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
Claims 1 – 20 are presented for examination.
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 120 and under 35 U.S.C. 365(c) is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 01/27/2025 was received. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the language “The subject disclosure relates to a method and apparatus for reducing a one-shot HARQ-ACK codebook size” is a purported merit and fails to provide a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent.
Applicant is reminded of the proper content of an abstract of the disclosure.
A patent abstract is a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. The abstract should not refer to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention and should not compare the invention with the prior art.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 1 – 20 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 1 recites the limitation "the PUCCH". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 11 recites the limitation "the PUCCH". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 19 recites the limitation "the PUCCH". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 20 recites the limitation "the PUCCH". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Any claim not addressed above is rejected due to its dependency on a rejected claim
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.
Claims 1 – 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al., U.S. Publication 2020/0358587 (herein Wang I), in view of Wang et al., U.S. Publication 2019/0103943 (herein Wang II).
Regarding claim 1, Wang I teaches: A user equipment (UE) for wireless communication, comprising: at least one memory; and at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory (paragraph 0147) and configured to cause the UE to: receive a first signaling configuring a plurality of carriers, wherein hybrid automatic repeat request-acknowledgement (HARQ-ACK) feedback for the plurality of carriers is transmitted in same physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) (figure 3; 13, element ST102; paragraph 0041, 0042, 0134); receive downlink control information (DCI) requesting HARQ-ACK feedback for one or more carriers of the plurality of carriers (figure 3, paragraph 0041, 0042), the DCI including a bitmap identifying one or more HARQ-ACK processes (paragraph 0028, 0120); transmit the HARQ-ACK codebook in the PUCCH (figure 3; paragraph 0041 – 0043). Wang I does not explicitly teach: generate a HARQ-ACK codebook for the one or more HARQ-ACK processes indicated by the bitmap, wherein the HARQ-ACK codebook includes the HARQ-ACK feedback for the one or more carriers of the plurality of carriers.
Wang II teaches: generate a HARQ-ACK codebook for the one or more HARQ-ACK processes indicated by the bitmap, wherein the HARQ-ACK codebook includes the HARQ-ACK feedback for the one or more carriers of the plurality of carriers (paragraph 137, 138).
One of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the invention, would find it obvious to combine the teaching of Wang I: receive downlink control information requesting HARQ-ACK feedback for one or more carriers of the plurality of carriers; with the teaching of Wang II: generate a HARQ-ACK codebook for the purpose of managing HARQ-ACK in communications (paragraph 0149). Downlink control information is are well-known in the art of wireless communications (abstract). A HARQ-ACK codebook is a well-known design choice in the art (abstract). One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the use of well-known design choice would yield a predictable result. And in view of the motivation previously stated above, for claim 1, the claim is rejected.
Regarding claim 2, Wang I and Wang II teach the limitations of the parent claim. Wang I additionally teaches: the one or more carriers of the plurality of carriers are indicated by a first indicator in the DCI (paragraph 0006, 0007). And in view of the motivation previously stated above, for claim 1, the claim is rejected.
Regarding claim 3, Wang I and Wang II teach the limitations of the parent claim. Wang I additionally teaches: a presence of the first indicator is configured by Radio Resource Control (RRC) signaling (paragraph 0036, 0054). And in view of the motivation previously stated above, for claim 1, the claim is rejected.
Regarding claim 4, Wang I and Wang II teach the limitations of the parent claim. Wang I additionally teaches: the first indicator is the bitmap, and wherein a length of the bitmap is equal to a total number of the plurality of carriers and each bit of the bitmap corresponds to one carrier of the plurality of carriers (figure 1, 3, 4). And in view of the motivation previously stated above, for claim 1, the claim is rejected.
Regarding claim 5, Wang I and Wang II teach the limitations of the parent claim. Wang I additionally teaches: a bit in the bitmap is set to a predefined state for requesting the HARQ-ACK feedback for the corresponding carrier (figure 1, 3, 4). And in view of the motivation previously stated above, for claim 1, the claim is rejected.
Regarding claim 6, Wang I and Wang II teach the limitations of the parent claim. Wang I additionally teaches: the plurality of carriers are divided into one or more carrier groups and the first indicator is the bitmap, and a length of the bitmap is equal to a total number of the one or more carrier groups with each bit corresponding to one carrier group (figure 1, 3, 4). And in view of the motivation previously stated above, for claim 1, the claim is rejected.
Regarding claim 7, Wang I and Wang II teach the limitations of the parent claim. Wang I additionally teaches: a bit in the bitmap is set to a predefined state for requesting the HARQ-ACK feedback for the corresponding carrier group (figure 1, 3, 4). And in view of the motivation previously stated above, for claim 1, the claim is rejected.
Regarding claim 8, Wang I and Wang II teach the limitations of the parent claim. Wang I additionally teaches: the one or more carriers of the plurality of carriers have contiguous carrier indexes and the first indicator indicates an index of the first carrier of the one or more carriers and a total number of the one or more carriers (figure 1, 3, 4; paragraph 0069 – 0071). And in view of the motivation previously stated above, for claim 1, the claim is rejected.
Regarding claim 9, Wang I and Wang II teach the limitations of the parent claim. Wang I additionally teaches: the first indicator comprises 2 bits, where n is a total number of the plurality of carriers (figure 1, 3, 4; paragraph 0069 – 0071). And in view of the motivation previously stated above, for claim 1, the claim is rejected.
Regarding claim 10, Wang I and Wang II teach the limitations of the parent claim. Wang I additionally teaches: wherein the one or more carriers of the plurality of carriers is determined based on counter Downlink Assignment Index (DAI) and total DAI (figure 3; paragraph 0041 – 0043). And in view of the motivation previously stated above, for claim 1, the claim is rejected.
Regarding claim 11, Wang I teaches: A base station for wireless communication (abstract; figure 10), comprising: at least one memory; and at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory (paragraph 0147) and configured to cause the base station to: transmit a first signaling configuring a plurality of carriers, wherein hybrid automatic repeat request-acknowledgement (HARQ-ACK) feedback for the plurality of carriers is transmitted in same physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) (figure 3; 13, element ST102; paragraph 0041, 0042, 0134); transmit downlink control information (DCI) requesting HARQ-ACK feedback for one or more carriers of the plurality of carriers, the DCI including a bitmap identifying one or more HARQ-ACK processes (figure 3, paragraph 0041, 0042); and receive a HARQ-ACK codebook for the one or more HARQ-ACK processes in the PUCCH (figure 3; paragraph 0041 – 0043). Wang I does not explicitly teach: wherein the HARQ-ACK codebook comprises the HARQ-ACK feedback for the one or more carriers of the plurality of carriers.
Wang II teaches: wherein the HARQ-ACK codebook comprises the HARQ-ACK feedback for the one or more carriers of the plurality of carriers (paragraph 137, 138). And in view of the motivation previously stated above, for claim 1, the claim is rejected.
Regarding claim 12, Wang I and Wang II teach the limitations of the parent claim. Wang I additionally teaches: the one or more carriers of the plurality of carriers are indicated by a first indicator in the DCI (paragraph 0006, 0007). And in view of the motivation previously stated above, for claim 1, the claim is rejected.
Regarding claim 13, Wang I and Wang II teach the limitations of the parent claim. Wang I additionally teaches: a presence of the first indicator is configured by Radio Resource Control (RRC) signaling (paragraph 0036, 0054). And in view of the motivation previously stated above, for claim 1, the claim is rejected.
Regarding claim 14, Wang I and Wang II teach the limitations of the parent claim. Wang I additionally teaches: the first indicator is the bitmap, and wherein a length of the bitmap is equal to a total number of the plurality of carriers and each bit of the bitmap corresponds to one carrier of the plurality of carriers (figure 1, 3, 4). And in view of the motivation previously stated above, for claim 1, the claim is rejected.
Regarding claim 15, Wang I and Wang II teach the limitations of the parent claim. Wang I additionally teaches: a bit in the bitmap is set to a predefined state for requesting the HARQ-ACK feedback for the corresponding carrier (figure 1, 3, 4). And in view of the motivation previously stated above, for claim 1, the claim is rejected.
Regarding claim 16, Wang I and Wang II teach the limitations of the parent claim. Wang I additionally teaches: the plurality of carriers are divided into one or more carrier groups and the first indicator is the bitmap, and a length of the bitmap is equal to a total number of the one or more carrier groups with each bit corresponding to one carrier group (figure 1, 3, 4). And in view of the motivation previously stated above, for claim 1, the claim is rejected.
Regarding claim 17, Wang I and Wang II teach the limitations of the parent claim. Wang I additionally teaches: a bit in the bitmap is set to a predefined state for requesting the HARQ-ACK feedback for the corresponding carrier group (figure 1, 3, 4). And in view of the motivation previously stated above, for claim 1, the claim is rejected.
Regarding claim 18, Wang I and Wang II teach the limitations of the parent claim. Wang I additionally teaches: the one or more carriers of the plurality of carriers have contiguous carrier indexes and the first indicator indicates an index of the first carrier of the one or more carriers and a total number of the one or more carriers (figure 1, 3, 4; paragraph 0069 – 0071). And in view of the motivation previously stated above, for claim 1, the claim is rejected.
Regarding claim 20, Wang I teaches: a processor for wireless communication (paragraph 0147), comprising: at least one controller coupled with at least one memory and configured to cause the processor to: receive a first signaling configuring a plurality of carriers, wherein hybrid automatic repeat request-acknowledgement (HARQ-ACK) feedback for the plurality of carriers is transmitted in same physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) (figure 3; 13, element ST102; paragraph 0041, 0042, 0134); receive downlink control information (DCI) requesting HARQ-ACK feedback for one or more carriers of the plurality of carriers (figure 3, paragraph 0041, 0042), the DCI including a bitmap identifying one or more HARQ-ACK processes (paragraph 0028, 0120); and transmit the HARQ-ACK codebook in the PUCCH (figure 3; paragraph 0041 – 0043). Wang I does not explicitly teach: generate a HARQ-ACK codebook for the one or more HARQ-ACK processes indicated by the bitmap, wherein the HARQ-ACK codebook includes the HARQ-ACK feedback for the one or more carriers of the plurality of carriers.
Wang II teaches: generate a HARQ-ACK codebook for the one or more HARQ-ACK processes indicated by the bitmap, wherein the HARQ-ACK codebook includes the HARQ-ACK feedback for the one or more carriers of the plurality of carriers (paragraph 137, 138). And in view of the motivation previously stated above, for claim 1, the claim is rejected.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 19 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
LIU; Liqing et al. US 20220201725 A1
NOH; Hoondong et al. US 20200328849 A1
Takeda; Kazuki et al. US 20220201735 A1
PARK; Sungjin et al. US 20200213981 A1
NOH; Hoondong et al. US 20220029746 A1
receive downlink control information (DCI) requesting HARQ-ACK feedback for one or more carriers of the plurality of carriers, the DCI including a bitmap identifying one or more HARQ-ACK processes;
generate a HARQ-ACK codebook for the one or more HARQ-ACK processes indicated by the bitmap;
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL F MCMAHON whose telephone number is (571)270-3232. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 9am - 5pm EST.
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, Mark Featherstone can be reached at (571)270-3750. 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.
/Daniel F. McMahon/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2111