HARQ processes and based at least in part on a cast type and a groupcast HARQ feedback (Rezagah teaches, in ¶ 0063, that With one or more respective messages 312.sub.4, the RX UE may send HARQ ACK/NACK to the TX UE. Rezagah also teaches, in ¶ 0248, that the TX UE may use a grant for packets related to broadcast, groupcast or unicast transmissions).
Rezagah fails to expressly disclose configuring one shot HARQ feedback including a bitmap indicating HARQ processes.
However, Alfarhan, in the analogous art, discloses configuring one shot HARQ feedback including a bitmap indicating HARQ processes (Alfarhan teaches, in ¶ 0072, that Upon receiving the request 235 for one-shot HARQ feedback request with the indication of priority level (e.g., priority 1), the WTRU may generate a HARQ codebook based on the indicated priority).
Alfarhan further teaches, in ¶ 0080, that the WTRU may receive a bitmap of HARQ process IDs where 1 or 0 indicate whether the HARQ process ID is included in part of the priority subset. The WTRU may then include HARQ feedback only for the indicated HARQ process to be part of the priority subset, such as upon triggering one-shot HARQ feedback.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system in Rezagah with the selective one-shot HARQ feedback taught in Alfarhan. The motivation is to improve reliability of the transmission [Alfarhan: ¶ 0076].
For Claim 2, Rezagah discloses a method, further comprising transmitting a sidelink (SL) one shot HARQ feedback request transmission using a second SCI format containing (Rezagah teaches, in ¶ 0379, that the network may decide to configure the UE with a single DCI format for scheduling SL transmissions) at least one destination ID in a unicast, groupcast, or broadcast transmission (Rezagah teaches, in ¶ 0248, that the TX UE may use a grant for packets related to broadcast, groupcast or unicast transmissions).
For Claim 3, Rezagah discloses a method, further comprising transmitting a quantity of SCI containing one shot HARQ feedback request to each device associated with each respective destination ID in a unicast or groupcast or broadcast transmission depending on a corresponding physical sidelink shared channel (PSSCH) cast type (Rezagah teaches, in ¶ 0231, that the TX UE is to send multiple SCIs with retransmission resource locations in each of the SCIs) at least one destination ID in a unicast, groupcast, or broadcast transmission (Rezagah teaches, in ¶ 0248, that the TX UE may use a grant for packets related to broadcast, groupcast or unicast transmissions. Rezagah teaches, in ¶ 0402, that if the resources are pointing to a resource pool with PSFCH (Physical Shared Feedback Channel) defined, the TX UE can assume that the packet to be transmitted would use HARQ-based retransmissions).
For Claim 4, Rezagah discloses all of the claimed subject matter with the exception of requesting a reporting of one shot HARQ feedback corresponding to all SL HARQ processes, a subset of HARQ processes, and handling of inactive HARQ processes between a pair of devices.
However, Alfarhan, in the analogous art, discloses requesting a reporting of one shot HARQ feedback corresponding to all SL HARQ processes, a subset of HARQ processes (Alfarhan teaches, in ¶ 0080, that the WTRU may receive a bitmap of HARQ process IDs where 1 or 0 indicate whether the HARQ process ID is included in part of the priority subset. The WTRU may then include HARQ feedback only for the indicated HARQ process to be part of the priority subset, such as upon triggering one-shot HARQ feedback), and handling of inactive HARQ processes between a pair of devices (Alfarhan teaches, in ¶ 0097, that The WTRU may assume that HARQ PIDs for which HARQ feedback is disabled are excluded from the priority set).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system in Rezagah with the selective one-shot HARQ feedback taught in Alfarhan. The motivation is to improve reliability of the transmission [Alfarhan: ¶ 0076].
For Claim 5, Rezagah discloses all of the claimed subject matter with the exception of receiving a default HARQ feedback for inactive HARQ processes as part of the one shot HARQ feedback report.
However, Alfarhan, in the analogous art, discloses receiving a default HARQ feedback for inactive HARQ processes as part of the one shot HARQ feedback report (Alfarhan teaches, in ¶ 0082, that the WTRU may be configured by RRC with a default priority subset, which the WTRU uses by default upon triggering or reception of a one-shot HARQ feedback request).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system in Rezagah with the selective one-shot HARQ feedback taught in Alfarhan. The motivation is to improve reliability of the transmission [Alfarhan: ¶ 0076].
For Claim 6, Rezagah discloses all of the claimed subject matter with the exception of ignoring the HARQ feedback for inactive HARQ processes in the one shot HARQ feedback report.
However, Alfarhan, in the analogous art, discloses ignoring the HARQ feedback for inactive HARQ processes in the one shot HARQ feedback report (Alfarhan teaches, in ¶ 0097, that In some systems, HARQ feedback may be disabled by the network for some HARQ process(es) or HARQ PIDs, such as by RRC or dynamic signaling. The WTRU may assume that HARQ PIDs for which HARQ feedback is disabled are excluded from the priority set).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system in Rezagah with the selective one-shot HARQ feedback taught in Alfarhan. The motivation is to improve reliability of the transmission [Alfarhan: ¶ 0076].
For Claims 7-12, please refer to the rejection of For Claims 1-6, above.
For Claim 13, Rezagah discloses a user equipment, wherein the one shot HARQ feedback report corresponds to a vehicle-to-everything (V2X) container (Rezagah teaches, in ¶ 0575, that it is noted that they have been described in an environment in which a communication is between a transmitter, like a TX UE, and a receiver, like a RX UE, in a V2X scenario).
For Claim 14, Rezagah discloses a user equipment, wherein the V2X containers comprise an enhanced physical sidelink feedback channel (PSFCH) format, a second SCI, a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE), or a combination thereof (Rezagah teaches, in ¶ 0402, that if the resources are pointing to a resource pool with PSFCH (Physical Shared Feedback Channel) defined, the TX UE can assume that the packet to be transmitted would use HARQ-based retransmissions. Rezagah teaches, in ¶ 0231, that the TX UE is to send multiple SCIs with retransmission resource locations in each of the SCIs) at least one destination ID in a unicast, groupcast, or broadcast transmission (Rezagah teaches, in ¶ 0248, that the TX UE may use a grant for packets related to broadcast, groupcast or unicast transmissions).
For Claim 15, please refer to the rejection of For Claim 1, above.
For Claims 16-20, please refer to the rejection of For Claims 1-5, above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. HOSSEINI et al (US 20220201729 A1) teaches wireless communication, wherein a first user equipment (UE) may receive, from a second UE via a sidelink interface, a triggering signal associated with triggering hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) feedback for a sidelink.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMED A KAMARA whose telephone number is (571)270-5629. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9AM-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, CHARLES JIANG can be reached on 5712707191. 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.
/MOHAMED A KAMARA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2412
Prosecution Insights