www.uspto.gov
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and TrademarkOffice
`Address; COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
`
`16/636,243
`
`02/03/2020
`
`Tomoya NUNOME
`
`733456.595USPC
`
`1614
`
`Seed IP Law Group LLP/Panasonic (PIPCA)
`701 5th Avenue, Suite 5400
`Seattle, WA 98104
`
`LEE, CHI HO A
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`ART UNIT
`
`2472
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`10/08/2021
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
`following e-mail address(es):
`USPTOeAction @ SeedIP.com
`
`pairlinkdktg @seedip.com
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`1-9 is/are pending in the application.
`)
`Claim(s)
`5a) Of the above claim(s) ___ is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`C} Claim(s)
`is/are allowed.
`Claim(s) 1-9 is/are rejected.
`S)
`) © Claim(s)____is/are objected to.
`Cj) Claim(s
`are subjectto restriction and/or election requirement
`)
`S)
`* If any claims have been determined allowable, you maybeeligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init_events/pph/index.jsp or send an inquiry to PPHfeedback@uspto.gov.
`
`) )
`
`Application Papers
`10) The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`11)0) The drawing(s) filedon__ is/are: a)(J accepted or b)() objected to by the Examiner.
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121 (d).
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`12)1) Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d)or (f).
`Certified copies:
`c)Z None ofthe:
`b)() Some**
`a)C All
`1.2 Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`2.1.) Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`3.1.) Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been receivedin this National Stage
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`* See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`Attachment(s)
`
`1)
`
`Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`
`Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`2)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3) (J Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`(Qj Other:
`
`4)
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mail Date 20211005
`
`Application No.
`Applicant(s)
`16/636,243
`NUNOME etal.
`
`Office Action Summary Art Unit|AIA (FITF) StatusExaminer
`ANDREW LEE
`2472
`Yes
`
`
`
`-- The MAILING DATEofthis communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address --
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLYIS SET TO EXPIRE 3 MONTHS FROM THE MAILING
`DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available underthe provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, may a reply betimely filed after SIX (6) MONTHSfrom the mailing
`date of this communication.
`If NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHSfrom the mailing date of this communication.
`-
`- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133}.
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, evenif timely filed, may reduce any earned patent term
`adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`
`1) Responsive to communication(s) filed on 02/03/2020.
`C} A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/werefiled on
`
`2a)L) This action is FINAL. 2b)¥)This action is non-final.
`3)02 An election was madeby the applicant in responseto a restriction requirement set forth during the interview
`on
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`4\0) Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`closed in accordance with the practice under Exparte Quayle, 1935 C.D. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/636,243
`Art Unit: 2472
`
`Page 2
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`Notice of Pre-AlA 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-AlA), second paragraph:
`The specification shall conclude with one or moreclaims particularly pointing out and distinctly
`claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
`
`3.
`
`Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AlA), 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 2 recites the limitation "the number of times a demodulation error"in line 3.
`
`Thereis insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`4.
`
`The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all
`
`obviousnessrejections setforth 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.
`
`5.
`
`Claims 1, 3-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WU
`
`PG PUB 2018/0332568 in view of KINI et al PG PUB 2020/0059327.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/636,243
`Art Unit: 2472
`
`Page 3
`
`Re Claims 1 and 9, WU teaches a UE (a circuitry and a transmitter) for
`
`generating at least one HARQ feedback message (one or more responsesignals)
`
`[0029] for respective information indicating a size (a parameter) of a corresponding one
`
`of the plurality of CBG sets (the respective code block groups) for generating a plurality
`
`of DCls [0021] wherein the UE collectively transmits at least one NACK to the network
`
`device (See figure 1). WU etal fails to explicitly teach “a value of the parameter...a first
`
`granularity coarser than a second granularity in units of the code block groups.”.
`
`However, KINI et al teaches a multi-bit HARQ feedbackallows for CB level granularity
`
`for retransmission where the granularity means the number of CBG(s) included in each
`
`bit of the multi-bit HARQ feedback [0085, 0138]. One skilled in the art would have been
`
`motivated to have applied the CBG granularity level based on the multi-bit HARQ
`
`feedback to have scheduled only CBG(s) needed for retransmission as opposedto all
`
`CBSsin the TD thereby minimizing resources. Therefore it would have been obvious to
`
`one skilled in the art to have combined the teachings.
`
`Re Claims 3-5, KINI et al teaches the BS can dynamically configure/assign the
`
`WTRU with a total number of CBG(s) for the TB.
`
`Re Claim 6, WU etal teachesthe plurality of CBG sets are associated with a
`
`plurality of cumulative indices where the total index is a total DAI; the network can
`
`configure different combinations of the indices which are consecutive [0026, 0030].
`
`Re Claims 7, 8, WU et al teaches the one or moreindicesare cyclically providing
`
`a plurality of candidate valued for the parameter; the network configures the different
`
`sizes (the first granularity) in the first cycle or initial assignment of the CBG(s), in view of
`
`KINI et al, can by dynamically change the number of CBG(s) based on the multi-bit
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/636,243
`Art Unit: 2472
`
`Page 4
`
`feedback message a second assignment or a second cycle wherein the number of of
`
`CBG(s)differ between the different combination of the indices which are
`
`consecutive/cumulative.
`
`6.
`
`Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WU PG PUB
`
`2018/0332568in view of KINI et al PG PUB 2020/0059327applied to Claim 1 above
`
`and further in view of KIM et al PG PUB 2019/0020445.
`
`Re Claim 2, WU etal in view of KINI et al teaches the BS configures a WTRU
`
`with a parameter N indicative of number of number of CBG(s) (the value of the
`
`parameter) but fails to explicitly teach “a number of times a demodulation error for the
`
`downlink control signal is allowed.”. However, KIM et al teaches a transmitting side
`
`performs retransmission of the CBG(s) until a maximum retransmission countis
`
`reached [0109]. One skilled in the art would have been motivated to incorporated the
`
`“maximum retransmission count” (the number of times a demodulation error) to limit the
`
`number of retransmission. Therefore it would have been obvious to one skilled in the
`
`art to have combined the teachings.
`
`7.
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
`
`examiner should be directed to ANDREW LEE whosetelephone number is (571)272-
`
`3130. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30AM-5PM ET.
`
`Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video
`
`conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-basedcollaboration tool. To schedule an
`
`interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request
`
`(AIR) at http:/Avww.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/636,243
`Art Unit: 2472
`
`Page 5
`
`If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's
`
`supervisor, Hassan Kizou can be reached on 571272. 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:/Awww.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-
`
`center for more information about Patent Center and
`
`https:/Awww.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information aboutfiling 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.
`
`/CHI HO A LEE/
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2472
`
`