DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12 February 2026 has been entered.
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 .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12 February 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claims 1-5, 7-20, and 22-30, the applicant argued, “…like Mao, Guan fails to disclose ‘wherein the aggregation…a second threshold,’ as recited…” on pages 10-12.
In response to applicant’s argument, the examiner respectfully disagrees with the above argument.
Applicant's arguments fail to comply with 37 CFR 1.111(b) because they amount to a general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1, 14, 16, and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 14, 16, and 29 have been amended to recite “the aggregation level…is lower than a first threshold based on the at least one measurement being higher than a second threshold”. ¶67 of the applicant’s specification recites “The thresholds on L1-RSRP, L1-SINR, CQI, and/or other channel state information (CSI) that correspond to different configuration options…” and “a first configuration option of the search space may include aggregation levels 1, 2, 4; a second configuration option of the search space may include aggregation levels 2, 4, 8; and a third configuration option may include aggregation levels 8, 16”. The thresholds in ¶67 correspond to the claimed “second threshold”. However, the applicant’s specification merely states that different thresholds correspond to different aggregation levels. A person having ordinary skill in the art might interpret the first, second, and third configuration options as the claimed “first threshold”. However, the applicant’s specification provides no support for which aggregation level is selected based on which measurement threshold is met, much less selecting an aggregation level lower than a threshold based on a measurement being higher than a threshold. Therefore, switching to an aggregation level below a threshold based a received measurement being higher than a threshold is not supported by the applicant’s specification.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 7-20, and 22-30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mao et al. WO 2021/064684 A1 (hereinafter referred to as “Mao”) in view of Guan US 2020/0021389 A1 (hereinafter referred to as “Guan”).
As to claims 1 and 14, Mao teaches an apparatus for wireless communication at a base station, comprising:
memory;
a transceiver; and
at least one processor coupled to the memory and the transceiver, the at least one processor configured to:
receive, from a user equipment (UE), at least one feedback signal comprising at least one measurement of a downlink connection between the base station and the UE (¶¶27 and 34-35: receive, from UE, full CSI reports for each beam and simplified/compact reporting of the beams);
switch to one and no more than one set of the plurality of sets of communication parameters for communication with the UE (¶¶34-35 and 38: switch to one set of PDSCH parameters), wherein different sets of the plurality of sets of communication parameters are activated for the switch to the one and no more than one set based on information in the at least one feedback signal (¶¶34-35 and 40: different sets of PDSCH parameters are activated based on receiving the different CSI reports); and
transmit, for the UE, downlink control information (DCI) indicating the one and no more than one set of the plurality of sets of communication parameters for communication with the UE (¶¶34-35, 37, and 40: transmit, to the UE, PDCCH carrying scheduling information for the one set of PDSCH parameters signaled via DCI indicators in the PDCCH).
Although Mao teaches “An apparatus…and the UE; switch to one…with the UE,” Mao does not explicitly disclose “configure a plurality…number of repetitions” and “wherein the aggregation level…a second threshold”.
However, Guan teaches configure a plurality of sets of communication parameters associated with one and no more than one search space for communication with the UE, wherein the plurality of sets of communication parameters are configured based on the at least one feedback signal, and wherein each set of communication parameters of the plurality of sets of communication parameters comprises a repetition factor or a number of repetitions (¶¶87, 113-116, 144-146, 184-189, and 201; figure 8: based on UE feedback of beam quality, base station configures beams, CCEs, and aggregation levels in a UE specific search space where UE can perform blind detection);
wherein the aggregation level associated with the one and no more than one set of the plurality of sets of communication parameters is lower than a first threshold based on the at least one measurement being higher than a second threshold (¶188: when the measured RSRP/quality difference exceeds threshold X3, aggregation level 1 is used for one of the beams).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to improve upon the apparatus described in Mao by including “configure a plurality…number of repetitions” and “wherein the aggregation level…a second threshold” as taught by Guan because it provides Mao’s apparatus with the enhanced capability of correlating beam quality with aggregation level (Guan, ¶188).
As to claims 2 and 15, Mao in view of Guan teaches the apparatus of claim 1. Mao further teaches wherein the at least one processor is further configured to:
communicate with the UE based on the no more than one set of the plurality of sets of communication parameters for communication with the UE (¶38).
As to claim 3, Mao in view of Guan teaches the apparatus of claim 1. Mao further teaches wherein the plurality of sets of communication parameters for communication with the UE are configured based on a plurality of feedback signals from the UE (¶¶27 and 34).
As to claim 4, Mao in view of Guan teaches the apparatus of claim 1. Mao further teaches wherein the plurality of sets of communication parameters for communication with the UE are configured based on the at least one measurement of the downlink connection in the at least one feedback signal (¶¶27 and 34).
As to claim 5, Mao in view of Guan teaches the apparatus of claim 1. Mao further teaches wherein the at least one feedback signal comprises at least one of channel state information (CSI), channel quality indicator (CQI), Layer 1 (L1) reference signal received power (RSRP) (L1-RSRP), L1 signal-to-noise and interference ratio (L1-SINR), or a combination thereof (¶¶31-32).
As to claim 7, Mao in view of Guan teaches the apparatus of claim 1. Mao further teaches wherein an activation time to switch to the no more than one set of the plurality of sets of communication parameters is based on a timing associated with information in the at least one feedback signal or a preconfigured time offset (¶¶27, 31-32, 34-35, 38, 42-43, and 47).
As to claim 8, Mao in view of Guan teaches the apparatus of claim 1. Mao further teaches wherein the plurality of sets of communication parameters correspond to at least one of a configured grant (CG), a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) search space, physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) transmission, semi-persistent scheduling (SPS), or a combination thereof (¶¶34, 38, and 43).
As to claim 9, Mao in view of Guan teaches the apparatus of claim 8. Mao further teaches wherein the plurality of sets of communication parameters comprises the number of repetitions for the CG based on information in the at least one feedback signal (¶¶34, 38, and 43).
As to claim 10, Mao in view of Guan teaches the apparatus of claim 8.
Guan further teaches the plurality of sets of communication parameters comprise a plurality of sets of aggregation levels for the PDCCH search space (¶188).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to improve upon the apparatus described in Mao in view of Guan by including “the plurality…search space” as further taught by Guan for the same rationale as set forth in claim 1 (Guan, ¶188).
As to claim 11, Mao in view of Guan teaches the apparatus of claim 10.
Guan further teaches an associated control resource set (CORESET) of the PDCCH search space is based on information in the at least one feedback signal (¶188).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further improve upon the apparatus described in Mao in view of Guan by including “an associated control resource set (CORESET) of the PDCCH search space is based on information in the at least one feedback signal” as further taught by Guan for the same rationale as set forth in claim 1 (Guan, ¶188).
As to claim 12, Mao in view of Guan teaches the apparatus of claim 8. Mao further teaches wherein the plurality of sets of communication parameters comprise a plurality of configurations for uplink control information (UCI) for PUCCH transmission (¶47).
As to claim 13, Mao in view of Guan teaches the apparatus claim 8. Mao further teaches wherein the plurality of sets of communication parameters comprises the repetition factor for SPS based on information in the at least one feedback signal (¶43).
As to claims 16 and 29, Mao teaches an apparatus for wireless communication at a user equipment (UE), comprising:
a memory;
a transceiver; and
at least one processor coupled to the memory and the transceiver, the at least one processor configured to:
transmit, to a base station, at least one feedback signal comprising at least one measurement of a downlink connection between the base station and the UE (¶¶27 and 34-35: transmit, to BS, full CSI reports for each beam and simplified/compact reporting of the beams);
receive, from the base station, downlink control information (DCI) indicating one and no more than one activated set of the plurality of sets of communication parameters, activated for selection based on the at least one feedback signal, for communication with the base station (¶¶34-35, 37, and 40: receive, from the BS, PDCCH carrying scheduling information indicating a set of PDSCH resources), wherein different sets of the plurality of sets of communication parameters are activated for a switch to the one and no more than one activated set based on information in the at least one feedback signal (¶¶34-35 and 40: different sets of PDSCH parameters are activated based on the different CSI reports); and
switch to the one and no more than one activated set of the plurality of sets of communication parameters (¶¶37-40: switch to the activated PDSCH resources/parameters).
Although Mao teaches “An apparatus…and the UE; receive, from the base station…of communication parameters,” Mao does not explicitly disclose “activate for selection…number of repetitions” and “wherein the aggregation level…a second threshold”.
However, Guan teaches activate for selection a plurality of sets of communication parameters associated with one and no more than one search space for communication with the base station, wherein the plurality of sets of communication parameters are activated for selection based on the at least one feedback signal, and wherein each set of communication parameters of the plurality of sets of communication parameters comprises a repetition factor or a number of repetitions (¶¶87, 113-116, 144-146, 184-189, and 201; figures 2 and 8: based on UE feedback of beam quality, base station configures beams, CCEs, and aggregation levels in a UE specific search space where UE can perform blind detection);
wherein the aggregation level associated with the one and no more than one set of the plurality of sets of communication parameters is lower than a first threshold based on the at least one measurement being higher than a second threshold (¶188: when the measured RSRP/quality difference exceeds threshold X3, aggregation level 1 is used for one of the beams).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to improve upon the apparatus described in Mao by including “activate for selection…number of repetitions” and “wherein the aggregation level…a second threshold” as taught by Guan because it provides Mao’s apparatus with the enhanced capability of correlating beam quality with aggregation level (Guan, ¶188).
As to claims 17 and 30, claims 17 and 30 are rejected the same way as claims 2 and 15.
As to claim 18, claim 18 is rejected the same way as claim 3.
As to claim 19, claim 19 is rejected the same way as claim 4.
As to claim 20, claim 20 is rejected the same way as claim 5.
As to claim 22, claim 22 is rejected the same way as claim 7.
As to claim 23, claim 23 is rejected the same way as claim 8.
As to claim 24, claim 24 is rejected the same way as claim 9.
As to claim 25, claim 25 is rejected the same way as claim 10.
As to claim 26, claim 26 is rejected the same way as claim 11.
As to claim 27, claim 27 is rejected the same way as claim 12.
As to claim 28, claim 28 is rejected the same way as claim 13.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUSTIN T VAN ROIE whose telephone number is (571)270-0308. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00am - 4:30pm.
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, Ian N Moore can be reached at 571-272-3085. 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.
/JUSTIN T VAN ROIE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2469