DETAILED ACTION
The following is a final office action in response to applicant’s remarks/arguments 4/07/2026 for
response of the office action mailed on 1/07/2026. Claims 10-16 have been canceled. Claims 29-33 have been added. Claims 1-9 and 22-33 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 .
Response to Remarks/Arguments
Applicant’s remarks/arguments (page 8-14), filed on 4/07/2026, with respect to the claim 1 have been
fully considered but are not persuasive.
Regarding remarks in page 8-9 for independent claim 1, applicant remarks that the Maattanen-Seo-Khoshnevisan hypothetical system does not determine for each CORESET, of a plurality of overlapping CORESETs, whether the CORESET is activated with a first TCI state and a second TCI state of a different CORESET of the overlapping CORESETs. Nor does the Maattanen-Seo-Khoshnevisan system receive DCI via one or more CORESETs, of the plurality of overlapping CORESETs, that are activated with at least one of the first TCI state or the second TCI state. Rather, the Maattanen-Seo-Khoshnevisan system monitors and receives DCI via a selected (i.e. prioritized) CORESET and other overlapping CORESETs with the same TCI states of the selected CORESET.
Examiner respectfully disagrees with the applicant. Khoshnevisan et al. (US 2022/0095357 Al) discloses (base station transmitting DCI messages to a UE using different TCI state configurations (e.g., a first TCI state, a second TCI state, or both) in PDCCH candidates of a single CORESET. the CORESET 305 may be configured with multiple TCI states 310 (e.g., TCI state 310-a and TCI state 310-b). additionally or alternatively, the CORESET 305 may be configure with one TCI state 310 or more than two TCI states 310. 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: Fig. 3, [0005], [0053]-[0054], [0092]-[0094], [0098], [0102], [0116]).
Regarding remarks in page 9-10 for independent claim 1, applicant remarks that the combination of Maattanen-Seo fails to disclose this feature at least because the Maattanen-Seo hypothetical system monitors and receives DCI via CORESETs having the same two TCI states as a prioritized CORESET selected from among a plurality of overlapping CORESETs.
SEO et al. (US 2020/0045569 Al) discloses (FIG. 13 illustrates an example of a case where two different CORESETs configured with different TCI states overlap each other in the time domain, Seo: Fig. 13, [0025], [0172]-[0179]). Maattanen et al. (US 2023/0224923 Al) discloses (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 two of the activated TCI states for PDCCH in one or more CORESETs, Maattanen: [0024]-[0026], [0037]-[0038], [0149]-[0154]).
Regarding remarks/arguments in page 12-13 for claims 9 and 28 along with arguments have been fully considered and are persuasive.
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 1-8, 22-27, and 29-33 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. receiving the signaling that activates NTCI TCI states for one or more CORESETs, Maattanen: [0037]-[0042], [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 a 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 in view of Seo does 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 (base station transmitting DCI messages to a UE using different TCI state configurations (e.g., a first TCI state, a second TCI state, or both) in PDCCH candidates of a single CORESET. the CORESET 305 may be configured with multiple TCI states 310 (e.g., TCI state 310-a and TCI state 310-b). the CORESET 305 may be configure with one TCI state 310 or more than two TCI states 310. 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: Fig. 3, [0005], [0053]-[0054], [0092]-[0094], [0098], [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 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 receiving an activation command indicating TCI state list for activating multiple TCI states for one or more CORESETs. receiving the signaling that activates NTCI TCI states for one or more CORESETs, Maattanen: [0037]-[0042], [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 a 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 in view of Seo does 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 (base station transmitting DCI messages to a UE using different TCI state configurations (e.g., a first TCI state, a second TCI state, or both) in PDCCH candidates of a single CORESET. the CORESET 305 may be configured with multiple TCI states 310 (e.g., TCI state 310-a and TCI state 310-b). the CORESET 305 may be configure with one TCI state 310 or more than two TCI states 310. 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: Fig. 3, [0005], [0053]-[0054], [0092]-[0094], [0098], [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 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 29, Maattanen discloses:
One or more non-transitory computer readable media storing instructions that, when executed cause (a computer program including instructions which, when executed by at least one processor. computer readable storage medium (e.g., a non-transitory computer readable medium such as memory), Maattanen: [0127]):
receiving, 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. receiving the signaling that activates NTCI TCI states for one or more CORESETs, Maattanen: [0037]-[0042], [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. UE may be dynamically indicated by a TCI codepoint in DCI one or two of 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 a 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 in view of Seo does 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 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:
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 (base station transmitting DCI messages to a UE using different TCI state configurations (e.g., a first TCI state, a second TCI state, or both) in PDCCH candidates of a single CORESET. the CORESET 305 may be configured with multiple TCI states 310 (e.g., TCI state 310-a and TCI state 310-b). the CORESET 305 may be configure with one TCI state 310 or more than two TCI states 310. 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: Fig. 3, [0005], [0053]-[0054], [0092]-[0094], [0098], [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 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 30, Maattanen-Seo-Khoshnevisan teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim 29 above.
Maattanen further discloses:
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).
Regarding claim 31, Maattanen-Seo-Khoshnevisan teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim 29 above.
Maattanen further discloses:
The one or more non-transitory computer readable media of claim 29, wherein the instructions, when executed, further cause:
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 32, Maattanen-Seo-Khoshnevisan teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim 29 above.
Maattanen further discloses:
The one or more non-transitory computer readable media of claim 29, wherein the instructions, when executed, further cause receiving the DCI by causing:
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 VE may apply also other QCL properties of the TCI state in decoding the PDSCH, Maattanen: [0025]-[0027]).
Regarding claim 33, Maattanen-Seo-Khoshnevisan teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim 29 above.
Maattanen further discloses:
The one or more non-transitory computer readable media of claim 29, wherein the instructions, when executed, further cause:
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
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]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9 and 28 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable
if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The Examiner
has conducted a search of Patent and Non-Patent Literature and was unable to find any prior art which solely or in combination with another reference teaches the limitation of:
Claim 9 – 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.
Claim 28 – 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, 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.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(b). Applicant is reminded of the extension
of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
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.
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
Prosecution Insights