DETAILED ACTION
This Office action is in response to Amendment filed on 10/27/2025. Claims 1, 10, and 22 have been
amended. Claims 27-28 have been added. Claims 1-16 and 22-28 remain pending in the application.
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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 10/27/2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed on 10/27/2025 has been entered.
Response to Remarks/Arguments
Applicant’s remarks/arguments (page 8-13), filed on 10/27/2025, with respect to the 103 rejections
have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding remarks in page 10 for independent claim 1, applicant asserts that Khoshnevisan does not disclose or describe that its UE determines for each CORESET, of the first set of CORESETs, whether the CORESET is associated with multiple spatial QCL properties of the of the first selected CORESET.
Examiner respectfully disagrees with the applicant. Khoshnevisan et al. (US 2022/0095357 Al) discloses (UE 115-a may determine the configured TCI states 230 for the search space set 225 based on the TCI state indicator in the RRC message. the TCI state indicator may correspond to a first TCI state 230-a configured for the CORESET 220, a second TCI state 230-b configured for the CORESET 220, Khoshnevisan: [0005], [0053]-[0054], [0092]-[0094], [0102], [0116]).
Regarding remarks in page 11 for dependent claim 9, applicant asserts that the disclosure of Seo relied upon by the Office to reject claim 9 do not teach or suggest dropping a DCI based on a "second CORESET being activated with a TCI state that is different from: the first TCI state; and the second TCI state" of a first overlapping CORESET.
SEO et al. (US 2020/0045569 Al) discloses (When a plurality of CORESETs having different TCI states in one slot exist, the TCI state of a CORESET determined to have the highest priority according to the described priority rule may be applied to the whole of the corresponding slots. It may indicate that when different CORESETs configured with different TCI states are monitored in the same slot, a CORESET with low priority may change an Rx beam only for the case of the corresponding slot (namely by assuming a TCI state different from the configuration), Seo: [0201]-[0205], [0214], [0237], [0256]).
Regarding remarks in page 12-13 for independent claim 10, applicant asserts that the combination of Maattanen, Seo, and Khoshnevisan fails to disclose "determining a second CORESET, of the plurality of CORESETs, activated with each of the plurality of TCI states of the first CORESET," as recited in claim 10.
Khoshnevisan discloses (if the UE fails to receive a message (e.g., an RRC message or MAC-CE) configuring a search space set with a TCI state configuration, the UE may determine a default TCI state configuration for the search space set based on one or more TCI states configured for the associated CORESET, Khoshnevisan: [0052]-[0054], [0087]-[0088], [0179]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that
are applied 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 1-16 and 22-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maattanen et al.
(US 2023/0224923 A1, hereinafter “Maattanen”) in view of Seo et al. (US 2020/0045569 A1, hereinafter “Seo”) and in further view of Khoshnevisan et al. (US 2022/0095357 Al, hereinafter “Khoshnevisan”).
Regarding claim 1, Maattanen discloses:
A method comprising:
receiving, by a wireless device and for a first control resource set (CORESET) among a plurality of CORESETs receiving an activation command indicating TCI state list for activating multiple TCI states for one or more CORESETs, Maattanen: [0037]-[0038], [0053], [0054], [0205]-[0209]);
receiving downlink control information (DCI) via one or more CORESETs of the plurality of CORESETs, that are activated with at least one of the first TCI state or the second TCI state (receiving DCI via CORESET corresponding to TCI states that are activated for one or more CORESETs. UE may be dynamically indicated by a TCI codepoint in DCI one or twoof the activated TCI states for PDCCH in one or more CORESETs, Maattanen: [0024]-[0026], [0037]-[0038], [0149]-[0154]).
Maattanen does not explicitly disclose:
a plurality of CORESETs that are overlapping in time.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Seo teaches:
a plurality of CORESETs that are overlapping in time (multiple CORESETs overlapping in time domain, Seo: [0172]-[0179], Fig. 13).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Maattanen in view of Seo in order to further modify receiving DCI via CORESET corresponding to activated TCI states among plurality of CORESETs from the teachings of Maattanen with plurality of CORESETs overlapping in the time domain from the teachings of Seo.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated because it would have enabled techniques for monitoring of control signals with plurality of CORESETs overlapping (Seo: [0035]- [0036]).
Yet, Maattanen and Seo do not explicitly disclose:
determining for each CORESET, of the plurality of CORESETs, whether the CORESET is activated with: a first TCI state of the two TCI states of the CORESET; and a second TCI state of the two TCI states of the first CORESET; and
However, in the same field of endeavor, Khoshnevisan teaches:
determining for each CORESET, of the plurality of CORESETs, whether the CORESET is activated with: a first TCI state of the two TCI states of the CORESET; and a second TCI state of the two TCI states of the first CORESET (UE 115-a may determine the configured TCI states 230 for the search space set 225 based on the TCI state indicator in the RRC message. the TCI state indicator may correspond to a first TCI state 230-a configured for the CORESET 220, a second TCI state 230-b configured for the CORESET 220, Khoshnevisan: [0005], [0053]-[0054], [0092]-[0094], [0102], [0116]); and
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Maattanen and Seo in view of Khoshnevisan in order to further modify determining for each CORESET, of the plurality of CORESETs, whether the CORESET is activated with: a first TCI state of the two TCI states of the CORESET; and a second TCI state of the two TCI states of the first CORESET from the teachings of Khoshnevisan.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated because the described techniques provide for improved network flexibility in transmitting downlink control information (DCI) to a user equipment (UE) in a CORESET (Khoshnevisan: [0005]).
Regarding claim 2, Maattanen-Seo-Khoshnevisan teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim 1 above.
Maattanen further discloses:
wherein the receiving the DCI is, during monitoring of a second CORESET of the plurality of CORESETs, based on the second CORESET being activated with the at least one of: the first TCI state of the first CORESET; or the second TCI state of the first CORESET (receiving DCI via one or more CORESETs corresponding to TCI states that are activated for one or more CORESETs, Maattanen: [0024], [0037]-[0038]).
Regarding claim 3, Maattanen-Seo-Khoshnevisan teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim 1 above.
Maattanen further discloses:
receiving one or more configuration parameters indicating the plurality of CORESETs (receiving configuration parameters including multiple CORESETs, Maattanen: [0042], [0117]-[0122]).
Regarding claim 4, Maattanen-Seo-Khoshnevisan teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim 1 above.
Maattanen further discloses:
receiving one or more configuration parameters for one or more cells, wherein one or more active downlink bandwidth parts (BWPs) of the one or more cells comprises the plurality of CORESETs (receiving configuration parameters including multiple CORESETs for serving cells, Maattanen: [0025], [0117]-[0122]); and
associating each active downlink BWP, of the one or more active downlink BWPs, with a respective cell of the one or more cells (associating active BWP with serving cell, Maattanen: [0025], [0117]-[0122]).
Regarding claim 5, Maattanen-Seo-Khoshnevisan teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim 1 above.
Maattanen further discloses:
wherein the receiving the DCI further comprises: monitoring, via the first CORESET and via the one or more CORESETS, downlink channel transmission for the DCI (UE may assume that the DM-RS ports of PDSCH of a serving cell are quasi co-located with the RS(s) with respect to the QCL parameter(s) used for PDCCH quasi co-location indication of the CORESET associated with a monitored search space with the lowest CORESET-ID in the latest slot in which one or more CORESETs within the active BWP of the serving cell are monitored by the UE. After a PDCCH is decoded successfully and if the offset indicated in the corresponding DCI is less than the threshold, the UE may apply also other QCL properties of the TCI state in decoding the PDSCH, Maattanen: [0025]-[0027]).
Regarding claim 6, Maattanen-Seo-Khoshnevisan teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim 1 above.
Maattanen further discloses:
receiving one or more configuration parameters for one or more cells (receiving configuration parameters indicating CORESET having lowest CORESET-ID associated with serving cell ID, Maattanen: [0025]-[0027], [0041], [0109]).
Maattanen does not explicitly disclose:
determining the first CORESET, among the plurality of CORESETs, based on the first CORESET being associated with a cell index that is lowest among one or more cell indexes of the one or more cells.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Seo teaches:
determining the first CORESET, among the plurality of CORESETs, based on the first CORESET being associated with a cell index that is lowest among one or more cell indexes of the one or more cells (selecting CORESET associated with lowest cell index, Seo: [0187]-[0190]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Maattanen and Khoshnevisan in view of Seo in order to further modify determining the first CORESET based on the first CORESET being associated with a cell index that is lowest among one or more cell indexes of the one or more cells from the teachings of Seo.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated because it would have enabled techniques for monitoring of control signals with plurality of CORESETs overlapping (Seo: [0035], [0036]).
Regarding claim 7, Maattanen-Seo-Khoshnevisan teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim 1 above.
Maattanen further discloses:
receiving one or more configuration parameters for one or more cells (receiving configuration parameters indicating CORESET having lowest CORESET-ID associated with serving cell ID, Maattanen: [0025]-[0027], [0041], [0109)
Maattanen does not explicitly disclose:
determining the first CORESET, among the plurality of CORESETs, based on the one or more configuration parameters indicating, for the first CORESET, a search space set with a search space set index that is lowest among a plurality of search space set indexes of a plurality of search space sets associated with the plurality of CORESETs.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Seo teaches:
determining the first CORESET, among the plurality of CORESETs, based on the one or more configuration parameters indicating, for the first CORESET, a search space set with a search space set index that is lowest among a plurality of search space set indexes of a plurality of search space sets associated with the plurality of CORESETs (selecting CORESET associated with lowest search space index, Seo: [0187]-[0190]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Maattanen and Khoshnevisan in view of Seo in order to further modify determining the first CORESET based on the one or more configuration parameters indicating a search space set with a search space set index that is lowest among a plurality of search space set indexes of a plurality of search space sets associated with the plurality of CORESETs from the teachings of Seo.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated because it would have enabled techniques for monitoring of control signals with plurality of CORESETs overlapping (Seo: [0035], [0036]).
Regarding claim 8, Maattanen-Seo-Khoshnevisan teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim 1 above.
Maattanen further discloses:
receiving an activation command indicating activation of one of: a first TCI state for a CORESET of the one or more CORESETs; a second TCI state for the CORESET of the one or more CORESETs; or the first TCI state and the second TCI state for the CORESET of the one or more CORESETs (receiving an activation command indicating TCI state list for activating multiple TCI states for one or more CORESETs, Maattanen: [0037]-[0038], [0053], [0054], [0205]-[0209]).
Regarding claim 9, Maattanen-Seo-Khoshnevisan teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim 1 above.
Maattanen does not explicitly disclose:
dropping, via a second CORESET of the plurality of CORESETs, a second DCI based on the second CORESET being activated with a TCI state that is different from: the first TCI state; and the second TCI state.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Seo teaches:
dropping, via a second CORESET of the plurality of CORESETs, a second DCI based on the second CORESET being activated with a TCI state that is different from: the first TCI state; and the second TCI state (prioritizing CORESET associated with TCI states with lower index over CORESETs with other TCI states. priority may be determined according to a technique for determining the TCI state of each CORESET, which may be regarded as a technique that puts high priority to the TCI state in which channel change may be quickly dealt with. When a plurality of CORESETs having different TCI states in one slot exist, the TCI state of a CORESET determined to have the highest priority according to the described priority rule may be applied to the whole of the corresponding slots. It may indicate that when different CORESETs configured with different TCI states are monitored in the same slot, a CORESET with low priority may change an Rx beam only for the case of the corresponding slot (namely by assuming a TCI state different from the configuration), Seo: [0201]-[0205], [0214], [0237], [0256]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Maattanen and Khoshnevisan in view of Seo in order to further modify dropping, via a second CORESET of the plurality of CORESETs, a second DCI based on the second CORESET from the teachings of Seo.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated because it would have enabled techniques for monitoring of control signals with plurality of CORESETs overlapping (Seo: [0035], [0036]).
Regarding claim 10, Maattanen discloses:
A method comprising:
receiving, by a wireless device, an activation command indicating activation of a plurality of transmission configuration indicator (TCI) states for a first control resource set (CORESET) among a plurality of CORESETs receiving an activation command indicating TCI state list for activating multiple TCI states for one or more CORESETs, Maattanen: [0037]-[0038], [0053], [0054], [0205]-[0209]); and
receiving downlink control information (DCI) via the second CORESET (receiving DCI via CORESET corresponding to TCI states that are activated for one or more CORESETs, Maattanen: [0024], [0037]-[0038], [0153]).
Maattanen does not explicitly disclose:
a plurality of CORESETs that are overlapping in time.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Seo teaches:
a plurality of CORESETs that are overlapping in time (multiple CORESETs overlapping in time domain, Seo: [0172]-[0179], Fig. 13).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Maattanen in view of Seo in order to further modify receiving DCI via CORESET corresponding to activated TCI states among plurality of CORESETs from the teachings of Maattanen with plurality of CORESETs overlapping in the time domain from the teachings of Seo.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated because it would have enabled techniques for monitoring of control signals with plurality of CORESETs overlapping (Seo: [0035], [0036]).
Yet, Maattanen and Seo do not explicitly disclose:
determining a second CORESET of the plurality of CORESETs, activated with each of the plurality of TCI states of the first CORESET; and
However, in the same field of endeavor, Khoshnevisan teaches:
determining a second CORESET of the plurality of CORESETs, activated with each of the plurality of TCI states of the first CORESET (if the UE fails to receive a message (e.g., an RRC message or MAC-CE) configuring a search space set with a TCI state configuration, the UE may determine a default TCI state configuration for the search space set based on one or more TCI states configured for the associated CORESET, Khoshnevisan: [0052]-[0055], [0086]-[0087]); and
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Maattanen and Seo in view of Khoshnevisan in order to further modify determining a second CORESET of the plurality of CORESETs, activated with each of the plurality of TCI states of the first CORESET from the teachings of Khoshnevisan.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated because it may support more flexibility in the base station selecting one or more TCI states for transmitting DCI (e.g., to improve reliability of DCI transmission, improve transmission diversity, or both) (Khoshnevisan: [0095]).
Regarding claim 11, Maattanen-Seo-Khoshnevisan teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim 10 above.
Maattanen further discloses:
monitoring downlink control channel transmission in the first CORESET based on the plurality of TCI states of the first CORESET (monitoring, via the first CORESET corresponding to TCI states, downlink channel transmission for the DCI, Maattanen: [0025]-[0027], [0037]-[0038]).
Regarding claim 12, Maattanen-Seo-Khoshnevisan teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim 11 above.
Maattanen further discloses:
wherein the monitoring comprises monitoring at least one demodulation reference signal (DM-RS) of the downlink control channel transmission that is quasi co-located with: a first reference signal indicated by a first TCI state of the first CORESET; and a second reference signal indicated by a second TCI state of the first CORESET (monitoring reference signals quasi co-located with multiple TCI states of CORESET, Maattanen: [0025]-[0027], [0109]).
Regarding claim 13, Maattanen-Seo-Khoshnevisan teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim 10 above.
Maattanen does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the plurality of CORESETs overlap in at least one symbol.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Seo teaches:
wherein the plurality of CORESETs overlap in at least one symbol (multiple CORESETs overlapping in symbol, Seo: [0172]-[0179], Fig. 13).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Maattanen and Khoshnevisan in view of Seo in order to further modify selecting a CORESET among the plurality of CORESETs overlap in at least one symbol from the teachings of Seo.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated because it would have enabled techniques for monitoring of control signals with plurality of CORESETs overlapping (Seo: [0035]- [0036]).
Regarding claim 14, Maattanen-Seo-Khoshnevisan teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim 10 above.
Maattanen further discloses:
receiving one or more configuration parameters for one or more cells, wherein one or more active downlink bandwidth parts (BWPs) of the one or more cells comprises the plurality of CORESETs (receiving configuration parameters including multiple CORESETs for serving cells, Maattanen: [0117]-[0122]); and
associating each active downlink BWP, of the one or more active downlink BWPs, with a respective cell of the one or more cells (associating active BWP with serving cell, Maattanen: [0025], [0117]-[0122]).
Regarding claim 15, Maattanen-Seo-Khoshnevisan teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim 10 above.
Maattanen does not explicitly disclose:
dropping, via a third CORESET of the plurality of CORESETs, a second DCI based on the third CORESET being activated with two TCI states that are different from: a first TCI state of the first CORESET; and a second TCI state of the first CORESET.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Seo teaches:
dropping, via a third CORESET of the plurality of CORESETs, a second DCI based on the third CORESET being activated with two TCI states that are different from: a first TCI state of the first CORESET; and a second TCI state of the first CORESET (prioritizing CORESET associated with TCI states with lower index over CORESETs with other TCI states, Seo: [0201]-[0205]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Maattanen and Khoshnevisan in view of Seo in order to further modify dropping, via a third CORESET of the plurality of CORESETs, a second DCI based on the third CORESET from the teachings of Seo.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated because an advantage may be obtained that monitoring occasions for a specific CORESET or a specific search space set are prevented from being reduced due to priority (Seo: [0204]).
Regarding claim 16, Maattanen-Seo-Khoshnevisan teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim 10 above.
Maattanen further discloses:
monitoring one or more CORESETs, among the plurality of CORESETs, that are activated with one or all of the plurality of TCI states of the first CORESET (monitoring CORESETs activated with TCI states, Maattanen: [0025]-[0027], [0109]).
Regarding claim 22, Maattanen discloses:
A wireless device comprising (Wireless Communication Device, Maattanen: [0082]):
one or more processors (wireless communication device includes one or more processors, Maattanen: [0129]); and
memory storing instructions that, when executed by one or more processors, cause the wireless device to (functionality of the wireless communication device described above (e.g., one or more functions of the wireless communication device or UE described above) may be fully or partially implemented in software that is, e.g., stored in the memory and executed by the processor(s), Maattanen: [0129] - [0130]):
receive, for a first control resource set (CORESET) among a plurality of CORESETs performing an activation command indicating TCI state list for activating multiple TCI states for one or more CORESETs, Maattanen: [0037]-[0038], [0053], [0054], [0205]-[0209]); and
receive downlink control information (DCI) via one or more CORESETs of the plurality of CORESETs, that are activated with at least one of the first TCI state or the second TCI state (receiving DCI via CORESET corresponding to TCI states that are activated for one or more CORESETs. UE may be dynamically indicated by a TCI codepoint in DCI one or twoof the activated TCI states for PDCCH in one or more CORESETs, Maattanen: [0024]-[0026], [0037]-[0038], [0149]-[0154]).
Maattanen does not explicitly disclose:
a plurality of CORESETs that are overlapping in time.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Seo teaches:
a plurality of CORESETs that are overlapping in time (multiple CORESETs overlapping in time domain, Seo: [0172]-[0179], Fig. 13).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Maattanen in view of Seo in order to further modify receiving DCI via CORESET corresponding to activated TCI states among plurality of CORESETs from the teachings of Maattanen with plurality of CORESETs overlapping in the time domain from the teachings of Seo.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated because it would have enabled techniques for monitoring of control signals with plurality of CORESETs overlapping (Seo: [0035], [0036]).
Yet, Maattanen and Seo do not explicitly disclose:
determine for each CORESET, of the plurality of CORESETs, whether the CORESET is activated with: a first TCI state of the two TCI states of the first CORESET; and a second TCI state of the two TCI states of the first CORESET; and
However, in the same field of endeavor, Khoshnevisan teaches:
determine for each CORESET, of the plurality of CORESETs, whether the CORESET is activated with: a first TCI state of the two TCI states of the first CORESET; and a second TCI state of the two TCI states of the first CORESET (UE 115-a may determine the configured TCI states 230 for the search space set 225 based on the TCI state indicator in the RRC message. the TCI state indicator may correspond to a first TCI state 230-a configured for the CORESET 220, a second TCI state 230-b configured for the CORESET 220, Khoshnevisan: [0005], [0053]-[0054], [0092]-[0094], [0102], [0116]); and
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Maattanen and Seo in view of Khoshnevisan in order to further modify determining for each CORESET, of the plurality of CORESETs, whether the CORESET is activated with: a first TCI state of the two TCI states of the first CORESET; and a second TCI state of the two TCI states of the first CORESET from the teachings of Khoshnevisan.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated because the described techniques provide for improved network flexibility in transmitting downlink control information (DCI) to a user equipment (UE) in a CORESET (Khoshnevisan: [0005]).
Regarding claim 23, Maattanen-Seo-Khoshnevisan teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim 22 above.
Maattanen further discloses:
The wireless device of claim 22, wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the wireless device to receive the DCI, during monitoring of a second CORESET of the plurality of CORESETs, based on the second CORESET being activated with the at least one of: the first TCI state of the first CO RESET; or the second TCI state of the first CO RESET. (receiving DCI via one or more CORESETs corresponding to TCI states that are activated for one or more CORESETs, Maattanen: [0024], [0037]-[0038]).
Regarding claim 24, Maattanen-Seo-Khoshnevisan teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim 22 above.
Maattanen further discloses:
The wireless device of claim 22, wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the wireless device to:
receive one or more configuration parameters for one or more cells, wherein one or more active downlink bandwidth parts (BWPs) of the one or more cells comprises the plurality of CORESETs (receiving configuration parameters including multiple CORESETs for serving cells, Maattanen: [0117]-[0122]); and
associate each active downlink BWP, of the one or more active downlink BWPs, with a respective cell of the one or more cells (associating active BWP with serving cell, Maattanen: [0025], [0117]-[0122]).
Regarding claim 25, Maattanen-Seo-Khoshnevisan teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim 22 above.
Maattanen further discloses:
The wireless device of claim 22, wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the wireless device to receive the DCI by causing:
monitoring, via the first CORESET and via the one or more CORESETS, downlink channel transmission for the DCI (monitoring, via the first CORESET and via the one or more CORESETs, downlink channel transmission for the DCI, Maattanen: [0025]-[0027]).
Regarding claim 26, Maattanen-Seo-Khoshnevisan teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim 22 above.
Maattanen further discloses:
The wireless device of claim 22, wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the wireless device to:
receive one or more configuration parameters for one or more cells (receiving configuration parameters indicating CORESET having lowest CORESET-ID associated with serving cell ID, Maattanen: [0025]-[0027], [0041], [0109]).
Maattanen does not explicitly disclose:
determining the first CORESET, among the plurality of CORESETs, based on the first CORESET being associated with a cell index that is lowest among one or more cell indexes of the one or more cells.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Seo teaches:
determine the first CORESET, among the plurality of CORESETs, based on the first CORESET being associated with a cell index that is lowest among one or more cell indexes of the one or more cells (selecting CORESET associated with lowest cell index, Seo: [0187]-[0190]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Maattanen and Khoshnevisan in view of Seo in order to further selecting CORESET associated with lowest cell index among the plurality of overlapping CORESETs from the teachings of Seo.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated because it would have enabled techniques for monitoring of control signals with plurality of CORESETs overlapping (Seo: [0035], [0036]).
Regarding claim 27, Maattanen-Seo-Khoshnevisan teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim 1 above.
Maattanen further discloses:
The method of claim 1, wherein the determining whether the CORESET is activated comprises a determination that the CORESET is activated with a first TCI state of the two TCI states of the first CORESET (The MAC CE further comprises a second octet that comprises a second part of the CORESET ID of the single CORESET and a first TCI state ID of a first TCI state of the NTCI TCI states that are activated for the single CORESET, Maattanen: [0056]-[0057]),
Maattanen does not explicitly disclose:
and wherein the receiving the DCI comprises receiving the DCI via one or more CORESETS, of the plurality of CORESETS, that are activated with the first TCI state.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Khoshnevisan teaches:
and wherein the receiving the DCI comprises receiving the DCI via one or more CORESETS, of the plurality of CORESETS, that are activated with the first TCI state (UE may monitor for a first DCI message in a first PDCCH candidate of the first search space set of the CORESET according to the first TCI state configuration which indicates that the first search space set is associated with the first TCI state, Khoshnevisan: [0180], [0185]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Maattanen and Seo in view of Khoshnevisan in order to further modify determining the receiving the DCI that comprises receiving the DCI via one or more CORESETS, of the plurality of CORESETS, that are activated with the first TCI state from the teachings of Khoshnevisan.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated because the described techniques provide for improved network flexibility in transmitting downlink control information (DCI) to a user equipment (UE) in a CORESET (Khoshnevisan: [0005]).
Regarding claim 28, Maattanen-Seo-Khoshnevisan teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim 1 above.
Maattanen further discloses:
The method of claim 1, wherein the determining whether the CORESET is activated comprises a determination that the CORESET is activated with both a first TCI state of the two TCI states of the first CORESET and a second TCI state of the two TCI states of the first CORESET (a second octet that comprises a second part of the CO RESET ID of the single CO RESET and a first TCI state ID of a first TCI state of the NTCI TCI states that are activated for the single CORESET; a third octet that comprises a second TCI state ID of a second TCI state of the NTCI TCI states that are activated for the single CORESET, Maattanen: [0170]),
Maattanen does not explicitly disclose:
and wherein the receiving the DCI comprises receiving the DCI via one or more CORESETS, of the plurality of CORESETS, that are activated with at least one of the first TCI state or the second TCI state.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Khoshnevisan teaches:
and wherein the receiving the DCI comprises receiving the DCI via one or more CORESETS, of the plurality of CORESETS, that are activated with at least one of the first TCI state or the second TCI state (UE may monitor for a first DCI message in a first PDCCH candidate of the first search space set of the CORESET according to the first TCI state configuration which indicates that the first search space set is associated with the first TCI state, the second TCI state, or both, Khoshnevisan: [0180], [0185]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Maattanen and Seo in view of Khoshnevisan in order to further modify determining the receiving the DCI that comprises receiving the DCI via one or more CORESETS, of the plurality of CORESETS, that are activated with at least one of the first TCI state or the second TCI state from the teachings of Khoshnevisan.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated because the described techniques provide for improved network flexibility in transmitting downlink control information (DCI) to a user equipment (UE) in a CORESET (Khoshnevisan: [0005]).
Conclusion
In the case of amendments, applicant is respectfully requested to indicate the portion(s) of the
specification which dictate(s) the structure relied on for proper interpretation and support, for ascertaining the metes and bounds of the claimed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SANG C LEE whose telephone number is (703)756-1461. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00AM-5:00PM EST.
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, HASSAN PHILLIPS can be reached on (571)272-3940. 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.
/S.C.L./Examiner, Art Unit 2467
/HASSAN A PHILLIPS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2467