DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. 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 § 112
2. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
3. Claims 11, 14, 17, 24, 27, and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 11 recites “a minimum number of symbols between the second DCI and a HARQ-ACK transmission occasion”. Claim does not define whether the claimed HARQ-ACK transmission occasion is the first HARQ_ACK transmission time or the second HARQ-ACK transmission time. Therefore, it is not clear whether the minimum symbol gap is between the second DCI and the first HARQ_ACK transmission time or between the second DCI and the second HARQ_ACK transmission time.
Claim 24 recites limitation similar to claim 11 and thereby, is rejected for the reasons discussed above with respect to claim 11.
Claim 14 recites “the second DCI includes a field that indicates whether a cancelation of a HARQ-ACK transmission applies to a HARQ-ACK of a same priority or a HARQ-ACK of a lower priority”. “A HARQ-ACK of a same priority” must have multiple HARQ-ACKs having same priority. Claim does not define the HARQ-ACKs that have the same priority. Similarly, lower priority HARQ-ACK must have a corresponding higher priority HARQ-ACK and claim does not define any of the lower priority HARQ-ACK and higher priority HARQ-ACK.
Claim 27 recites limitation similar to claim 14 and thereby, is rejected for the reasons discussed above with respect to claim 14.
Claim 17 recites, “the second DCI includes a field that indicates whether a cancelation of a HARQ-ACK transmission applies to HARQ-ACKs for a same control resource set (CORESET) pool index or is able to apply to HARQ-ACKs for different CORESET pool indices”. Claim does not specify the HARQ ACKs associated with same CORESET pool index and HARQ ACKs associated with different CORESET pool indices.
Claim 30 recites limitation similar to claim 17 and thereby, is rejected for the reasons discussed above with respect to claim 17.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
4. 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.
5. Claims 1-10, 12, 18-23, and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Li et al (US 20230091988, hereinafter referred to as Li).
Re claim 1, Li teaches an apparatus for wireless communication at a user equipment (UE) (UE 300, Fig. 3), comprising:
(i) one or more memories (322, Fig. 3) (Par 0036-0038); and
(ii) one or more processors (321, Fig. 3), coupled to the one or more memories (322, Fig. 3) (Par 0036-0038), individually or collectively configured to cause the UE to:
(iii) receive a first downlink control information (DCI) (First DCI) that indicates a first slot offset (first K value) between the first DCI and a first transmission time for a first hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) acknowledgement (ACK) (First DCI including a first k value) (Fig. 4-7, Par 0040-0047, Par 0049-0051, Par 0061-0065, Par 0073);
(iv) receive a second DCI (second DCI) that indicates a second slot offset (second K value) between the second DCI and a second transmission time for a second HARQ-ACK (Second DCI including a second k value) (Fig. 4-7, Par 0040-0047, Par 0049-0051, Par 0061-0065, Par 0068, Par 0073); and
(v) transmit a merged HARQ-ACK that combines the first HARQ-ACK and the second HARQ-ACK in a slot that is the second slot offset after the second DCI (transmitting a combined HARQ-ACK after the second K value/offset included in the second DCI) (Fig. 4-7, Par 0040-0047, Par 0049-0051, Par 0061-0065, Par 0068, Par 0073).
Re claims 2, 19, Li teaches that the second DCI includes an indication that a transmission of the first HARQ-ACK is canceled for a slot at the first slot offset after the first DCI (Discarding first HARQ feedback based on NFI included in the second DCI) (Par 0067-0068, Par 0072).
Re claims 3, 21, Li teaches that the indication is included in a field that is specific to indicating a canceled HARQ-ACK transmission (Discarding first HARQ feedback based on NFI field included in the second DCI) (Par 0067-0068, Par 0072).
Re claim 4, Li teaches to receive a radio resource control message that configures the field for a DCI format (RRC message configuring enhanced HARQ-ACK feedback mode) (Fig. 4, Par 0004-0005, Par 0040-0041, Par 0056).
Re claim 5, Li teaches that the indication is included in a k1 field (The second k value indicates to send a combined HARQ feedback) (Fig. 4-7, Par 0040-0046, Par 0049-0051, Par 0061-0065, Par 0073).
Re claim 6, Li teaches that the indication is included in a physical uplink control channel resource indicator field (k value indicates PUCCH resource for transmitting HARQ feedback) (Fig. 4-7, Par 0042-0047, Par 0051, Par 0059, Par 0065, Par 0072-0077).
Re claims 7, 20, Li teaches that the second DCI indicates that a transmission of the first HARQ-ACK is canceled for a next slot scheduled for a HARQ-ACK transmission (Discarding first HARQ feedback based on NFI included in the second DCI) (Par 0067-0068, Par 0072).
Re claim 8, Li teaches that the second DCI indicates which slot scheduled for a HARQ-ACK transmission is canceled (Discarding first HARQ feedback scheduled in a slot (indicated by the first k value) based on NFI included in the second DCI) (Fig. 4-7, Par 0042-0047, Par 0051, Par 0059, Par 0067-0068, Par 0072).
Re claims 9, 22, Li teaches that the second DCI indicates which single HARQ-ACK transmission is canceled within a specified number of scheduled HARQ-ACK transmission occasions (HARQ -ACK feedback corresponding to the first DCI is cancelled) (Fig. 4-7, Par 0042-0047, Par 0051, Par 0059, Par 0065, Par 0067-006, Par 0072-0077).
Re claims 10, 23, Li teaches that the second DCI indicates two or more scheduled HARQ-ACK transmission occasions that are canceled (DCI-3 causes to combine HARQ-ACK feedback for PDSCH1-3) (Fig. 7, Par 0072-0073).
Re claims 12, 25, Li teaches to transmit the merged HARQ-ACK based at least in part on a priority of the first HARQ-ACK being a same priority as a priority of the second HARQ-ACK (Merging same priority HARQ-ACKs) (Fig. 4-7, Par 0040-0047, Par 0049-0051, Par 0061-0065, Par 0068, Par 0073).
Re claim 18, Li teaches an apparatus for wireless communication at a network entity (base station 200, Fig. 2), comprising:
(i) one or more memories (222, Fig. 2) (Par 0034-0035); and
(ii) one or more processors (221, Fig. 2), coupled to the one or more memories (222, Fig. 2) (Par 0034-0035), individually or collectively configured to cause the network entity to:
(iii) transmit a first downlink control information (DCI) (First DCI) that indicates a first slot offset (first K value) between the first DCI and a first transmission time for a first hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) acknowledgement (ACK) (First DCI including a first k value) (Fig. 4-7, Par 0040-0047, Par 0049-0051, Par 0061-0065, Par 0073);
(iv) transmit a second DCI (second DCI) that indicates a second slot offset (second K value) between the second DCI and a second transmission time for a second HARQ-ACK (Second DCI including a second k value) (Fig. 4-7, Par 0040-0047, Par 0049-0051, Par 0061-0065, Par 0068, Par 0073); and
(v) receive a merged HARQ-ACK that combines the first HARQ-ACK and the second HARQ-ACK in a slot that is the second slot offset after the second DCI (transmitting a combined HARQ-ACK after the second K value/offset included in the second DCI) (Fig. 4-7, Par 0040-0047, Par 0049-0051, Par 0061-0065, Par 0068, Par 0073).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. 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.
7. Claims 11 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Nimbalker et al (US 20230396401 A1, hereinafter referred to as Nimbalker).
Re claims 11, 24, Li does not explicitly disclose that the UE is configured with a minimum number of symbols between the second DCI and a HARQ-ACK transmission occasion to be canceled.
Nimbalker teaches that the UE is configured with a minimum number of symbols between the second DCI and a HARQ-ACK transmission occasion to be canceled (HARQ-ACK occasion canceled for insufficient processing time) (Par 0011-0016).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Li by including the step that the UE is configured with a minimum number of symbols between the second DCI and a HARQ-ACK transmission occasion to be canceled, as taught by Nimbalker for the purpose of improving network operations by efficiently scheduling a UE, as taught by Nimbalker (Par 0046).
8. Claims 13 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of El Hamss et al (US 20220078768 A1, hereinafter referred to as El Hamss).
Re claims 13, 26, Li does not explicitly disclose to transmit the merged HARQ-ACK based at least in part on a priority of the first HARQ- ACK being a lower priority than a priority of the second HARQ-ACK.
El Hamss teaches to transmit the merged HARQ-ACK based at least in part on a priority of the first HARQ- ACK being a lower priority than a priority of the second HARQ-ACK (Multiplexing low priority HARQ feedback with high priority HARQ feedback) (Fig. 2-3, Par 0087-0090, Par 0193-0194, Par 0250-0251, Par 0283-0286).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Li by including the step to transmit the merged HARQ-ACK based at least in part on a priority of the first HARQ- ACK being a lower priority than a priority of the second HARQ-ACK, as taught by El Hamss for the purpose of providing enhanced control signaling corresponding to the type of service to improve communication efficiency, as taught by El Hamss (Par 0083-0084).
9. Claims 14 and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Blankenship et al (US 20230283415 A1, hereinafter referred to as Blankenship).
Re claims 14, 27, Li does not explicitly disclose that the second DCI includes a field that indicates whether a cancelation of a HARQ-ACK transmission applies to a HARQ-ACK of a same priority or a HARQ-ACK of a lower priority.
Blankenship teaches that the second DCI includes a field that indicates whether a cancelation of a HARQ-ACK transmission applies to a HARQ-ACK of a same priority or a HARQ-ACK of a lower priority (Fig. 6-8, Par 0070-0076, Par 0081, Par 0096-0102, Par 0114-0117, Par 0122-0126).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Li by including the step that the second DCI includes a field that indicates whether a cancelation of a HARQ-ACK transmission applies to a HARQ-ACK of a same priority or a HARQ-ACK of a lower priority, as taught by Blankenship for the purpose of triggering the enhanced Type-3 HARQ codebook that accounts for the different priority indices of HARQ-ACK bits, as taught by Blankenship (Par 0036).
10. Claims 15-16 and 28-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Liu et al (US 20220294591 A1, hereinafter referred to as Liu).
Re claims 15, 28, Li does not explicitly disclose to transmit the merged HARQ-ACK based at least in part on a control resource set (CORESET) pool index associated with the first HARQ-ACK being for a same CORESET pool index as a CORESET pool index associated with the second HARQ-ACK.
Liu teaches to transmit the merged HARQ-ACK based at least in part on a control resource set (CORESET) pool index associated with the first HARQ-ACK being for a same CORESET pool index as a CORESET pool index associated with the second HARQ-ACK (Joint HARQ feedback for the same CORESET index) (Fig. 6-8, Par 0073-0074, Par 0076, Par 0083-0086).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Li by including the step to transmit the merged HARQ-ACK based at least in part on a control resource set (CORESET) pool index associated with the first HARQ-ACK being for a same CORESET pool index as a CORESET pool index associated with the second HARQ-ACK, as taught by Liu for the purpose of efficiently transmitting multi PDCCH based HARQ feedback, as taught by Liu (Par 0072).
Re claims 16, 29, Li does not explicitly disclose to transmit the merged HARQ-ACK independent of a control resource set (CORESET) pool index associated with the first HARQ-ACK and a CORESET pool index associated with the second HARQ-ACK.
Liu teaches to transmit the merged HARQ-ACK independent of a control resource set (CORESET) pool index associated with the first HARQ-ACK and a CORESET pool index associated with the second HARQ-ACK (Joint HARQ feedback is transmitted when CORESETs are not configured with any index value) (Par 0073, Par 0083).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Li by including the step to transmit the merged HARQ-ACK independent of a control resource set (CORESET) pool index associated with the first HARQ-ACK and a CORESET pool index associated with the second HARQ-ACK, as taught by Liu for the purpose of efficiently transmitting multi PDCCH based HARQ feedback, as taught by Liu (Par 0072).
11. Claims 17 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Chen et al (US 20210367740 A1, hereinafter referred to as Chen).
Re claims 17, 30, Li does not explicitly disclose that the second DCI includes a field that indicates whether a cancelation of a HARQ-ACK transmission applies to HARQ-ACKs for a same control resource set (CORESET) pool index or is able to apply to HARQ-ACKs for different CORESET pool indices.
Chen teaches that the second DCI includes a field that indicates whether a cancelation of a HARQ-ACK transmission applies to HARQ-ACKs for a same control resource set (CORESET) pool index or is able to apply to HARQ-ACKs for different CORESET pool indices (dropping HARQ feedback based on CORESET index) (Fig. 6, Par 0066-0071, Par 0086-0089, Par 0119-0120, Par 0199).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Li by including the step the second DCI includes a field that indicates whether a cancelation of a HARQ-ACK transmission applies to HARQ-ACKs for a same control resource set (CORESET) pool index or is able to apply to HARQ-ACKs for different CORESET pool indices, as taught by Chen for the purpose of efficiently transmitting multiple pieces of ACK/NACK information on the same time-domain resource, as taught by Chen (Par 0004-0005).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HARUN UR R CHOWDHURY whose telephone number is (571)270-3895. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9AM-5PM.
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, Kwang B Yao can be reached at 5712723182. 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.
/HARUN CHOWDHURY/Examiner, Art Unit 2473
Prosecution Insights