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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-4, 7-16, 18-19, and 22-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ye et al. (US 20210258104 A1)
Regarding claims 1, 11, 22 and 23 Ye discloses:
receiving a control command transmitted by a network side device; (Paragraph [0099], “the base station 102 may disable the HARQ feedback by always toggling a new data indicator (NDI) in DCI 605.” For claim 1 and 11 it works both ways BS transmits UE receives. Thus if the base station (network device) sends a control command then the UE receives it.)
and determining whether scheduled data supports a HARQ feedback function. (Paragraph [0100], “At 608, the UE may determine whether to disable a HARQ feedback. The UE may transmit the HARQ feedback 610 if the HARQ feedback is enabled.” UE determines if it wants to support (enable) or not (disable) HARQ feedback.)
Specifically regarding claim 22 Ye discloses:
Terminal device with processors and memory (Paragraph [0171], “UE comprising: at least one antenna; at least one radio, wherein the at least one radio is configured to perform cellular communication; one or more processors…” and paragraph [0176], “a non-transitory computer readable memory medium storing program instructions executable by processing circuitry to cause a user equipment device (UE)”)
Specifically regarding claim 23 Ye discloses:
Network side device with processors and memory (paragraph [0075], “The processor 404 of the base station 102 may be configured to implement or support implementation of part or all of the methods described herein, e.g., by executing program instructions stored on a memory medium (e.g., a non-transitory computer-readable memory medium).”)
Regarding claims 2 and 12 Ye discloses:
Determining, based on the control command, whether current data scheduling by a first physical layer control signaling supports the HARQ feedback function, wherein the control command is the first physical layer control signaling to indicate HARQ enabled or HARQ disabled. (Paragraph [0099], “In some embodiments, for a HARQ process in the second set of HARQ processes with semi-statically enabled HARQ feedback, DCI 605 may be configured to disable a HARQ feedback for a DL transmission. As illustrated in FIG. 6, the UE 106 may receive the DCI 605 through a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH). This applies for downlink transmissions and uplink transmissions. For uplink transmission, the base station 102 may disable the HARQ feedback by always toggling a new data indicator (NDI) in DCI 605.” Base station uses DCI (physical layer control signaling) to toggle HARQ feedback.)
Regarding claim 3 and 13 Ye discloses:
determining, based on the control command, whether data scheduling within a first time period supports the HARQ feedback function, wherein the control command is a second physical layer control signaling to indicate HARQ enabled or HARQ disabled, and the first time period. (Paragraph [0100], “DCI signaling 605 may be used to dynamically disable the HARQ feedback. In some embodiments, field reinterpretation may be used to indicate the HARQ feedback is disabled. For example, in DCI format 1_0, the field “PDSCH-to-HARQ feedback timing indicator” may have a code point to indicate the HARQ feedback is disabled when a higher layer flag is set to True.” As disclosed above DCI can be used to toggle the HARQ feedback function and with the timing indicator the UE will know if data scheduling is indicated through the code point.)
Regarding claims 4 and 14 Ye discloses:
determining, based on the control command, whether data scheduling within a second time period supports the HARQ feedback function, wherein the control command is a third physical layer control signaling to indicate HARQ enabled or HARQ disabled, and the second time period is a time period starting from reception of the third physical layer control signaling to indicate HARQ enabled, and ending until reception of the third physical layer control signaling to indicate HARQ disabled; (Paragraph [0098], “In some embodiments, the RRC/MAC CE message 603 may indicate a timing of the HARQ feedback enabling or disabling. For example, the RRC/MAC CE message 603 may indicate a starting time, an ending time, a duration of the HARQ feedback being enabled or disabled.” And paragraph [0100], “In some embodiments, field reinterpretation may be used to indicate the HARQ feedback is disabled. For example, in DCI format 1_0, the field “PDSCH-to-HARQ feedback timing indicator” may have a code point to indicate the HARQ feedback is disabled when a higher layer flag is set to True.”)
or the second time period is a time period starting from reception of the third physical layer control signaling to indicate HARQ disabled, and ending until reception of the third physical layer control signaling to indicate HARQ enabled. (Paragraph [0098], “In some embodiments, the RRC/MAC CE message 603 may indicate a timing of the HARQ feedback enabling or disabling. For example, the RRC/MAC CE message 603 may indicate a starting time, an ending time, a duration of the HARQ feedback being enabled or disabled.” And paragraph [0100], “In some embodiments, field reinterpretation may be used to indicate the HARQ feedback is disabled. For example, in DCI format 1_0, the field “PDSCH-to-HARQ feedback timing indicator” may have a code point to indicate the HARQ feedback is disabled when a higher layer flag is set to True.”)
Regarding claims 7, 8 and 16 Ye discloses:
(Note: claim 16 is a combination of 7 and 8 It would be easier to combine the rejection)
Determining whether the scheduled data supports the HARQ feedback function based on indication information in a predetermined information field in a control command. (Paragraph [0100], “In some embodiments, field reinterpretation may be used to indicate the HARQ feedback is disabled. For example, in DCI format 1_0, the field “PDSCH-to-HARQ feedback timing indicator” may have a code point to indicate the HARQ feedback is disabled when a higher layer flag is set to True.” Field has indication information of HARQ feedback function.)
Specifically for claims 8 and 16 Ye discloses:
Wherein at least one of a length or a position of the predetermined information field is defined by a protocol or preconfigured. (Paragraph [0100], “In some embodiments, field reinterpretation may be used to indicate the HARQ feedback is disabled. For example, in DCI format 1_0, the field “PDSCH-to-HARQ feedback timing indicator” may have a code point to indicate the HARQ feedback is disabled when a higher layer flag is set to True. If a higher layer flag (i.e., “HARQ-disabling”) is set to “True”, then the 3-bit field (e.g., from “000” to “110”) may directly indicate the slot offset between PDSCH and HARQ feedback is from 1 to 7, where the all “1” field may indicate HARQ feedback is disabled.” The length and position are preconfigured.)
Regarding claim 9 Ye discloses:
determining a correspondence between a value of a radio network temporary identifier (RNTI) and whether the HARQ feedback function is supported, wherein the control command is a scheduling command; (Paragraph [0101], “a radio network temporary identifier (RNTI) indicating whether a HARQ feedback is enabled or disabled. RNTI based indication may be used to indicate the HARQ feedback is enabled or disabled.” UE uses a value of RNTI as indication for HARQ feedback is supported (enabled or disabled). Further, it is inherent that the RNTI is sent in the DCI (control command).)
parsing the scheduling command to obtain a target RNTI value in the scheduling command; (Paragraph [0101], “a radio network temporary identifier (RNTI) indicating whether a HARQ feedback is enabled or disabled. RNTI based indication may be used to indicate the HARQ feedback is enabled or disabled.” and paragraph [0102], “RNTI scrambled on different positions of DCI cyclic redundancy check (CRC) may be used to indicate whether a HARQ feedback is enabled or disabled.” The UE needs to decode the DCI for information which include the RNTI.)
and determining whether the scheduled data supports the HARQ feedback function based on the correspondence and the target RNTI value. (Paragraph [0102], “Only last 17 DCI CRC bits are not distributed, which can be used for scrambling. If last 16 DCI CRC bits are scrambled by RNTI, as illustrated at 702, then HARQ feedback is enabled. If second last 16 DCI CRC bits are scrambled by RNTI, as illustrated at 701, then HARQ feedback is disabled.”)
Regarding claim 10 Ye discloses:
determining a correspondence between a scrambling sequence and whether the HARQ feedback function is supported, wherein the control command is a scheduling command; (paragraph [0102], “Only last 17 DCI CRC bits are not distributed, which can be used for scrambling. If last 16 DCI CRC bits are scrambled by RNTI, as illustrated at 702, then HARQ feedback is enabled. If second last 16 DCI CRC bits are scrambled by RNTI, as illustrated at 701, then HARQ feedback is disabled.” The last 17 bits are used in a scrambling sequence and discloses the enablement or disabling of HARQ feedback.)
parsing the scheduling command to obtain a target scrambling sequence in the scheduling command; (paragraph [0102], “Only last 17 DCI CRC bits are not distributed, which can be used for scrambling. If last 16 DCI CRC bits are scrambled by RNTI, as illustrated at 702, then HARQ feedback is enabled. If second last 16 DCI CRC bits are scrambled by RNTI, as illustrated at 701, then HARQ feedback is disabled.” The DCI is parsed and decoded by the UE to obtain this sequence to know if HARQ is enabled or disabled.)
and determining whether the scheduled data supports the HARQ feedback function based on the correspondence and the target scrambling sequence. (paragraph [0102], “Only last 17 DCI CRC bits are not distributed, which can be used for scrambling. If last 16 DCI CRC bits are scrambled by RNTI, as illustrated at 702, then HARQ feedback is enabled. If second last 16 DCI CRC bits are scrambled by RNTI, as illustrated at 701, then HARQ feedback is disabled.” The last 17 bits are used in a scrambling sequence and discloses the enablement or disabling of HARQ feedback.)
Regarding claim 15 Ye discloses:
wherein the control command is a control command for uplink transmission or a control command for downlink transmission. (Paragraph [0092], “HARQ may be disabled via DCI in new/re-interpreted field, or new Uplink Control Information (UCI) feedback for reporting DL transmission disruption and or requesting DL scheduling changes.”)
Regarding claim 18 Ye discloses:
scrambling the control command based on a target radio network temporary identifier (RNTI) value, wherein the control command is a scheduling command; (Paragraph [0101], “radio network temporary identifier (RNTI) indicating whether a HARQ feedback is enabled or disabled. RNTI based indication may be used to indicate the HARQ feedback is enabled or disabled” and paragraph [0102], “RNTI scrambled on different positions of DCI cyclic redundancy check (CRC)”)
and transmitting the scheduling command scrambled with the target RNTI value to the terminal device, wherein the scheduling command scrambled with the target RNTI value implicitly indicates whether the scheduled data supports the HARQ feedback function. (Paragraph [0102], “RNTI scrambled on different positions of DCI cyclic redundancy check (CRC) may be used to indicate whether a HARQ feedback is enabled or disabled. Only last 17 DCI CRC bits are not distributed, which can be used for scrambling. If last 16 DCI CRC bits are scrambled by RNTI, as illustrated at 702, then HARQ feedback is enabled. If second last 16 DCI CRC bits are scrambled by RNTI, as illustrated at 701, then HARQ feedback is disabled.”)
Regarding claim 19 Ye discloses:
scrambling the control command on a radio network temporary identifier (RNTI) with a target scrambling sequence, wherein the control command is a scheduling command; (Paragraph [0102], “RNTI scrambled on different positions of DCI cyclic redundancy check (CRC) may be used to indicate whether a HARQ feedback is enabled or disabled. Only last 17 DCI CRC bits are not distributed, which can be used for scrambling. If last 16 DCI CRC bits are scrambled by RNTI, as illustrated at 702, then HARQ feedback is enabled. If second last 16 DCI CRC bits are scrambled by RNTI, as illustrated at 701, then HARQ feedback is disabled.”)
and transmitting the scheduling command scrambled with the target scrambling sequence to the terminal device, wherein the scheduling command scrambled with the target scrambling sequence implicitly indicates whether the scheduled data supports the HARQ feedback function. (Paragraph [0102], “RNTI scrambled on different positions of DCI cyclic redundancy check (CRC) may be used to indicate whether a HARQ feedback is enabled or disabled. Only last 17 DCI CRC bits are not distributed, which can be used for scrambling. If last 16 DCI CRC bits are scrambled by RNTI, as illustrated at 702, then HARQ feedback is enabled. If second last 16 DCI CRC bits are scrambled by RNTI, as illustrated at 701, then HARQ feedback is disabled.”)
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.
Claims 5 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ye in view of Stephenne et al. (US 20160226628 A1)
Regarding claim 5 Ye does not disclose:
after the terminal device transmits uplink data, waiting for a scheduling command or a HARQ feedback further transmitted by the network side device, and determining whether to retransmit the uplink data based on the scheduling command or the HARQ feedback further transmitted by the network side device, wherein the control command is a control command for uplink transmission, and the scheduled data supports the HARQ feedback function; or, after the terminal device transmits the uplink data, clearing data cache in a HARQ process corresponding to the uplink data, wherein the control command is the control command for uplink transmission, and the scheduled data does not support the HARQ feedback function.
Stephenne discloses:
after the terminal device transmits uplink data, waiting for a scheduling command or a HARQ feedback further transmitted by the network side device, ()
and determining whether to retransmit the uplink data based on the scheduling command or the HARQ feedback further transmitted by the network side device, wherein the control command is a control command for uplink transmission, and the scheduled data supports the HARQ feedback function; ()
or, after the terminal device transmits the uplink data, clearing data cache in a HARQ process corresponding to the uplink data, wherein the control command is the control command for uplink transmission, and the scheduled data does not support the HARQ feedback function. (Paragraph [0003], “Once a packet is sent as part of a HARQ process implemented at a transmitter (e.g. User Equipment (UE) for uplink transmissions), the transmitter buffers the transmitted data and the HARQ process waits for acknowledgement information from the receiver (e.g. a base station). “ and paragraph [0096], “The ALMOST-ACK feedback is used to indicate to the transmitter that the receiver has not fully determined whether retransmission is required and that retransmission of the previously-transmitted data is to be delayed until it is established that retransmission is required.” And paragraph [0108], “the transmitter may further store in memory (e.g. in the retransmission buffer) data related to the deactivated HARQ process, when an ALMOST-ACK is received for the data. In some embodiments, if, following the ALMOST-ACK signal (e.g. after a given time interval elapses), the transmitter receives no RENACK signal, the transmitter may discard the retransmission buffer…When a deactivated HARQ process can no longer be referenced by the signaling, the deactivated HARQ process may be flushed from memory.” The ALMOST-ACK is used by the base station so that the UE may make a decision on retransmission. If the UE does not receive the RENACK for retransmission after the ALMOST-ACK the deactivated HARQ gets deleted.)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ye’s HARQ feedback function process with Stephenne’s memory clearing. One would have been motivated to do this to reduce memory usage and prevents the usage of outdated information.
Regarding claim 6 Ye discloses:
after the terminal device receives the downlink data, disabling HARQ feedback, (Paragraph [0099], “In some embodiments, for a HARQ process in the second set of HARQ processes with semi-statically enabled HARQ feedback, DCI 605 may be configured to disable a HARQ feedback for a DL transmission.”)
Ye does not disclose:
feeding back HARQ feedback information of the downlink data at an indicated position, wherein the control command is a control command for downlink transmission, and the scheduled data supports the HARQ feedback function;
or, …, disabling HARQ feedback, and clearing data cache in a HARQ process corresponding to the downlink data, wherein the control command is the control command for downlink transmission, and the scheduled data does not support the HARQ feedback function.
Stephenne discloses:
after the terminal device receives downlink data, feeding back HARQ feedback information of the downlink data at an indicated position, wherein the control command is a control command for downlink transmission, and the scheduled data supports the HARQ feedback function; ()
or, … and clearing data cache in a HARQ process corresponding to the downlink data, wherein the control command is the control command for downlink transmission, and the scheduled data does not support the HARQ feedback function. (Paragraph [0108], “the transmitter may further store in memory (e.g. in the retransmission buffer) data related to the deactivated HARQ process, when an ALMOST-ACK is received for the data. In some embodiments, if, following the ALMOST-ACK signal (e.g. after a given time interval elapses), the transmitter receives no RENACK signal, the transmitter may discard the retransmission buffer…When a deactivated HARQ process can no longer be referenced by the signaling, the deactivated HARQ process may be flushed from memory.”)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ye’s HARQ feedback function process with Stephenne’s memory clearing. One would have been motivated to do this to reduce memory usage and prevents the usage of outdated information.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Loehr et al. (US 20160330698 A1) discloses after transmitting an uplink data transmission the UE receives a NACK from the network and retransmits the data. This is relevant for claim 5 (Paragraph [0101], “This is illustrated in FIG. 9, in which within the bundle data transmitted in the first four subframes 905 an error is detected. Accordingly, a negative acknowledgement (NACK) is transmitted from the network to the terminal. After receiving the negative acknowledgement, the terminal retransmits the data of all four subframes 905 in a new bundle of TTIs within subframes 915”).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NAM P CAO whose telephone number is (571)270-0614. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5.
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, Jae Y Lee can be reached at 5712703936. 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.
/NAM P. CAO/Examiner, Art Unit 2479 /JAE Y LEE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2479
Prosecution Insights