US 8385284

Here is a concise summary of US patent 8385284:

US Patent 8385284 Summary

• Title: Control channel signaling using a common signaling field for transport format and redundancy version
• Original Assignee: Panasonic Corp
• Current Assignee: Optis Wireless Technology LLC
• Inventors: Christian Wengerter, Akihiko Nishio, Hidetoshi Suzuki, Joachim Loehr, Katsuhiko Hiramatsu
• Filing Date: 2008-12-18
• Issue Date (Publication Date): 2013-02-26
• Abstract: The invention relates to methods, control channel signals, mobile stations, and base stations for providing control signaling associated with a protocol data unit conveying user data in a mobile communication system. To reduce control channel overhead, it proposes a common field for the transport format and redundancy version in the control channel information format. One approach involves jointly encoding the transport format and redundancy version in this common field. Another aspect uses a shared field that indicates either a transport format or a redundancy version, depending on whether the control channel signal pertains to an initial transmission or a retransmission. Additionally, some embodiments suggest further enhancements to a Hybrid Automatic Repeat reQuest (HARQ) protocol to address specific error cases.

Plain-Language Overview of Independent Claims:

• Claim 1: This claim describes a control channel signal used in a mobile communication system. This signal is associated with a protocol data unit (PDU) carrying user data. It includes a "control information field" which has a certain number of bits. These bits are designed to jointly encode both the transport format (how the data is structured, like its size or modulation scheme) and the redundancy version (which specific set of encoded bits is used for transmission, important for error correction) for transmitting that PDU.
• Claim 13: This claim outlines a method for encoding control signaling by a base station in a mobile communication system. The base station generates a control channel signal that has a "control information field." In this field, the transport format and a redundancy version of a protocol data unit (PDU) are jointly encoded. After generating it, the base station transmits this control channel signal to at least one mobile terminal.
• Claim 24: This claim details a method for a mobile terminal's operation. The mobile terminal receives a sub-frame of physical radio resources, which includes a control channel signal specifically for that terminal. This control channel signal contains a "control information field" where a transport format and a redundancy version of a protocol data unit (PDU) are jointly encoded. The mobile terminal then interprets this signal to determine the transport format and redundancy version for the PDU and subsequently either receives or transmits the PDU on specified radio resources using these determined parameters.
• Claim 31: This claim describes a base station in a mobile communication system. The base station has a processing unit that generates a control channel signal. This signal includes a control information field where a transport format and a redundancy version of a protocol data unit (PDU) are jointly encoded. The base station also has a transmitter unit that transmits this control channel signal (which is part of the control signaling) to at least one mobile terminal.
• Claim 33: This claim describes a mobile terminal in a mobile communication system. It includes a receiver unit that receives a sub-frame containing a control channel signal meant for it. This control channel signal has a control information field where a transport format and a redundancy version of a protocol data unit (PDU) are jointly encoded. The mobile terminal also has a processing unit that determines the transport format and redundancy version from the received signal. Finally, it has a transmitter unit that transmits the PDU on specific radio resources using the determined transport format and redundancy version.
• Claim 34: Similar to Claim 33, this claim describes a mobile terminal with a receiver unit for receiving a sub-frame with a control channel signal destined for it, where the signal's control information field jointly encodes the transport format and redundancy version of a PDU. It also includes a processing unit for determining these parameters. However, in this claim, the receiver unit is specifically capable of receiving the protocol data unit on at least one physical radio resource using the indicated transport format and redundancy version, rather than transmitting it.
• Claim 35: This claim is for a computer-readable medium. This medium stores instructions that, when executed by a processor in a base station, cause the base station to generate a control channel signal. This signal contains a control information field where a transport format and a redundancy version of a protocol data unit (PDU) are jointly encoded. The instructions also cause the base station to transmit this control channel signal to at least one mobile terminal.
• Claim 36: This claim is also for a computer-readable medium. This medium stores instructions that, when executed by a processor in a mobile terminal, cause the mobile terminal to receive a sub-frame containing a control channel signal destined for it, where the control information field jointly encodes a transport format and a redundancy version of a PDU. The instructions further cause the mobile terminal to determine these parameters and then receive or transmit the PDU on specific radio resources using the indicated transport format and redundancy version.

Regarding CAFC 2026 dockets for US8385284, no specific cases or dockets related to this patent number were found for the year 2026 in the search results. The results provided general CAFC updates and patent-related cases, but none specifically mentioning US8385284.

Unified Patents, a company that "seeks to 'deter Non-Practicing Entities (NPEs) who assert bad patents' and 'protect against frivolous patent litigation,' has provided information regarding litigation involving US patent 8385284.

Known litigation involving US patent 8385284:

1. Plaintiff(s): Optis Wireless Technology LLC

   • Defendant(s): Unknown at this time.
   • Jurisdiction: Texas Eastern District Court
   • Case Number: 2:19-cv-00066
   • Filing Date: Unknown at this time.
   • Outcome/Current Status: Litigation.

2. Plaintiff(s): Optis Wireless Technology LLC

   • Defendant(s): Unknown at this time.
   • Jurisdiction: Texas Eastern District Court
   • Case Number: 2:17-cv-00123
   • Filing Date: Unknown at this time.
   • Outcome/Current Status: Litigation.

3. Plaintiff(s): Unknown at this time.

   • Defendant(s): Unknown at this time.
   • Jurisdiction: Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
   • Case Number: 22-1925
   • Filing Date: Unknown at this time.
   • Outcome/Current Status: Litigation.

4. Plaintiff(s): Unknown at this time.

   • Defendant(s): Unknown at this time.
   • Jurisdiction: Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
   • Case Number: 22-1904
   • Filing Date: Unknown at this time.
   • Outcome/Current Status: Litigation.

Additionally, the patent family has "First worldwide family litigation filed", though specific details are not immediately available from the provided information.## Litigation Involving US Patent 8385284

US Patent 8385284, titled "Control channel signaling using a common signaling field for transport format and redundancy version," has been involved in multiple litigation cases, primarily within the US legal system. The current assignee of the patent is Optis Wireless Technology LLC.

Here is a summary of the known litigation:

• Plaintiff(s): Optis Wireless Technology LLC

  • Defendant(s): Not specified in the provided data.
  • Jurisdiction: Texas Eastern District Court
  • Case Number: 2:19-cv-00066
  • Filing Date: Not specified in the provided data.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Active litigation.

• Plaintiff(s): Optis Wireless Technology LLC

  • Defendant(s): Not specified in the provided data.
  • Jurisdiction: Texas Eastern District Court
  • Case Number: 2:17-cv-00123
  • Filing Date: Not specified in the provided data.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Active litigation.

• Plaintiff(s): Not specified in the provided data.

  • Defendant(s): Not specified in the provided data.
  • Jurisdiction: Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC)
  • Case Number: 22-1925
  • Filing Date: Not specified in the provided data.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Active litigation.

• Plaintiff(s): Not specified in the provided data.

  • Defendant(s): Not specified in the provided data.
  • Jurisdiction: Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC)
  • Case Number: 22-1904
  • Filing Date: Not specified in the provided data.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Active litigation.

It is also noted that there has been "First worldwide family litigation filed" concerning this patent family, although further details regarding this specific international litigation are not available in the provided information.

Proceedings overview

There are no AIA trial proceedings on file for US Patent 8,385,284 as of the most recent ingest from the USPTO ODP API. A web search did not surface any additional PTAB activity. This means the patent has not been subjected to IPR, PGR, or CBM trials, and all claims remain untested by these specific post-grant challenges. This gives a defendant no immediate defensive advantage from PTAB invalidations, suggesting the patent is unhardened in this regard.

Strategic summary

All claims of US Patent 8,385,284 are currently UNTESTED by AIA trial proceedings. This means there are no canceled or sustained claims as a result of IPR, PGR, or CBM. Consequently, the estoppel provisions of 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2) do not apply, leaving all prior-art grounds fully available for any potential defendant. The absence of PTAB activity suggests that the patent has not yet been subjected to this specific form of post-grant challenge, or any such challenges have not been publicly recorded or indexed. The patent is currently assigned to Optis Wireless Technology LLC, which has been active in asserting this patent in district court litigation.

Recommended next steps

As there is no PTAB activity on file for US Patent 8,385,284, the recommended next step for a potential defendant facing assertion of this patent would be to consider filing an IPR petition if relevant prior art can be identified. This would be a first attempt to challenge the patentability of the claims before the PTAB.

Inventors

• Christian Wengerter: Panasonic Corp
• Akihiko Nishio: Panasonic Corp
• Hidetoshi Suzuki: Panasonic Corp
• Joachim Loehr: Panasonic Corp
• Katsuhiko Hiramatsu: Panasonic Corp

(It is assumed all inventors were employed by Panasonic Corporation at the time of filing, as they assigned their interest to Panasonic Corporation on August 10, 2010.)

Original assignee

The original assignee named on the issued patent is Panasonic Corp.

Panasonic Corp is a multinational electronics corporation that manufactures and markets a wide range of electronic products, including those involving mobile communication technologies. It is highly probable that Panasonic Corp shipped products embodying the claims of US8385284, as the patent relates to control channel signaling in mobile communication systems, an area consistent with their business. Panasonic Corp is currently an operating company.

Assignment timeline

• 2010-08-10 (executed) / recorded 2010-08-16 — Reel 024982/0130
  • Conveyance: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST
  • Assignor: WENGERTER, CHRISTIAN; HIRAMATSU, KATSUHIKO; LOEHR, JOACHIM; NISHIO, AKIHIKO; SUZUKI, HIDETOSHI (all named inventors)
  • Assignee: PANASONIC CORPORATION
  • Correspondent: FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, GARRETT & DUNNER, LLP, 901 NEW YORK AVENUE, NW, WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, 20001. This correspondent also appears for the subsequent assignment to Optis Wireless Technology, LLC.
  • Context: Initial assignment of patent rights from inventors to their employer.
• 2014-01-20 (executed) / recorded 2014-01-24 — Reel 032288/0100
  • Conveyance: LIEN
  • Assignor: OPTIS WIRELESS TECHNOLOGY, LLC
  • Assignee: HIGHBRIDGE PRINCIPAL STRATEGIES, LLC, AS COLLATERAL AGENT
  • Correspondent: FOLEY & LARDNER LLP, 3000 K STREET, N.W. SUITE 600, WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, 20007-5109.
  • Context: Granting of a security interest by Optis Wireless Technology, LLC.
• 2014-02-14 (executed) / recorded 2014-02-23 — Reel 032334/0100
  • Conveyance: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST
  • Assignor: PANASONIC CORPORATION
  • Assignee: OPTIS WIRELESS TECHNOLOGY, LLC
  • Correspondent: FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, GARRETT & DUNNER, LLP, 901 NEW YORK AVENUE, NW, WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, 20001. This correspondent also appeared for the initial inventor assignment.
  • Context: Transfer of patent ownership from Panasonic Corporation to Optis Wireless Technology, LLC.
• 2014-03-03 (executed) / recorded 2014-03-12 — Reel 032398/0126
  • Conveyance: SECURITY INTEREST
  • Assignor: OPTIS WIRELESS TECHNOLOGY, LLC
  • Assignee: WILMINGTON TRUST, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
  • Correspondent: JOHN L. WELCH, 6303 WINDSOR COURT, RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA, 27615. This correspondent also appears for the subsequent release by HPS Investment Partners, LLC.
  • Context: Granting of a security interest by Optis Wireless Technology, LLC.
• 2016-07-08 (executed) / recorded 2016-07-15 — Reel 034608/0777
  • Conveyance: RELEASE BY SECURED PARTY
  • Assignor: HPS INVESTMENT PARTNERS, LLC
  • Assignee: OPTIS WIRELESS TECHNOLOGY, LLC
  • Correspondent: JOHN L. WELCH, 6303 WINDSOR COURT, RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA, 27615. This correspondent also appeared for the prior security interest involving Wilmington Trust, National Association.
  • Context: Release of a security interest held by HPS Investment Partners, LLC (related to Highbridge Principal Strategies, LLC) over the patent.

Timeline diagram

timeline
    title Ownership of US 8385284
    2008 : Filed by Panasonic Corp
    2010 : Inventors assigned to Panasonic
    2013 : Patent issued
    2014 : Optis gets security interest
         : Panasonic assigned to Optis
         : Optis gets second security interest
    2016 : Security interest released

NPE / troll-pattern signals

1. Shell-entity transfer —
   • Present: The patent was transferred from Panasonic Corporation, an operating company, to Optis Wireless Technology, LLC, a known patent assertion entity. (Executed 2014-02-14 / recorded 2014-02-23, Reel 032334/0100)
2. Known asserter in the chain —
   • Present: Optis Wireless Technology, LLC is widely recognized as a patent assertion entity (PAE) or Non-Practicing Entity (NPE). Their involvement in multiple litigations concerning this patent family confirms their assertion strategy.
3. Repeat correspondent across the chain —
   • Present: John L. Welch, 6303 Windsor Court, Raleigh, North Carolina, 27615, served as the correspondent for two recordings involving Optis Wireless Technology, LLC: a security interest (Reel 032398/0126, recorded 2014-03-12) and a release by a secured party (Reel 034608/0777, recorded 2016-07-15). The firm Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP also appears twice, handling the initial inventor assignment (Reel 024982/0130) and the assignment from Panasonic to Optis (Reel 032334/0100).
4. Cascading transfers —
   • Not present: While there were multiple financial conveyances (security interests, release) in proximity to the assignment to Optis, there were no multiple consecutive assignments of ownership through chained LLCs within a short period. The ownership transfer was a single step from Panasonic to Optis.
5. Pre-litigation transfer —
   • Unclear: The assignment to Optis was executed on 2014-02-14 (recorded 2014-02-23, Reel 032334/0100). The earliest identified US litigation for this patent is case 2:17-cv-00123, filed in 2017. This date is more than 6 months after the assignment. However, "First worldwide family litigation filed" is noted at an unspecified date, which could have been closer to the assignment. Given Optis's business model, an acquisition by them is inherently in anticipation of assertion.
6. Bankruptcy fire-sale —
   • Not present: Panasonic Corporation was an active operating company at the time of the assignment to Optis, and there is no indication of bankruptcy proceedings.
7. Privateering —
   • Unclear: While Optis is an NPE and the patent originated from an operating company, there is no explicit evidence (e.g., from SEC filings or public reports) to confirm that Panasonic transferred the patent to Optis specifically for assertion on Panasonic's behalf against competitors.
8. Defensive aggregator (anti-NPE) —
   • Not present: The patent is currently held by Optis Wireless Technology, LLC, which is a known patent assertion entity, not a defensive aggregator.

Verdict

NPE — high confidence

The verdict is high confidence NPE due to the transfer of the patent from the operating company Panasonic Corporation to Optis Wireless Technology, LLC (executed 2014-02-14 / recorded 2014-02-23, Reel 032334/0100), which is a known patent assertion entity. This is further supported by the numerous active litigation cases in which Optis Wireless Technology LLC is a plaintiff, as listed in the Google Patents legal events.

Verification: USPTO Assignment Center search for US8385284

To identify the most relevant prior art for US patent 8385284, I will use the USPTO's Patent Public Search tool. Unfortunately, I cannot directly perform live searches on the USPTO database from this interface. However, I can outline the process and, based on common patent analysis practices and the patent's description, describe the types of prior art that would be highly relevant.

Process for Identifying Prior Art:

1. Access USPTO Patent Public Search: I would go to the USPTO Patent Public Search website and select the "Advanced search" option.
2. Search for Patent 8385284: I would enter the patent number "8385284" into the search field for patent numbers. The USPTO search system typically requires exact patent numbers, potentially with leading zeros for older 6-digit patents, but 8385284 is a 7-digit number, so "8385284" should work directly.
3. Review "Cited By" and "Citations" sections: Once the patent record for US8385284 is retrieved, I would examine two key sections:
   • Cited By: These are later patents that have cited US8385284 as prior art. While not directly "prior art" to US8385284, they can indicate areas where this patent's teachings are considered foundational or relevant.
   • Citations (References Cited): This section lists the patents and non-patent literature that the examiner and/or applicant identified as relevant during the prosecution of US8385284. These are the primary candidates for prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 102.

Types of Highly Relevant Prior Art (based on the patent's description and claims):

Given the patent's focus on "control channel signaling using a common signaling field for transport format and redundancy version" in mobile communication systems, especially within a HARQ context, the most relevant prior art would likely include:

• 3GPP Technical Specifications: The patent frequently references 3GPP (3rd Generation Partnership Project) standards, such as 3GPP TR 25.814, 3GPP TS 25.308, and 3GPP TS 25.212. These documents, particularly earlier versions (prior to the priority date of 2007-12-20), would be highly relevant as they define the existing signaling structures and HARQ protocols that the patent aims to improve upon.
  • Example Relevance: These specifications would likely disclose separate signaling fields for transport format (TF), redundancy version (RV), and New Data Indicator (NDI)/sequence number (SN), which is the problem the patent seeks to solve by combining them into a single field.
• Prior Art Patents on Wireless Communication Control Channels: Other patents disclosing methods or systems for transmitting control information in wireless communication, particularly those related to:
  • Downlink/Uplink Control Information (DCI/UCI): Signaling of resource allocation, modulation and coding scheme (MCS), transport block size (TBS), HARQ process ID, RV, and NDI/SN.
  • HARQ Protocols: Patents detailing various HARQ implementations, including synchronous/asynchronous HARQ, Chase Combining, and Incremental Redundancy.
  • Packet Scheduling in OFDMA/CDMA Systems: Methods for dynamic resource allocation and signaling in shared channel environments.
• Academic Papers/Industry Publications: Research papers or white papers published before the patent's priority date that discuss optimizations for control channel overhead in mobile communication, particularly in the context of LTE or other advanced wireless systems.

Potential Anticipation under 35 U.S.C. § 102:

For any prior art to anticipate a claim under 35 U.S.C. § 102, it must disclose every limitation of that claim, either explicitly or inherently, in a single reference, and be publicly available before the critical date (e.g., the patent's priority date of 2007-12-20).

Without performing the actual search and reviewing each cited reference, it's impossible to state definitively which claims a specific piece of prior art might anticipate. However, a highly relevant prior art document that would anticipate claims like Claim 1 ("a control information field consisting of a number of bits jointly encoding a transport format and a redundancy version") would need to explicitly teach or inherently disclose:

• A control channel signal.
• Associated with a protocol data unit.
• A control information field within that signal.
• Where bits in that single field simultaneously indicate both the transport format and the redundancy version.

If prior art only shows separate fields for TF and RV, it would not anticipate these claims but would be relevant for obviousness arguments under 35 U.S.C. § 103. If prior art shows a combined field but only for a subset of the claimed features (e.g., TF and NDI, but not RV), it would also not anticipate claims covering all three.

I do not have the ability to execute a live USPTO search and analyze each citation in detail. Therefore, I cannot provide a definitive list of the most relevant prior art with full citations, descriptions, and specific claim anticipation under 35 U.S.C. § 102. That would require a direct, interactive search and in-depth review of each document.

To assess the obviousness of US patent 8385284 under 35 U.S.C. § 103, we must consider whether the claimed invention, at the time of the invention (before the priority date of 2007-12-20), would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA) by combining existing prior art references. A PHOSITA in this field would be an engineer or researcher involved in designing wireless communication systems, particularly the physical and MAC layer signaling for mobile standards like 3GPP LTE or HSDPA, with an understanding of HARQ protocols and resource allocation.

The core of US patent 8385284 lies in reducing control channel overhead by efficiently signaling transport format (TF) and redundancy version (RV), often by combining them into a single field.

Primary Prior Art Reference

The patent itself identifies the state of the art, particularly in 3GPP HSDPA systems. As stated in the patent's background: "As described in section 4.6 of 3GPP TS 25.212, “Multiplexing and Channel Coding (FDD”), version 7.6.0, September 2007 (available at http://www.3gpp.org) in HSDPA the “Transport Format” (TF) (Transport-block size information (6 bits)), the “Redundancy and constellation Version” (RV/CV) (2 bits) and the “New Data Indicator” (NDI) (1 bit) are signaled separately by in total 9 bits."

Reference: 3GPP TS 25.212, "Multiplexing and Channel Coding (FDD”), version 7.6.0, September 2007.

Disclosure by 3GPP TS 25.212: This document, which predates the priority date of US8385284, explicitly teaches a control channel signaling mechanism for HSDPA in a mobile communication system. It describes the use of separate fields for:

• Transport Format (TF): 6 bits.
• Redundancy and Constellation Version (RV/CV): 2 bits.
• New Data Indicator (NDI): 1 bit.
  These fields are part of the L1/L2 control signaling associated with a transport block (a type of protocol data unit) and are used to convey user data.

Obviousness Analysis of Claim 1

Claim 1: "A control channel signal for use in a mobile communication system, the control channel signal associated to a protocol data unit transporting user data and comprising a control information field consisting of a number of bits jointly encoding a transport format and a redundancy version used for transmitting the protocol data unit."

1. Elements Disclosed by Prior Art: 3GPP TS 25.212 discloses a control channel signal in a mobile communication system, associated with a protocol data unit (transport block), which includes explicit signaling for both transport format and redundancy version.

2. Missing Element: The key difference between Claim 1 and 3GPP TS 25.212 is the "jointly encoding a transport format and a redundancy version" within a single control information field. 3GPP TS 25.212 describes these as separate, distinct fields.

3. Motivation to Combine/Modify: A PHOSITA in 2007 would have been strongly motivated to reduce control channel overhead in wireless communication systems. The patent itself identifies this as a primary objective: "One object of the invention is to reduce the amount of bits required for control channel signaling, such as for example L1/L2 control signaling, in uplink or downlink." The separate signaling of TF (6 bits) and RV (2 bits) in HSDPA systems, totaling 8 bits for these two parameters alone, would have been an obvious target for optimization.

   Given the desire to reduce bits, a PHOSITA would have considered known engineering techniques for more efficient signaling of related parameters, such as:

   • Implicit Signaling: Leveraging the fact that some redundancy versions might be fixed or implicitly determined for certain transport formats (e.g., RV0 for initial transmissions, as mentioned in the patent description), thereby reducing the need for explicit signaling.
   • Joint Encoding/Coding: Combining multiple related parameters into a single field where a specific bit combination represents a unique pair (or tuple) of values for those parameters. This is a common method to achieve bit savings when the total number of possible combinations is less than what would be required by separate fields, or when some combinations are more frequently used.

   The decision to jointly encode TF and RV into a single field represents a design choice aimed at achieving the universally desired goal of signaling efficiency in a resource-constrained wireless environment. While it might involve a trade-off in flexibility or increased complexity in encoding/decoding logic, the motivation for a PHOSITA to attempt such a combination to reduce overhead would have been high and within the ordinary skill in the art. The patent presents this as a "new format for the control channel information", a structural modification to existing signaling to achieve a known desirable outcome (bit reduction).

Therefore, it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA, seeking to reduce control channel overhead in mobile communication systems, to combine the separately signaled Transport Format and Redundancy Version fields, as taught by 3GPP TS 25.212, into a single jointly encoded control information field.

Obviousness of Other Independent Claims

The same reasoning applies to the other independent claims, as they describe the method, apparatus (base station and mobile terminal), and computer-readable media for implementing or utilizing the control channel signal described in Claim 1:

• Claim 13 (Method for Encoding): If the signal structure of Claim 1 is obvious, the method for a base station to generate and transmit such a signal would also be obvious, driven by the same motivation to save signaling bits.
• Claim 24 (Method for Mobile Terminal): Similarly, if the signal is obvious, the corresponding method for a mobile terminal to receive and interpret this signal to determine TF and RV, and then to receive or transmit data accordingly, would be an obvious counterpart implementation.
• Claim 31 (Base Station Apparatus): The base station apparatus configured to generate and transmit such a jointly encoded control channel signal would be an obvious implementation of the method of Claim 13.
• Claims 33 & 34 (Mobile Terminal Apparatus): A mobile terminal apparatus configured to receive and determine TF and RV from such a jointly encoded control channel signal, and then to transmit (Claim 33) or receive (Claim 34) data, would be an obvious implementation of the method of Claim 24.
• Claims 35 & 36 (Computer Readable Medium): Computer-readable media storing instructions to perform these obvious methods at a base station or mobile terminal would also be obvious to a PHOSITA.

Considering Other Embodiments (e.g., Jointly Encoding NDI)

The patent also describes embodiments where a New Data Indicator (NDI) or sequence number (SN) is additionally jointly encoded with TF and RV within the single field, or where a "shared field" is used to signal either TF (for initial transmission) or RV (for retransmission) depending on the NDI.

The motivation for these variations remains the same: reducing signaling overhead. Since 3GPP TS 25.212 also discloses a separate 1-bit NDI field, a PHOSITA would have had the same motivation to jointly encode NDI with TF and RV, or to use a shared field approach, to further optimize control channel efficiency. These represent further design choices in the same direction of bit reduction, given the known parameters in prior art.

In summary, the specific prior art reference 3GPP TS 25.212, combined with the widely recognized motivation to reduce control channel signaling overhead in wireless communication systems, would render the claims of US patent 8385284 obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art.