DETAILED ACTION
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 Amendment
The Amendment filed 01/30/2026 has been entered. Claims 1, 2, 6, 7, 10, 11, 12, 15, 16, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 28, 29, 30 and 31 have been amended.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 01/30/2026 have been fully considered. Regarding independent claims 1, 14, and 20; they are moot based on the new ground of rejection.
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.
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 non-obviousness.
Claims 1-2, 4-5, 8, 10-13, 15-17, 19-25, 27-31, 33, and 34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C.103 as being unpatentable over Farag et al. (US 20220104043) hereinafter Farag in view of Oteri et al. (US 20220272724 A1) hereinafter Oteri in further view of Zhang et al. (US 20190068268 A1) hereinafter Zhang
Regarding claim 1,
Farag teaches a method of wireless communication performed by a user equipment (UE), comprising ([0165], [0214]-[0215]; Figs. 13 and 16): receiving a downlink message (purpose-designed DCI conveying beam indication [0165]) comprising the indication to switch the beam (elements 1314 and 1614 of Figs. 13 and 16), wherein the indication to switch the beam triggers at least one of a reference signal for a beam measurement or a transmission of the measurement report (AP/SP-CSI-RS and beam metrics [0165] and [0214]; elements 1314 and 1614 of Figs. 13 and 16), wherein the reference signal or the transmission of the measurement report is triggered based at least in part on an association of the beam with the reference signal or the measurement report ([0165] and [0214]; elements 1320, 1322, 1620, and 1622 of Figs. 13 and 16, wherein the downlink message comprises the indication to switch the beam and an indication of a time domain resource (example 1.2.6 where parameters indicated by beam indication signaling [0168]); receiving the reference signal associated with the beam measurement based at least in part on receiving the indication to switch the beam ([0165] and [0214]; elements 1320 and 1620 of Figs. 13 and 16); and transmitting, using the indication of a time domain resource, wherein the measurement report indicates a measurement of the reference signal, and wherein the indication of a time domain resource is based at least in part on receiving the indication to switch the beam ([0165] and [0214]; elements 1322 and 1622 of Figs. 13 and 16).
Farag does not explicitly teach receiving configuration information including a rule, wherein the rule indicates a modulation and coding scheme (MCS) to be used for a measurement report based at least in part on the measurement report being triggered by the indication, and indication of time domain resource allocation (TDRA) table index value, wherein the TDRA table index value corresponds to an entry of a TDRA table that comprises one or more downlink values and one or more uplink values, and transmitting the measurement report using the MCS
Oteri teaches indication of time domain resource allocation (TDRA) table index value (TDRA index [0112]-[0117]), wherein the TDRA table index value corresponds to an entry of a TDRA table that comprises one or more downlink values and one or more uplink values (TDRA index used for scheduling x PUSCH and y PDSCH [0116]-[0117]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Oteri to the teachings of Farag. One would have been motivated to do this, with reasonable expectation of success, because it would minimize signaling overhead (Oteri [0005]).
Farag and Oteri do not explicitly teach receiving configuration information including a rule, wherein the rule indicates a modulation and coding scheme (MCS) to be used for a measurement report based at least in part on the measurement report being triggered by the indication; and transmitting the measurement report using the MCS
Zhang teaches receiving configuration information including a rule, wherein the rule indicates a modulation and coding scheme (MCS) to be used for a measurement report based at least in part on the measurement report being triggered by the indication (MCS configured through RRC signaling for transmitting beam related information [0102]), and transmitting the measurement report using the MCS (transmitting beam-related information using MCS configured through RRC signaling [0102])
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Zhang to the teachings of Farag and Oteri. One would have been motivated to do this, with reasonable expectation of success, because it would enhance L1 reporting (Zhang [0014]).
Regarding claim 2,
Farag and Oteri and Zhang teach all the features of claim 1, as outlined above.
Farag further teaches transmitting acknowledgment feedback associated with the indication to switch the beam based at least in part on successfully receiving the indication to switch the beam (HARQ-ACK feedback [0165] and [0214]; elements 1316 and 1616 of Figs. 13 and 16), wherein the configuration information (information about association [0165] and [0214]; elements 1312 and 1612 of Figs. 13 and 16) indicates information for measurement reports to be transmitted using an uplink control channel (type of channel for beam report [0206])
Regarding claim 4,
Farag and Oteri and Zhang teach all the features of claim 1, as outlined above.
Farag further teaches wherein the measurement report is associated with an uplink shared channel (type of channel for beam report [0206]), and wherein receiving the downlink message comprises: receiving downlink control information (DCI) including the indication to switch the beam (new beam indication [0165] and [0214]; elements 1316 and 1616 of Figs. 13 and 16), wherein the DCI uses an uplink DCI format ([0128]; Fig. 10), and wherein the DCI indicates a time domain resource (example 1.2.6 [0168]).
Farag does not explicitly teach the DCI indicates the TDRA table index value.
Oteri teaches the DCI indicates the TDRA table index value (TDRA index parameter included in the DCI [0116]-[0120]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Oteri to the teachings of Farag. One would have been motivated to do this, with reasonable expectation of success, because it would minimize signaling overhead (Oteri [0005]).
Regarding claim 5,
Farag and Oteri and Zhang teach all the features of claim 1, as outlined above.
Farag further teaches wherein the measurement report is associated with an uplink shared channel (type of channel for beam report [0206]).
Regarding claim 8,
Farag and Oteri and Zhang teach all the features of claim 1, as outlined above.
Farag further teaches wherein the measurement report is an aperiodic measurement report ([0113], [0143], [0168], [0177], [0182], [0218]; Figs. 12 and 13), and wherein the measurement report is associated with an uplink control channel (type of channel for beam report [0206]).
Regarding claim 10,
Farag and Oteri and Zhang teach all the features of claim 1, as outlined above.
Farag further teaches the configuration information configures the association (elements 1302 and 1312 of Fig. 13).
Regarding claim 11,
Farag and Oteri and Zhang teach all the features of claim 1, as outlined above.
Farag further teaches wherein the configuration information indicates that at least one of: a transmission configuration indicator (TCI) state of the beam is associated with a codepoint of a trigger state associated with the measurement report, wherein the configuration information is provided via a TCI configuration information element in radio resource control signaling, or the TCI state of the beam is associated with a report configuration of the measurement report, and wherein the configuration information is provided via the TCI configuration information element in the radio resource control signaling ([0165], [0192], and [0232]).
Regarding claim 12,
Farag and Oteri teach all the features of claim 1, as outlined above.
Farag further teaches wherein the association is based at least in part on the rule, and wherein the rule indicates the reference signal (table 1 [0169]), .
Regarding claim 13,
Farag and Oteri teach all the features of claim 1, as outlined above.
Farag further teaches wherein the rule indicates the reference signal or the measurement report based at least in part on at least one of a source reference signal of the beam, a transmission configuration indicator (TCI) state of the beam, or a mapping of the TCI state with a reference signal resource associated with the reference signal or a reference signal resource set associated with the reference signal (table 1; [0169] and [0192]).
Claims [15-17, 20, 22-23 and 25] “network entity method” are rejected under the same reasoning as claims [1-2, 5 and 10-13] “user equipment method”.
Claims [29 and 31] “user equipment device” are rejected under the same reasoning as claims [1 and 2] “user equipment method”.
Claim [30] “network entity device” is rejected under the same reasoning as claim [1] “user equipment method”.
Regarding claim 21,
Farag and Oteri and Zhang teach all the features of claim 15, as outlined above.
Farag further teaches wherein the configuration information is associated with an activation period based at least in part on the configuration information being transmitted via medium access control (MAC) signaling ([0168]; Fig. 13).
Regarding claim 24,
Farag and Oteri and Zhang teach all the features of claim 15, as outlined above.
Farag further teaches transmitting signaling activating the rule, wherein the signaling indicates an action associated with the measurement report (DCI transmission activates rule [0168]; Fig. 13).
Regarding claim 27,
Farag and Oteri and Zhang teach all the features of claim 15, as outlined above.
Farag further teaches wherein the indication to switch the beam is configured to trigger transmission of a sounding reference signal (SRS) using the beam (AP/SP-SRS [0258]; element 1920 of Fig. 19).
Regarding claim 28,
Farag and Oteri and Zhang teach all the features of claim 27, as outlined above.
Farag further teaches wherein a resource or resource set of the SRS is based at least in part on the rule, where the rule indicates that at least one of: the resource or the resource set is based at least in part on a source reference signal of a first transmission configuration indicator (TCI) state of the beam, or the resource or the resource set is based at least in part on a second TCI state of the beam (mapping to S [0247]).
Regarding claim 33,
Farag and Oteri and Zhang teach all the features of claim 1, as outlined above.
Farag further teaches the time domain resource for transmitting a measurement report (example 1.2.6 where parameter T3 indicates the time offset for measurement reporting [0165]-[0168] and [0204]).
Farag doesn’t explicitly teach the TDRA table index value enables identification of an uplink TDRA and a downlink TDRA for another downlink message scheduled by the downlink message, wherein the TDRA comprises uplink TDRA.
Oteri teaches the TDRA table index value enables identification of an uplink TDRA and a downlink TDRA for another downlink message scheduled by the downlink message, wherein the TDRA comprises uplink TDRA (TDRA index parameter for scheduling x PUSCH and y PDSCH [0116]-[0120]), wherein the TDRA comprises uplink TDRA (TDRA comprises PUSCH TDRA [0116]-[0120]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Oteri to the teachings of Farag and Zhang. One would have been motivated to do this, with reasonable expectation of success, because it would minimize signaling overhead (Oteri [0005]).
Regarding claim 34,
Farag and Oteri and Zhang teach all the features of claim 1, as outlined above.
Farag does not explicitly teach for a row in the TDRA table, the TDRA table indicates two values for K2 parameter and two values for an S parameter, wherein the two values for the K2 parameter comprise a first uplink value and a first downlink value, and wherein the two value for the S parameter comprise a second uplink value and a second downlink value.
Oteri teaches for a row in the TDRA table, the TDRA table indicates two values for K2 parameter and two values for an S parameter (a single row in the TDRA table may be used to schedule N PxSCH transmissions [0116]-[0120] and [0169]; Figs. 8 and 9), wherein the two values for the K2 parameter comprise a first uplink value and a first downlink value (the K values maybe used for a PxSCH transmission which could be for uplink or downlink [0116]-[0120] and [0169]; Figs. 8 and 9), and wherein the two value for the S parameter comprise a second uplink value and a second downlink value (the SLIV/S values maybe used for a PxSCH transmission which could be for uplink or downlink [0116]-[0120] and [0169]; Figs. 8 and 9).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Oteri to the teachings of Farag and Zhang. One would have been motivated to do this, with reasonable expectation of success, because it would minimize signaling overhead (Oteri [0005]).
Claims 7 and 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Farag and Oteri and Zhang in view of Rastegardoost et al. (US 20210144743 A) hereinafter Rastegardoost.
Regarding claim 7,
Farag and Oteri and Zhang teach all the features of claim 1, as outlined above, where Farag teaches receiving indication of time domain resource to be used for the measurement report based at least in part on the measurement report being triggered by the indication to switch the beam ([0165] and [0214]; elements 1322 and 1622 of Figs. 13 and 16).
Farag and Oteri and Zhang do not explicitly teach the rule indicates a K2 value from a list of radio resource control configured K2 values.
Rastegardoost teaches the rule indicates a K2 value from a list of radio resource control configured K2 values (one or more RRC messages configuring uplink grant with parameters such as MCS, TDRA, and time offset [0393]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Rastegardoost to the teachings of Farag and Oteri and Zhang. One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would reduce signaling overhead (Rastegardoost [0004]).
Claim [19] “network entity method” is rejected under the same reasoning as claim [7] “user equipment method”.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Farag and Oteri and Zhang in view of Park et al. (US 20230232481) hereinafter Park.
Regarding claim 9,
Farag and Oteri and Zhang teach all the features of claim 1, as outlined above.
Farag and Oteri and Zhang do not explicitly teach receiving a scheduling grant for a second downlink message in the downlink message.
Park teaches receiving a scheduling grant for a second downlink message in the downlink message ([0430] and [0455]; Fig. 24).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Park to the teachings of Farag and Oteri and Zhang. One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would improve beam management efficiency (Park [0426] and [0427]).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Farag and Oteri and Zhang in view of Yang et al. (US 20200383096) hereinafter Yang.
Regarding claim 14,
Farag and Oteri and Zhang teach all the features of claim 13, as outlined above.
Farag and Oteri and Zhang do not explicitly teach wherein the mapping is based at least in part on a prioritization rule.
Yang teaches wherein the mapping is based at least in part on a prioritization rule (priority level [0066]-[0069], [0113], [0114]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Yang to the teachings of Farag and Oteri and Zhang. One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would improve beam configuration flexibility (Yang [0005]).
Claims 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Farag and Oteri and Zhang in view of Farag et al. (US 20210359745) hereinafter Farag745.
Regarding claim 26,
Farag and Oteri and Zhang teach all the features of claim 25, as outlined above.
Farag and Oteri and Zhang do not explicitly teach wherein the TCI state is associated with multiple quasi co- location (QCL) types corresponding to multiple source reference signals, and wherein the rule indicates the reference signal based at least in part on a selected QCL type, of the multiple QCL types, associated with a selected source reference signal.
Farag745 teaches wherein the TCI state is associated with multiple quasi co- location (QCL) types corresponding to multiple source reference signals, and wherein the rule indicates the reference signal based at least in part on a selected QCL type, of the multiple QCL types, associated with a selected source reference signal (TCI-state configuration table [0162] and [0168]; Fig. 15)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Farag745 to the teachings of Farag and Oteri and Zhang. The motivation for such an addition would be improve beam management efficiency (Farag745 [0004]).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABDUL AZIZ SANTARISI whose telephone number is (703)756-4586. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 AM - 5:00 PM ET. 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, Ayman Abaza can be reached on (571)270-0422. 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.
/ABDUL AZIZ SANTARISI/Examiner, Art Unit 2465 /AYMAN A ABAZA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2465