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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-20 are pending in the instant application.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 11/07/2024 and 03/19/2025 were filed before the mailing of a First Office Action on the Merits. The information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
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.
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang et al. US 20240389111 A1 (hereinafter referred to as Yang) in view of Oh et al. US 20220240294 A1 (hereinafter referred to as Oh).
Regarding claim 1, Yang discloses a method performed by a terminal in a wireless communication system, the method comprising: receiving, from a base station (Yang: ¶ 158, the UE may receive information from the BS through higher layer signaling (V320)), configuration information on a maximum number of transport blocks (TBs) included in a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) (Yang: ¶ 0115, When the maximum number of TBs capable of being transmitted on one PDSCH is set to 2 (for example, when the high layer parameter maxNrofCode WordsScheduledByDCI is configured such that transmission of (up to) two TBs over one PDSCH is allowed)); receiving, from the base station (Yang: ¶ 158), downlink control information (DCI) including a redundancy version (RV) field (Yang: ¶ 0005, The DCI may include (i) a first modulation and coding scheme (MCS) field for first transport blocks (TBs) of the N PDSCHs and (ii) a first redundancy version (RV) field including N bits each indicating an RV for each of the first TBs of the N PDSCHs).
Yang does not explicitly disclose identifying at least one disabled TB among the TBs included in the PDSCH based on a size of the RV field; and receiving, from the base station, the at least one disabled TB on the PDSCH.
However, in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, Oh teaches identifying at least one disabled TB among the TBs included in the PDSCH based on a size of the RV field (Oh: ¶ 0361, when an MCS value and an RV value indicated with respect to transport block 2 of ith PDSCH are I and R (e.g., 1=26, R=1), respectively, the UE may determine that transmission (or reception) of transport block 2 corresponding to MCS and RV indicated by the I and R from among transport blocks transmitted via ith PDSCH is disabled… values of I and R indicating that a transport block is disabled… may be configured with, by an upper signal, values of I and R indicating that a transport block is disabled); and receiving, from the base station, the at least one disabled TB on the PDSCH (Oh: ¶ 0361, the UE may determine that transmission (or reception) of transport block 2 corresponding to MCS and RV…is disabled, and may not receive the transport block).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use these above mentioned features disclosed by Oh with the system disclosed by Yang, since doing so would have achieved the desirable result of TB enabling/disabling determined without added DCI bits, preserving PDCCH reception performance.
Regarding claim 2, Yang in view of Oh teaches the method of claim 1.
Yang further teaches wherein the configuration information further includes information on the size of the RV field (Yang: ¶¶ 0121-0122, if fewer than K PDSCHs are scheduled by multi-TTI DCI, one 2-bit RV field may be configured/indicated for each PDSCH… If more than K PDSCHs are scheduled by the multi-TTI DCI, one 1-bit RV field may be configured/indicated for each PDSCH… the K value may be configured by RRC).
Regarding claim 3 Yang in view of Oh teaches the method of claim 1.
Yang further teaches wherein the RV field includes a plurality of RV blocks corresponding to each of the TBs included in the PDSCH (Yang: ¶ 0131, Among the total N RV bits of the 1st RV field, an n-th bit, which is denoted as B.sub.n-1, may be the RV for TB1 of PDSCH #n (e.g., B.sub.n-1 indicates whether the RV index of TB1 is RV0 or RV2)). Yang does not explicitly disclose wherein the at least one disabled TB is identified based on an identifier (ID) of an RV block of the plurality of RV blocks.
However, in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, Oh teaches wherein the at least one disabled TB is identified based on an identifier (ID) of an RV block of the plurality of RV blocks (Oh: ¶ 0370, the UE determines that an RV value of each of transport blocks 1 and 2 transmitted via ith PDSCH is 2*ith bit in a sequential order starting from an MSB to an LSB of each of RV1 and RV2 fields of DCI. In other words, first and second bits among an RVI value having 4 bits are an RV value of transport block 1 of a first PDSCH, and third and fourth bits among the RV1 value are an RV value of transport block 1 of a second PDSC).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the multi-transport block (TB) communication scheme of Yang by incorporating the explicit bit-to-TB mapping logic taught by Oh, achieving the desirable result of optimizing DCI overhead and signaling efficiency.
Regarding claim 4, modified Yang teaches the method of claim 2.
Oh further teaches wherein the information on the size of the RV field is numberOfBitsForRV-DCI-1-3 which includes at most 2 bits (Oh: ¶ 0369, an RV value (or the number of RV bits to be applied) with respect to ith PDSCH scheduled by the DCI may be determined differently or applied differently. In a case where a size of an RV field of the DCI is Nmax or N2 bits, if the number of PDSCHs, N, that is actually scheduled by the DCI is equal to or smaller than N3, it may be determined that an RV value of each PDSCH is indicated by 2 bits in a sequential order starting from an MSB to an LSB of the RV field).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to incorporate Oh’s above mentioned Redundancy Version (RV) field specification with the system disclosed by Yang to achieve the desirable result of further detailing RV filed size, leading to maximized DCI payload efficiency.
Regarding claim 5, Yang in view of Oh teaches the method of claim 1.
Yang further teaches wherein the DCI further includes a modulation and coding scheme (MCS) field (Yang: ¶ 0006, An index of the specific MCS may be 26, and an index of the specific RV may be 2), and wherein a value of an MCS field corresponding to the at least one disabled TB is 26 (Yang: 0132, if a combination of a specific MCS index (e.g., 26) and an RV index (e.g., X=2 or 3) is indicated by the corresponding DCI, the TB disabling operation may be defined to be performed).
Regarding claim 6, Yang discloses a method performed by a base station in a wireless communication system, the method comprising: transmitting, to a terminal, configuration information on a maximum number of transport blocks (TBs) included in a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) (Yang: ¶ 0018, provided herein is a method of transmitting a signal by a base station (BS) in a wireless communication system…transmitting DCI for scheduling N PDSCHs through a single PDCCH; and transmitting the N PDSCHs based on the DCI. The DCI may include (i) a first MCS field for first TBs of the N PDSCHs and (ii) a first RV field including N bits each indicating an RV for each of the first TBs of the N PDSCHs.); transmitting, to the terminal, downlink control information (DCI) including a redundancy version (RV) field; and transmitting, to the terminal, the TBs included in the PDSCH, wherein at least one disabled TB among the TBs included in the PDSCH is identified based on a size of the RV field (Yang: ¶ 0018, The BS may inform a UE that all of the first TBs are disabled for an entirety of the N PDSCHs by setting the first MCS field for the first TBs of the N PDSCHs to a specific MCS and setting all of the N bits included in the first RV field for the first TBs of the N PDSCHs to only a specific RV).
Regarding claim 7, Yang discloses the method of claim 6, wherein the configuration information further includes information on the size of the RV field (Yang: ¶¶ 0121-0122, if fewer than K PDSCHs are scheduled by multi-TTI DCI, one 2-bit RV field may be configured/indicated for each PDSCH… If more than K PDSCHs are scheduled by the multi-TTI DCI, one 1-bit RV field may be configured/indicated for each PDSCH… the K value may be configured by RRC).
Regarding claim 8, Yang discloses the method of claim 6, wherein the RV field includes a plurality of RV blocks corresponding to each of the TBs included in the PDSCH (Yang: ¶ 0131, Among the total N RV bits of the 1st RV field, an n-th bit, which is denoted as B.sub.n-1, may be the RV for TB1 of PDSCH #n (e.g., B.sub.n-1 indicates whether the RV index of TB1 is RV0 or RV2)), and wherein the at least one disabled TB is based on an identifier (ID) of an RV block of the plurality of RV blocks. Yang does not explicitly disclose wherein the at least one disabled TB is identified based on an identifier (ID) of an RV block of the plurality of RV blocks.
However, in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention, Oh teaches wherein the at least one disabled TB is identified based on an identifier (ID) of an RV block of the plurality of RV blocks (Oh: ¶ 0370, the UE determines that an RV value of each of transport blocks 1 and 2 transmitted via ith PDSCH is 2*ith bit in a sequential order starting from an MSB to an LSB of each of RV1 and RV2 fields of DCI. In other words, first and second bits among an RVI value having 4 bits are an RV value of transport block 1 of a first PDSCH, and third and fourth bits among the RV1 value are an RV value of transport block 1 of a second PDSC).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the multi-transport block (TB) communication scheme of Yang by incorporating the explicit bit-to-TB mapping logic taught by Oh, achieving the desirable result of optimizing DCI overhead and signaling efficiency.
Regarding claim 9, Yang discloses the method of claim 7.
Oh further teaches wherein the information on the size of the RV field is numberOfBitsForRV-DCI-1-3 which includes at most 2 bits (Oh: ¶ 0369, an RV value (or the number of RV bits to be applied) with respect to ith PDSCH scheduled by the DCI may be determined differently or applied differently. In a case where a size of an RV field of the DCI is Nmax or N2 bits, if the number of PDSCHs, N, that is actually scheduled by the DCI is equal to or smaller than N3, it may be determined that an RV value of each PDSCH is indicated by 2 bits in a sequential order starting from an MSB to an LSB of the RV field).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to incorporate Oh’s above mentioned Redundancy Version (RV) field specification with the system disclosed by Yang to achieve the desirable result of further detailing RV filed size, leading to maximized DCI payload efficiency.
Regarding claim 10, Yang discloses the method of claim 6, wherein the DCI further includes a modulation and coding scheme (MCS) field (Yang: ¶ 0006, An index of the specific MCS may be 26, and an index of the specific RV may be 2), and wherein a value of an MCS field corresponding to the at least one disabled TB is 26 (Yang: 0132, if a combination of a specific MCS index (e.g., 26) and an RV index (e.g., X=2 or 3) is indicated by the corresponding DCI, the TB disabling operation may be defined to be performed).
Regarding claim 11, Yang discloses a terminal in a wireless communication system, the terminal comprising: a transceiver; and at least one processor coupled with the transceiver and configured to (Fig. 15, ¶ 0195, may include one or more processors 102 and one or more memories 104 and additionally further include one or more transceivers): receive, from a base station, configuration information on a maximum number of transport blocks (TBs) included in a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH), receive, from the base station, downlink control information (DCI) including a redundancy version (RV) field, identify at least one disabled TB among the TBs included in the PDSCH based on a size of the RV field, and receive, from the base station, the at least one disabled TB on the PDSCH (Yang: ¶ 0195, may be configured to implement the descriptions, functions, procedures, proposals, methods, and/or operational flowcharts disclosed in this document. ¶ 0016, provided herein is a UE configured to perform the signal reception method described above.).
Features of claims 12-20 correspond to features of claims 2-10, respectively, and are therefore rejected using the same rationale(s) and same prior art(s) applied to claims 2-10, above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TEMITOPE O. FOLAYAN whose telephone number is (571)270-0630. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 a.m - 5 p.m. ET..
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, Edan Orgad can be reached at (571) 272-7884. 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.
/T.O.F./Examiner, Art Unit 2414
/EDAN ORGAD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2414
Prosecution Insights