Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (publ)

Patent Trials and Appeals Board

Sep 2, 2021

2020002812 (P.T.A.B. Sep. 2, 2021)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
www.uspto.gov
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
15/300,584 09/29/2016 Tuomas Tirronen 4015-9700 / P47710-US2 8213
24112 7590 09/02/2021
COATS & BENNETT, PLLC
1400 Crescent Green, Suite 300
Cary, NC 27518
EXAMINER
ROUDANI, OUSSAMA
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
2413
MAIL DATE DELIVERY MODE
09/02/2021 PAPER
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.
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________

BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
____________

Ex parte TUOMAS TIRRONEN and YUFEI BLANKENSHIP
____________

Appeal 2020-002812
Application 15/300,584
Technology Center 2400
____________

Before ANTON W. FETTING, ERIC B. CHEN, and
JEREMY J. CURCURI, Administrative Patent Judges.

FETTING, Administrative Patent Judge.

DECISION ON APPEAL

Appeal 2020-002812
Application 15/300,584

2

STATEMENT OF THE CASE1
Tuomas Tirronen and Yufei Blankenship (Appellant2) seek review
under 35 U.S.C. § 134 of a final rejection of claims 1–26, the only claims
pending in the application on appeal. We have jurisdiction over the appeal
pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
This invention is in the context of error control for Long Term
Evolution (LTE) 3 wireless data transmission in which the receiver detects
transmission errors in a message and automatically requests a retransmission
from the transmitter. Such requests are generically referred to as ARQ’s
(automatic repeat requests). More nuanced such requests are generically
referred to as hybrid automatic repeat requests (HARQ). The invention lies
in the protocol created for the response to such an HARQ, which includes
indicating a number of repetitions and then performing that number of
repetitions.
The Appellant invented a retransmission procedure, e.g., an uplink
Hybrid Automatic Repeat Request (HARQ) procedure in a wireless
communication system. Specification 1:8–13.

1 Our decision will make reference to the Appellant’s Appeal Brief (“Appeal
Br.,” filed October 4, 2019) and Reply Brief (“Reply Br.,” filed March 2,
2020), and the Examiner’s Answer (“Ans.,” mailed January 15, 2020), and
Final Action (“Final Act.,” mailed May 23, 2019).

2 We use the word “Appellant” to refer to “applicant” as defined in
37 C.F.R. § 1.42. Appellant identifies the real party in interest as
Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (Appeal Br. 2).

3 LTE is the technology upon which 3G, 4G, and 5G wireless
communications are based.
Appeal 2020-002812
Application 15/300,584

3

An understanding of the invention can be derived from a reading of
exemplary claim 1, which is reproduced below (bracketed matter and some
paragraphing added).
1. A method performed by a wireless terminal in communication
with a wireless network node, the method comprising:
[1] receiving a grant for uplink transmission from the network
node,
wherein the received grant indicates a first number of
repetitions;
[2] transmitting on an uplink shared channel according to the first
number of repetitions;
[3] monitoring a first channel for a message a first number of
subframes after the wireless terminal transmits on the uplink
shared channel according to the first number of repetitions,
wherein the first channel comprises a physical downlink
control channel for machine–type communications;
and
[4] if the message is detected and correctly decoded,
and
if the decoded message requests retransmission,
performing adaptive uplink retransmission
according to a first retransmission format indicated
by the decoded message.
Appeal Br. 12 (Claims Appendix).

The Examiner relies upon the following prior art:
Name Reference Date
Yang US 2014/0105191 A1 Apr. 17, 2014
Rudolph US 2014/0362832 A1 Dec. 11, 2014
You US 2016/0211949 A1 July 21, 2016

Appeal 2020-002812
Application 15/300,584

4

Claims 1–5, 7–11, 13–17, 19–22, and 24–26 stand rejected under 35
U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Yang and You.
Claims 6, 12, 18, and 23 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
unpatentable over Yang, You, and Rudolph.

ISSUES
The issues of obviousness turn primarily on whether the art applied
describes the recited repetitions in limitations 1–3.

FACTS PERTINENT TO THE ISSUES
The following enumerated Findings of Fact (FF) are believed to be
supported by a preponderance of the evidence.
Facts Related to Claim Construction
01. The disclosure contains no lexicographic definition of
“repetition.”
02. In order to achieve the coverage targeted in LTE Rel-13 for LC
UEs and other UEs operating delay tolerant MTC applications,
time repetition techniques are used in order to allow energy
accumulation of the received signals at the UE side. Spec. 2:10–
12.
03. The solution presented herein uses a physical downlink control
channel for machine-type communications, e.g., the M-PDDCH,
to enable different repetition levels for control and data
transmissions. More particularly, when a wireless terminal detects
and correctly decodes a message carried by a physical downlink
Appeal 2020-002812
Application 15/300,584

5

control channel for machine-type communications that requests
retransmissions, the wireless terminal performs adaptive uplink
retransmissions according to a retransmission format included in
the detected and correctly decoded message. The retransmission
format defines at least one of a modulation and coding rate for the
retransmissions, a frequency resource for the retransmissions, and
a number of repetitions. Spec. 3:19–26.
Facts Related to the Prior Art
Yang
04. Yang is directed to a wireless communication system and, more
particularly, to a method for transmitting control information.
Yang para. 1.
05. Yang describes performing HARQ (hybrid automatic repeat
request) retransmission by a communication device in a wireless
communication system by: initially transmitting a data block to a
Base Station (BS); attempting a detection of PDCCH (physical
downlink control channel) in a predetermined time interval
including a plurality of subframes after transmission of an uplink
channel signal; and retransmitting the data block when a PDCCH
signal indicating retransmission of the data block is detected in the
predetermined time interval, wherein reception of a PHICH
(physical hybrid ARQ indicator channel) corresponding to initial
transmission of the data block is skipped. Yang para. 5.
06. Yang describes the initial transmission of the data block as
performed through a PUSCH (physical uplink shared channel)
allocated to SPS (semi-persistent scheduling), and the
Appeal 2020-002812
Application 15/300,584

6

predetermined time interval as periodically given according to an
SPS transmission period, and PDCCH detection being skipped in
subframes other than the predetermined time interval. Yang paras
7–8.
07. Yang describes a retransmission time being systematically
appointed (e.g. after 4 subframes from a NACK reception time) in
the case of synchronous non-adaptive HARQ. Accordingly, the
BS can transmit a UL grant message to a UE only during initial
transmission and retransmission following the initial transmission
is performed according to an ACK/NACK signal (e.g. PHICH
signal). In the case of asynchronous adaptive HARQ, a
retransmission time is not appointed, and thus the BS needs to
transmit a retransmission request message. Furthermore, since a
frequency resource or MCS for retransmission varies according to
transmission time, the retransmission request message can include
a UE ID, RB allocation information, HARQ process index, RV,
NDI, etc. Yang para. 53.
08. Yang describes its FIG. 10, in which a UE can transmit an SPS-
PUSCH (S1002-1, S1002-2 and S1002-3) and then attempt to
detect a PDCCH (which can indicate retransmission) for n
subframes after k subframes (S1004-1, S1004-2 and S1004-3). In
the case of FDD, k can be 4. However, k is not limited thereto.
Here, n is a positive integer. The PDCCH that indicates
retransmission includes a HARQ index and thus the PDCCH can
indicate a HARQ process necessary for retransmission. If the UE
receives the PDCCH indicating retransmission, the UE can
Appeal 2020-002812
Application 15/300,584

7

attempt retransmission using a resource (time domain and/or
frequency domain), a modulation scheme, etc., indicated by the
PDCCH (which is not shown). If the PDCCH is not detected, the
UE does not attempt retransmission (S1006-1 and S1006-2).
Yang para. 71.
You
09. You is directed to mobile communication. You para. 2.
10. You describes the base station BS as repeatedly transmitting (i.e.,
bundle transmission) a PDCCH or a PDSCH on several
subframes. However, although the PDCCH or the PDSCH is
repeatedly transmitted (i.e., bundle transmission) on several
subframes, in case that a hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ)
negative-acknowledgement (NACK) is received from a receiving
side, it is technically obscure how to perform a retransmission.
You therefore describes a method for transmitting uplink data
device. The method may be performed by a machine type
communication (MTC) and comprise: transmitting initially a
bundle of repeated physical uplink shared channels (PUSCHs)
including same uplink data to a base station on a plurality of
uplink subframes; receiving a hybrid automatic repeat request
(HARQ) response signal from the base station in response to the
bundle of repeated PUSCHs; determining a repetition number of
PUSCH including the same uplink data, if the HARQ response
signal is negative-acknowledgement (NACK); and retransmitting
the bundle of PUSCHs, which are repeated by the determined
Appeal 2020-002812
Application 15/300,584

8

repetition number on a plurality of uplink subframes, to the base
station. You paras. 11–13.
11. You describes receiving information on the repetition number of
PUSCH from the base station. The information on the repetition
number of PUSCH may be included in a redundancy version field
in a PDCCH. You paras. 15–16.
ANALYSIS
Claims 1–5, 7–11, 13–17, 19–22, and 24–26 rejected under 35 U.S.C. §
103(a) as unpatentable over Yang and You
Again, the issue is whether the art applied describes the repetitions
recited in limitations 1–3. The art does not appear to do so. Initially we
construe the term “repetitions.” In particular we consider what is repeated in
such repetitions, whether a process or data. Although this term is not
lexicographically defined, the Specification makes clear the term refers to
repetitions of data. FF 02–03.
We are persuaded by Appellant's argument that
the Examiner insists Figure 10 of Yang detects a PDCCH k
subframes after PUSCH repetitions. As noted by the Examiner,
the S1002-1, S1002-2, and S1002-3 transmissions in Figure 10
of Yang are SPS-PUSCH transmissions. The UE attempts to
detect a PDCCH (S1004-1, S1004-2, S1004-3) k subframes after
the UE transmits each SPS-PUSCH. However, while this
attempted PDCCH detection occurs some number of subframes
(i.e., k subframes) after an uplink transmission on a shared
channel, it is not some number of subframes after the wireless
terminal transmits on the uplink shared channel "according to the
first number of repetitions" (of the uplink shared channel), as
recited in independent claims 1, 7, and 15. Indeed, this attempted
detection occurs after every transmission of an SPS-PUSCH. The
Examiner appears to interpret S1002-2 and S1002-3 of Figure 10
Appeal 2020-002812
Application 15/300,584

9

as two repetitions of S1002-1, and thus as the claimed first
number of repetitions. However, Yang does not support, and
indeed refutes, this interpretation. First, each PUSCH
transmission is given a different reference number, which
implies a different PUSCH. Further, as clearly indicated in ¶
[0071], the UE only attempts retransmission of a particular SPS-
PUSCH (i.e., S1002-1) if the UE detects, after the transmission
of that particular SPS-PUSCH, a PDCCH indicating
retransmission. As such, S1002-2 and/or S1002-3 cannot be
construed as repetitions of S1002-1. Instead, each of S1002-1,
S1002-2, and S1002-3 are separate distinct PUSCH
transmissions. The same can be said of the S1102-1, S1102-2,
and S1102-3 PUSCH transmissions of Yang's Figure 11.
Reply Br. 2. As Appellant contends, Yang has no description of
retransmission repetitions, and so the art fails to describe the claim
limitations.

Claims 6, 12, 18, and 23 rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable
over Yang, You, and Rudolph
These claims depend from those above.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The rejection of claims 1–5, 7–11, 13–17, 19–22, and 24–26 under 35
U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Yang and You is improper.
The rejection of claims 6, 12, 18, and 23 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
unpatentable over Yang, You, and Rudolph is improper.

Appeal 2020-002812
Application 15/300,584

10

CONCLUSION
The rejection of claims 1–26 is reversed.
In summary:
Claims
Rejected
35 U.S.C.
§
Reference(s)/Basis Affirmed Reversed
1–5, 7–11,
13–17, 19–
22, 24–26
103 Yang You 1–5, 7–11,
13–17, 19–
22, 24–26
6, 12, 18, 23 103 Yang, You,
Rudolph
6, 12, 18, 23
Overall Outcome 1–26

REVERSED