Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/837,348

METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR DATA TRANSMISSION AND RECEPTION IN NETWORK COOPERATIVE COMMUNICATION

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jun 10, 2022
Examiner
REYES, CHRISTOPHER ANTHONY
Art Unit
2475
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
OA Round
4 (Non-Final)
88%
Grant Probability
Favorable
4-5
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
81%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 88% — above average
88%
Career Allow Rate
7 granted / 8 resolved
+29.5% vs TC avg
Minimal -6% lift
Without
With
+-6.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
52 currently pending
Career history
60
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.3%
-36.7% vs TC avg
§103
82.8%
+42.8% vs TC avg
§102
11.1%
-28.9% vs TC avg
§112
2.9%
-37.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 8 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 6, 11, and 16 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. Claim(s) 1, 3, 4, 11, and 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZHOU, et al. (US 20200350957 A1, hereinafter, "ZHOU") in view of CHENG, et al. (US 20200145982 A1, hereinafter, "CHENG"), ABDELGHAFFAR, et al. (US 20220368495 A1, hereinafter, "ABDELGHAFFAR"), and SUN, et al. (US 20220312449 A1, hereinafter, "SUN"). Regarding claim 11, ZHOU teaches a terminal in a communication system (paragraph 0057; figure 1, 115: UE), the terminal comprising: a transceiver (paragraph 0157; figure 11, 1120: transceiver); and a controller (paragraph 0157; figure 11, 1115: I/O controller, 1140: processor) configured to: receive, from a base station, downlink control information (DCI) for scheduling a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH), ZHOU writes, “A user equipment (UE) may receive a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) transmission from a base station that includes control information for decoding a subsequent physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) transmission from the base station” (paragraph 0048). ZHOU adds, “A UE 115 may receive control information over a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH), which may include downlink control information (DCI) that may be decoded by a UE 115 and used to determine a receive beam configuration for receiving a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH)” (paragraph 0088). ZHOU continues, “...a base station 105 facilitates the scheduling of resources for D2D communications” (paragraph 0060). ZHOU indicates that the base station facilitates scheduling of resources between devices, and that the UE receives a PDCCH transmission from the base station that may include DCI for configuring receiving a PDSCH transmission from the base station. identify that a scheduling offset for the PDSCH is smaller than a time duration for applying quasi co-location (QCL) information, ZHOU writes, “A UE or base station may determine that the time offset between a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) and a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) is below a threshold” (paragraph 0005). ZHOU further specifies, “...if the offset between the reception of the downlink DCI and the corresponding PDSCH is less than the threshold time duration (e.g., timeDurationForQCL), the UE may determine that the DM-RS ports of PDSCH associated with a value of the CORESET index value of a serving cell are QCL with certain reference signals” (paragraph 0106). ZHOU indicated above that the PDCCH may include DCI. Here, ZHOU states, the UE or base station may determine that the time offset between a PDCCH and a PDSCH is below a threshold. ZHOU further elaborates that if the offset between the downlink DCI and the corresponding PDSCH is less that the threshold duration, which ZHOU points out as the time duration for QCL, that a determination may be made. Therefore, it can be concluded that the offset for the PDSCH is smaller than a time duration for applying QCL information can be identified. identify a first control resource set (CORESET) with a lowest identity (ID) monitored in a slot closest to a slot for PDSCH reception, ZHOU writes, “The UE 115-a may derive the default receive beams 215 based on how the multiple TRP CORESET is configured. For example, if the UE 115-a monitors for the multiple TRP CORESET, the UE 115-a may derive the QCL from the CORESET with the lowest ID in the latest measured slot” (paragraph 0093). identify one or more default beams for the PDSCH based on the first CORESET, ZHOU writes, “The UE 115-a may derive the default receive beams 215 based on how the multiple TRP CORESET is configured. For example, if the UE 115-a monitors for the multiple TRP CORESET, the UE 115-a may derive the QCL from the CORESET with the lowest ID in the latest measured slot” (paragraph 0093). wherein the second CORESET corresponds to two transmission configuration indicator (TCI) states, ZHOU writes, “...a multiple TRP TCI state may be formed and applied to a CORESET, which then becomes a multiple TRP CORESET” (paragraph 0105). ZHOU continues, “...the multiple TRP CORESET may include a TRP TCI state from a first TRP and a second TRP (e.g., two single TRP TCI states)” (paragraph 0101). identify a beam for the PDSCH, ZHOU writes, “A UE 115 may receive control information over a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH), which may include downlink control information (DCI) that may be decoded by a UE 115 and used to determine a receive beam configuration for receiving a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH)” (paragraph 0088). and receive, from the base station, the PDSCH based on the beam, ZHOU writes, “...the default beams may have a mix of single and multiple default receive beams (e.g., default receive beams 215) for receiving data via a PDSCH transmission” (paragraph 0094). ZHOU fails to explicitly disclose information regarding, “identify a second CORESET overlapping in time with the PDSCH,”, “wherein, in case that a number of default beams for the PDSCH is one and the one default beam for the PDSCH overlaps with a TCI state among the two TCI states corresponding to the second CORESET,”, and “the beam for the PDSCH is identified based on the TCI state overlapping with the one default beam for the PDSCH.” However, in analogous art, CHENG teaches identify a second CORESET overlapping in time with the PDSCH, CHENG writes, “In this case, the QCL assumption of PDSCH 504 may follow the QCL assumption of CORESET #2 508 that overlaps PDSCH 504 in at least one symbol in the time domain” (paragraph 0099; figure 5, 504: PDSCH, 508: CORESET #2). Therefore, since the CORESETs are monitored, the overlapping in time with the PDSCH is understood to be identified. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate a method used to determine the QCL assumptions for beam operation when multiple CORESETs are configured to a UE that CHENG introduces. The benefit of incorporating the QCL assumptions for beam operation will allow the “flexible resource allocation scheme” for next generation wireless communication systems to be utilized by remedying “unfavorable beam switching when the UE is configured with multiple CORESETs” (paragraph 0004 - 0005). ZHOU and CHENG fail to explicitly disclose information regarding, “wherein, in case that a number of default beams for the PDSCH is one and the one default beam for the PDSCH overlaps with a TCI state among the two TCI states corresponding to the second CORESET,” and “the beam for the PDSCH is identified based on the TCI state overlapping with the one default beam for the PDSCH.” However, in analogous art, ABDELGHAFFAR teaches wherein, in case that a number of default beams for the PDSCH is one and the one default beam for the PDSCH overlaps with a TCI state among the two TCI states corresponding to the second CORESET, ABDELGHAFFAR writes, “In certain aspects, when the UE applies the QCL assumption of the one of the at least two TCI states for processing the aperiodic CSI-RSs, the one of the at least two TCI states is identical to a TCI state for the aperiodic CSI-RSs” (paragraph 0122). ABDELGHAFFAR adds, “...the UE is configured with the at least two TCI states, the SFN PDSCH overlaps with the aperiodic CSI-RS resources at the same symbols, each aperiodic CSI-RS resource is for one TRP and associated with a single TCI state of the at least two TCI states, and/or a single beam receives the aperiodic CSI-RS resources” (paragraph 0136). ABDELGHAFFAR continues, “...the UE applies the QCL assumption of one of the two TCI states when receiving and processing the aperiodic CSI-RSs (e.g., at least when a dynamic switching between the SFN PDSCH and a single-TRP is enabled, and the BS triggers the aperiodic CSI-RSs for the single-TPR that overlaps with the SFN PDSCH at the same symbols)” (paragraph 0137). ABDELGHAFFAR notes, “...at least when the CORESET with the lowest CORESET-ID is the SFN with the two TCI states and the CSI-RS is the SFN, the UE applies the QCL assumption of both the two TCI states when receiving and processing the aperiodic CSI-RSs. In some cases, there is an alignment with a default beam for PDSCH as well” (paragraph 0126). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method and invention of ZHOU and CHENG to include aspects described by ABDELGHAFFAR that “relate to wireless communications, and more particularly, to techniques for quasi-colocation (QCL) assumption for aperiodic channel state information (CSI) reference signals (RSs).” ABDELGHAFFAR provides the motivation for modification stating, “...the features of this disclosure provide advantages that include improved and desirable techniques for determining quasi-colocation (QCL) assumptions for aperiodic channel state information (CSI) reference signals (RSs) with a single frequency network (SFN) physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) transmission” (paragraph 0007). ZHOU, CHENG, and ABDELGHAFFAR fail to explicitly disclose information regarding, “the beam for the PDSCH is identified based on the TCI state overlapping with the one default beam for the PDSCH.” However, in analogous art, SUN teaches the beam for the PDSCH is identified based on the TCI state overlapping with the one default beam for the PDSCH. SUN writes, “The default beam selected by the UE is the beam that corresponds to the lowest TCI codepoint from a plurality of TCI codepoints, each of which includes two different TCI states” (paragraph 0002). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention and method of ZHOU, CHENG, and ABDELGHAFFAR to include aspects of the method and apparatus described by SUN in which "The exemplary embodiments relate to reporting user equipment (UE) physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) overlapping capability with a gNB of a 5G new radio (NR) network." SUN provides motivation for modification of the invention stating, "The exemplary embodiments advantageously improve throughput and reception by the UE" (paragraph 0014). Regarding claim 13, ZHOU, CHENG, ABDELGHAFFAR, and SUN teach the terminal of claim 11, Additionally, ABDELGHAFFAR teaches wherein, in case that a number of default beams for the PDSCH is two and at least one of the two TCI states corresponding to the second CORESET overlaps with the two default beams for the PDSCH, the beam for the PDSCH is identified based on the two TCI states corresponding to the second CORESET. ABDELGHAFFAR writes, “In certain aspects, when the UE applies the QCL assumption of the one of the at least two TCI states for processing the aperiodic CSI-RSs, the one of the at least two TCI states is identical to a TCI state for the aperiodic CSI-RSs” (paragraph 0122). ABDELGHAFFAR adds, “...the UE is configured with the at least two TCI states, the SFN PDSCH overlaps with the aperiodic CSI-RS resources at the same symbols, each aperiodic CSI-RS resource is for one TRP and associated with a single TCI state of the at least two TCI states, and/or a single beam receives the aperiodic CSI-RS resources” (paragraph 0136). ABDELGHAFFAR continues, “...the UE applies the QCL assumption of one of the two TCI states when receiving and processing the aperiodic CSI-RSs (e.g., at least when a dynamic switching between the SFN PDSCH and a single-TRP is enabled, and the BS triggers the aperiodic CSI-RSs for the single-TPR that overlaps with the SFN PDSCH at the same symbols)” (paragraph 0137). ABDELGHAFFAR notes, “...at least when the CORESET with the lowest CORESET-ID is the SFN with the two TCI states and the CSI-RS is the SFN, the UE applies the QCL assumption of both the two TCI states when receiving and processing the aperiodic CSI-RSs. In some cases, there is an alignment with a default beam for PDSCH as well” (paragraph 0126). Regarding claim 14, ZHOU, CHENG, ABDELGHAFFAR, and SUN teach the terminal of claim 11, Additionally, SUN teaches wherein, in case that the number of default beams for the PDSCH is two and the two TCI states corresponding to the second CORESET do not overlap with the two default beams for the PDSCH, the beam for the PDSCH is identified based on one of the two default beams for the PDSCH and one of the two TCI states corresponding to the second CORESET. SUN writes, “Release 16 of 5G NR supports multi-downlink control information (DCI), multi-transmission reception point (TRP) communications. As such, a UE can receive two physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) transmissions from two TRPs. Release 16 also supports fully overlapping, partially overlapping, and non-overlapping PDSCHs in the time domain and/or the frequency domain” (paragraph 0017). SUN elaborates, “Some exemplary embodiments are related to a computer readable storage medium comprising a set of instructions that when executed by a processor cause the processor to perform operations. The operations include receiving a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) transmission configured with downlink control information (DCI) in a single-DCI, multi-transmission/reception point (TRP) operation, wherein the DCI schedules reception of a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) transmission, determining whether or not a TCI field is configured in the DCI, when the TCI field is not configured in the DCI, determining a default beam based on a control resource set (CORESET) with the lowest ID in the PDCCH and when the TCI field is configured in the DCI, determining whether the TCI field indicates a TCI codepoint includes two TCI states” (paragraph 0005). SUN states a UE can receive two physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) transmissions from two TRPs, and Release 16 also supports fully overlapping, partially overlapping, and non-overlapping PDSCHs in the time domain and/or the frequency domain. SUN continues when the TCI field is not configured in the DCI, determining a default beam based on a control resource set (CORESET) with the lowest ID in the PDCCH and when the TCI field is configured in the DCI, determining whether the TCI field indicates a TCI codepoint includes two TCI states. SUN indicates the number of default beams for the PDSCH is two and the two TCI states corresponding to the CORESET do not overlap and the beam for the PDSCH is identified based on one of the two default beams for the PDSCH and one of the two TCI states corresponding to the CORESET. Claims 1, 3, and 4 are method claims corresponding to the apparatus claims 11, 13, and 14 that have already been rejected above. The applicant’s attention is directed to the rejection of claims 11, 13, and 14. Claims 1, 3, and 4 are rejected under the same rational as claims 11, 13, and 14. Claim(s) 2, 5, 12, and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZHOU, CHENG, ABDELGHAFFAR, and SUN as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, and further in view of BAGHERI, et al. (US 20200314881 A1, hereinafter, "BAGHERI"). Regarding claim 12, ZHOU, CHENG, ABDELGHAFFAR, and SUN teach the terminal of claim 11, ZHOU, CHENG, ABDELGHAFFAR, and SUN fail to explicitly disclose information regarding, “wherein, in case that a number of default beams for the PDSCH is one and the one default beam for the PDSCH does not overlap with the two TCI states corresponding to the second CORESET, the beam for the PDSCH is identified based on one TCI state among the two TCI states corresponding to the second CORESET.” However, in analogous art, BAGHERI teaches wherein, in case that a number of default beams for the PDSCH is one and the one default beam for the PDSCH does not overlap with the two TCI states corresponding to the second CORESET, the beam for the PDSCH is identified based on one TCI state among the two TCI states corresponding to the second CORESET. BAGHERI writes, “TCI states or the QCL assumptions for the PDSCH are derived based on the TCI state or QCL assumption whichever is applied for the CORESET used for the PDCCH transmission (reception by UE) for multi-TRP operation (e.g., in scheme 2 of multi-TRP transmission discussed above; when the number of non-overlapping sets of resources is greater than one). In one example, a CORESET may be associated with two TCI states (first TCI state and second TCI state, more generally R TCI states). If only the first TCI state is configured for the CORESET, the UE assumes the PDSCH scheduled by the PDCCH received on the CORESET is for single-TRP operation. The TCI state or the QCL assumption for the PDSCH is identical to the TCI state or QCL assumption (first TCI state) whichever is applied for the CORESET, or the first TCI state of the CORESET associated with a monitored search space with the lowest CORESET-ID in the latest slot depending on the conditions described above. If the first TCI state, and second TCI state is configured for the CORESET, the UE assumes the PDSCH scheduled by the PDCCH received on the CORESET is for multi-TRP operation. The TCI state or the QCL assumption for the PDSCH from the first TRP is identical to the TCI state or QCL assumption (first TCI state) whichever is applied for the CORESET or the first TCI state of the CORESET associated with a monitored search space with the lowest CORESET- ID in the latest slot depending on the conditions described above, and the PDSCH from the second TRP is identical to the TCI state or QCL assumption of the second TCI state associated with the CORESET” (paragraphs 0165-0167). BAGHERI explains that the TCI states for the PDSCH are derived based on the TCI state or QCL assumption whichever is applied for the CORESET used for the PDCCH transmission for multi-TRP operation (e.g., in scheme 2 of multi-TRP transmission discussed above; when the number of non-overlapping sets of resources is greater than one). BAGHERI provides an example where a CORESET may be associated with two TCI states (first TCI state and second TCI state, more generally R TCI states). If the first TCI state, and second TCI state is configured for the CORESET, the UE assumes the PDSCH scheduled by the PDCCH received on the CORESET is for multi-TRP operation. The TCI state or the QCL assumption for the PDSCH from the first TRP is identical to the TCI state or QCL assumption (first TCI state) whichever is applied for the CORESET or the first TCI state of the CORESET associated with a monitored search space with the lowest CORESET-ID in the latest slot depending on the conditions described above. BAGHERI indicates the PDSCH does not overlap with the two TCI states corresponding to the CORESET, and that the PDSCH is identified based on one TCI state among the two TCI states corresponding to the CORESET. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention of ZHOU, CHENG, ABDELGHAFFAR, and SUN to include the method described by BAGHERI for downlink resource allocation for multi-TRP transmission. According to BAGHERI, “by better managing the use and selection of information, such as transmission configuration indicator states associated with the potentially multi-TRP points, that communications between a particular user and the network may be improved…” (paragraph 0005). Regarding claim 15, ZHOU, CHENG, ABDELGHAFFAR, and SUN teach the terminal of claim 11, ZHOU, CHENG, ABDELGHAFFAR, and SUN fail to explicitly disclose information regarding, “wherein the PDSCH and the second CORESET are received based on an intra-band carrier aggregation (CA).” However, in analogous art, BAGHERI teaches wherein the PDSCH and the second CORESET are received based on an intra-band carrier aggregation (CA). BAGHERI writes, “In this case, if the ‘QCL-TypeD’ of the PDSCH DM-RS is different from that of the PDCCH DM-RS with which they overlap in at least one symbol, the UE is expected to prioritize the reception of PDCCH associated with that CORESET. This also applies to the intra-band CA case (when PDSCH and the CORESET are in different component carriers)” (paragraph 0162). BAGHERI indicates that receiving PDSCH and the CORESET transmission can occur based on intra-band carrier aggregation, when PDSCH and the CORESET are in different component carriers. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention of ZHOU, CHENG, ABDELGHAFFAR, and SUN to include the method described by BAGHERI for downlink resource allocation for multi-TRP transmission. According to BAGHERI, “by better managing the use and selection of information, such as transmission configuration indicator states associated with the potentially multi-TRP points, that communications between a particular user and the network may be improved…” (paragraph 0005). Claims 2 and 5 are method claims corresponding to the apparatus claims 12 and 15 that have already been rejected above. The applicant’s attention is directed to the rejection of claims 12 and 15. Claims 2 and 5 are rejected under the same rational as claims 12 and 15. Claim(s) 6, 8, 16, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZHOU in view of ABDELGHAFFAR, CHENG, and YAO, et al. (US 20230345477 A1, hereinafter, "YAO"). Regarding claim 16, ZHOU teaches a base station in a communication system (paragraph 0053; figure 1, 105: base stations), the base station comprising: a transceiver (paragraph 0185; figure 15, 1520: transceiver); and a controller (paragraph 0185; figure 15, 1540: processor) configured to: transmit, to a terminal, downlink control information (DCI) for scheduling a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH), ZHOU writes, “A user equipment (UE) may receive a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) transmission from a base station that includes control information for decoding a subsequent physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) transmission from the base station” (paragraph 0048). ZHOU adds, “A UE 115 may receive control information over a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH), which may include downlink control information (DCI) that may be decoded by a UE 115 and used to determine a receive beam configuration for receiving a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH)” (paragraph 0088). ZHOU continues, “...a base station 105 facilitates the scheduling of resources for D2D communications” (paragraph 0060). ZHOU indicates that the base station facilitates scheduling of resources between devices, and that the UE receives a PDCCH transmission from the base station that may include DCI for configuring receiving a PDSCH transmission from the base station. identify that a scheduling offset for the PDSCH is smaller than a time duration for applying quasi co-location (QCL) information, ZHOU writes, “A UE or base station may determine that the time offset between a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) and a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) is below a threshold” (paragraph 0005). ZHOU further specifies, “...if the offset between the reception of the downlink DCI and the corresponding PDSCH is less than the threshold time duration (e.g., timeDurationForQCL), the UE may determine that the DM-RS ports of PDSCH associated with a value of the CORESET index value of a serving cell are QCL with certain reference signals” (paragraph 0106). ZHOU indicated above that the PDCCH may include DCI. Here, ZHOU states, the UE or base station may determine that the time offset between a PDCCH and a PDSCH is below a threshold. ZHOU further elaborates that if the offset between the downlink DCI and the corresponding PDSCH is less that the threshold duration, which ZHOU points out as the time duration for QCL, that a determination may be made. Therefore, it can be concluded that the offset for the PDSCH is smaller than a time duration for applying QCL information can be identified. wherein the second CORESET corresponds to two transmission configuration indicator (TCI) states, ZHOU writes, “...a multiple TRP TCI state may be formed and applied to a CORESET, which then becomes a multiple TRP CORESET” (paragraph 0105). ZHOU continues, “...the multiple TRP CORESET may include a TRP TCI state from a first TRP and a second TRP (e.g., two single TRP TCI states)” (paragraph 0101). identify a beam for the PDSCH, ZHOU writes, “A UE 115 may receive control information over a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH), which may include downlink control information (DCI) that may be decoded by a UE 115 and used to determine a receive beam configuration for receiving a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH)” (paragraph 0088). and transmit, to the terminal, the PDSCH based on the beam, ZHOU writes, “...the default beams may have a mix of single and multiple default receive beams (e.g., default receive beams 215) for receiving data via a PDSCH transmission” (paragraph 0094). ZHOU fails to explicitly disclose information regarding, “identify a first control resource set (CORESET) with a lowest identity (ID) monitored in a slot closest to a slot for PDSCH transmission,”, “identify one or more default beams for the PDSCH based on the first CORESET,”, “identify a second CORESET overlapping in time with the PDSCH,”, and “wherein , in case that a number of default beams for the PDSCH is one and the one default beam for the PDSCH overlaps with a TCI state among the two TCI states corresponding to the second CORESET, the beam for the PDSCH is identified based on the TCI state overlapping with the one default beam for the PDSCH.” However, in analogous art, ABDELGHAFFAR teaches identify a first control resource set (CORESET) with a lowest identity (ID) monitored in a slot closest to a slot for PDSCH transmission, ABDELGHAFFAR writes, “...at least when the CORESET with the lowest CORESET-ID is the SFN with the two TCI states and the CSI-RS is the SFN, the UE applies the QCL assumption of both the two TCI states when receiving and processing the aperiodic CSI-RSs. In some cases, there is an alignment with a default beam for PDSCH as well” (paragraph 0126). wherein, in case that a number of default beams for the PDSCH is one and the one default beam for the PDSCH overlaps with a TCI state among the two TCI states corresponding to the second CORESET, the beam for the PDSCH is identified based on the TCI state overlapping with the one default beam for the PDSCH. ABDELGHAFFAR writes, “In certain aspects, when the UE applies the QCL assumption of the one of the at least two TCI states for processing the aperiodic CSI-RSs, the one of the at least two TCI states is identical to a TCI state for the aperiodic CSI-RSs” (paragraph 0122). ABDELGHAFFAR adds, “...the UE is configured with the at least two TCI states, the SFN PDSCH overlaps with the aperiodic CSI-RS resources at the same symbols, each aperiodic CSI-RS resource is for one TRP and associated with a single TCI state of the at least two TCI states, and/or a single beam receives the aperiodic CSI-RS resources” (paragraph 0136). ABDELGHAFFAR continues, “...the UE applies the QCL assumption of one of the two TCI states when receiving and processing the aperiodic CSI-RSs (e.g., at least when a dynamic switching between the SFN PDSCH and a single-TRP is enabled, and the BS triggers the aperiodic CSI-RSs for the single-TPR that overlaps with the SFN PDSCH at the same symbols)” (paragraph 0137). ABDELGHAFFAR notes, “...at least when the CORESET with the lowest CORESET-ID is the SFN with the two TCI states and the CSI-RS is the SFN, the UE applies the QCL assumption of both the two TCI states when receiving and processing the aperiodic CSI-RSs. In some cases, there is an alignment with a default beam for PDSCH as well” (paragraph 0126). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method and invention of ZHOU to include aspects described by ABDELGHAFFAR that “relate to wireless communications, and more particularly, to techniques for quasi-colocation (QCL) assumption for aperiodic channel state information (CSI) reference signals (RSs).” ABDELGHAFFAR provides the motivation for modification stating, “...the features of this disclosure provide advantages that include improved and desirable techniques for determining quasi-colocation (QCL) assumptions for aperiodic channel state information (CSI) reference signals (RSs) with a single frequency network (SFN) physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) transmission” (paragraph 0007). ZHOU and ABDELGHAFFAR fail to explicitly disclose information regarding, “identify one or more default beams for the PDSCH based on the first CORESET,” and “identify a second CORESET overlapping in time with the PDSCH,” However, in analogous art, YAO teaches identify one or more default beams for the PDSCH based on the first CORESET, YAO writes, “...the default beam for PDSCH and aperiodic CSI-RS is based on the beam of CORESET with lowest ID in latest slot when multiple CORESETs are configured in the same BWP…” (paragraph 0071). YAO adds, “...based on the configuration, the UE is configured to monitor a CORESET sent from the gNB to determine the default PDSCH beam” (paragraph 0076). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention of ZHOU and ABDELGHAFFAR to include techniques described by YAO for “concurrent communications between multiple transmission-reception points (TRPs) and a user equipment (UE).” Because in some cases PDCCH and PDSCH transmissions may be scheduled close together and the UE may not be able to decode the PDCCH transmission prior to the PDSCH transmission, YAO suggests techniques including compatibility of beams, mapping, configuration, and prioritization. YAO indicates these techniques will make receiving transmission from multiple TRPs concurrently efficient and reliable. ZHOU, ABDELGHAFFAR, and YAO fail to explicitly disclose information regarding, “identify a second CORESET overlapping in time with the PDSCH,” However, in analogous art, CHENG teaches identify a second CORESET overlapping in time with the PDSCH, CHENG writes, “In this case, the QCL assumption of PDSCH 504 may follow the QCL assumption of CORESET #2 508 that overlaps PDSCH 504 in at least one symbol in the time domain” (paragraph 0099; figure 5, 504: PDSCH, 508: CORESET #2). CHENG adds, “The PDCCH may be transmitted in one of a set of one or more monitored CORESETs, and the one of the set of one or more monitored CORESETs may be associated with a monitored search space configured with a lowest CORESET ID among the set of one or more monitored CORESETs” (paragraph 0008). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate a method used to determine the QCL assumptions for beam operation when multiple CORESETs are configured to a UE that CHENG introduces. The benefit of incorporating the QCL assumptions for beam operation will allow the “flexible resource allocation scheme” for next generation wireless communication systems to be utilized by remedying “unfavorable beam switching when the UE is configured with multiple CORESETs” (paragraph 0004 - 0005). Regarding claim 18, ZHOU, ABDELGHAFFAR, YAO, and CHENG teach the base station of claim 16, Additionally, ABDELGHAFFAR teaches wherein, in case that a number of default beams for the PDSCH is one and the one default beam for the PDSCH overlaps with a TCI state among the two TCI states corresponding to the second CORESET, the beam for the PDSCH is identified based on the two TCI states corresponding to the second CORESET. ABDELGHAFFAR writes, “In certain aspects, when the UE applies the QCL assumption of the one of the at least two TCI states for processing the aperiodic CSI-RSs, the one of the at least two TCI states is identical to a TCI state for the aperiodic CSI-RSs” (paragraph 0122). ABDELGHAFFAR adds, “...the UE is configured with the at least two TCI states, the SFN PDSCH overlaps with the aperiodic CSI-RS resources at the same symbols, each aperiodic CSI-RS resource is for one TRP and associated with a single TCI state of the at least two TCI states, and/or a single beam receives the aperiodic CSI-RS resources” (paragraph 0136). ABDELGHAFFAR continues, “...the UE applies the QCL assumption of one of the two TCI states when receiving and processing the aperiodic CSI-RSs (e.g., at least when a dynamic switching between the SFN PDSCH and a single-TRP is enabled, and the BS triggers the aperiodic CSI-RSs for the single-TPR that overlaps with the SFN PDSCH at the same symbols)” (paragraph 0137). ABDELGHAFFAR notes, “...at least when the CORESET with the lowest CORESET-ID is the SFN with the two TCI states and the CSI-RS is the SFN, the UE applies the QCL assumption of both the two TCI states when receiving and processing the aperiodic CSI-RSs. In some cases, there is an alignment with a default beam for PDSCH as well” (paragraph 0126). Claims 6 and 8 are method claims corresponding to the apparatus claims 16 and 18 that have already been rejected above. The applicant’s attention is directed to the rejection of claims 16 and 18. Claims 6 and 8 are rejected under the same rational as claims 16 and 18. Claim(s) 7, 10, 17, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZHOU, ABDELGHAFFAR, YAO, and CHENG as applied to claims 6 and 16 above, and further in view of BAGHERI. Regarding claim 17, ZHOU, ABDELGHAFFAR, YAO, and CHENG teach the base station of claim 16, ZHOU, ABDELGHAFFAR, YAO, and CHENG fail to explicitly disclose information regarding, “wherein, in case that a number of default beams for the PDSCH is one and the one default beam for the PDSCH does not overlap with the two TCI states corresponding to the second CORESET, the beam for the PDSCH is identified based on one TCI state among the two TCI states corresponding to the second CORESET.” However, in analogous art, BAGHERI teaches wherein, in case that a number of default beams for the PDSCH is one and the one default beam for the PDSCH does not overlap with the two TCI states corresponding to the second CORESET, the beam for the PDSCH is identified based on one TCI state among the two TCI states corresponding to the second CORESET. BAGHERI writes, “TCI states or the QCL assumptions for the PDSCH are derived based on the TCI state or QCL assumption whichever is applied for the CORESET used for the PDCCH transmission (reception by UE) for multi-TRP operation (e.g., in scheme 2 of multi-TRP transmission discussed above; when the number of non-overlapping sets of resources is greater than one). In one example, a CORESET may be associated with two TCI states (first TCI state and second TCI state, more generally R TCI states). If only the first TCI state is configured for the CORESET, the UE assumes the PDSCH scheduled by the PDCCH received on the CORESET is for single-TRP operation. The TCI state or the QCL assumption for the PDSCH is identical to the TCI state or QCL assumption (first TCI state) whichever is applied for the CORESET, or the first TCI state of the CORESET associated with a monitored search space with the lowest CORESET-ID in the latest slot depending on the conditions described above. If the first TCI state, and second TCI state is configured for the CORESET, the UE assumes the PDSCH scheduled by the PDCCH received on the CORESET is for multi-TRP operation. The TCI state or the QCL assumption for the PDSCH from the first TRP is identical to the TCI state or QCL assumption (first TCI state) whichever is applied for the CORESET or the first TCI state of the CORESET associated with a monitored search space with the lowest CORESET- ID in the latest slot depending on the conditions described above, and the PDSCH from the second TRP is identical to the TCI state or QCL assumption of the second TCI state associated with the CORESET” (paragraphs 0165-0167). BAGHERI explains that the TCI states for the PDSCH are derived based on the TCI state or QCL assumption whichever is applied for the CORESET used for the PDCCH transmission for multi-TRP operation (e.g., in scheme 2 of multi-TRP transmission discussed above; when the number of non-overlapping sets of resources is greater than one). BAGHERI provides an example where a CORESET may be associated with two TCI states (first TCI state and second TCI state, more generally R TCI states). If the first TCI state, and second TCI state is configured for the CORESET, the UE assumes the PDSCH scheduled by the PDCCH received on the CORESET is for multi-TRP operation. The TCI state or the QCL assumption for the PDSCH from the first TRP is identical to the TCI state or QCL assumption (first TCI state) whichever is applied for the CORESET or the first TCI state of the CORESET associated with a monitored search space with the lowest CORESET-ID in the latest slot depending on the conditions described above. BAGHERI indicates the PDSCH does not overlap with the two TCI states corresponding to the CORESET, and that the PDSCH is identified based on one TCI state among the two TCI states corresponding to the CORESET. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention of ZHOU, ABDELGHAFFAR, YAO, and CHENG to include the method described by BAGHERI for downlink resource allocation for multi-TRP transmission. According to BAGHERI, “by better managing the use and selection of information, such as transmission configuration indicator states associated with the potentially multi-TRP points, that communications between a particular user and the network may be improved…” (paragraph 0005). Regarding claim 20, ZHOU, ABDELGHAFFAR, YAO, and CHENG teach the base station of claim 16, ZHOU, ABDELGHAFFAR, YAO, and CHENG fail to explicitly disclose information regarding, “wherein the PDSCH and the second CORESET are transmitted based on an intra-band carrier aggregation (CA).” However, in analogous art, BAGHERI teaches wherein the PDSCH and the second CORESET are transmitted based on an intra-band carrier aggregation (CA). BAGHERI writes, “In this case, if the ‘QCL-TypeD’ of the PDSCH DM-RS is different from that of the PDCCH DM-RS with which they overlap in at least one symbol, the UE is expected to prioritize the reception of PDCCH associated with that CORESET. This also applies to the intra-band CA case (when PDSCH and the CORESET are in different component carriers)” (paragraph 0162). BAGHERI indicates that receiving PDSCH and the CORESET transmission can occur based on intra-band carrier aggregation, when PDSCH and the CORESET are in different component carriers. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention of ZHOU, ABDELGHAFFAR, YAO, and CHENG to include the method described by BAGHERI for downlink resource allocation for multi-TRP transmission. According to BAGHERI, “by better managing the use and selection of information, such as transmission configuration indicator states associated with the potentially multi-TRP points, that communications between a particular user and the network may be improved…” (paragraph 0005). Claims 7 and 10 are method claims corresponding to the apparatus claims 17 and 20 that have already been rejected above. The applicant’s attention is directed to the rejection of claims 17 and 20. Claims 7 and 10 are rejected under the same rational as claims 17 and 20. Claim(s) 9 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZHOU, ABDELGHAFFAR, YAO, and CHENG as applied to claims 6 and 16 above, and further in view of SUN. Regarding claim 19, ZHOU, ABDELGHAFFAR, YAO, and CHENG teach the base station of claim 16, ZHOU, ABDELGHAFFAR, YAO, and CHENG fail to explicitly disclose information regarding, “wherein, in case that the number of default beams for the PDSCH is two and the two TCI states corresponding to the second CORESET do not overlap with the two default beams for the PDSCH, the beam for the PDSCH is identified based on one of the two default beams for the PDSCH and one of the two TCI states corresponding to the second CORESET.” However, in analogous art, SUN teaches wherein, in case that the number of default beams for the PDSCH is two and the two TCI states corresponding to the second CORESET do not overlap with the two default beams for the PDSCH, the beam for the PDSCH is identified based on one of the two default beams for the PDSCH and one of the two TCI states corresponding to the second CORESET. SUN writes, “Release 16 of 5G NR supports multi-downlink control information (DCI), multi-transmission reception point (TRP) communications. As such, a UE can receive two physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) transmissions from two TRPs. Release 16 also supports fully overlapping, partially overlapping, and non-overlapping PDSCHs in the time domain and/or the frequency domain” (paragraph 0017). SUN elaborates, “Some exemplary embodiments are related to a computer readable storage medium comprising a set of instructions that when executed by a processor cause the processor to perform operations. The operations include receiving a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) transmission configured with downlink control information (DCI) in a single-DCI, multi-transmission/reception point (TRP) operation, wherein the DCI schedules reception of a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) transmission, determining whether or not a TCI field is configured in the DCI, when the TCI field is not configured in the DCI, determining a default beam based on a control resource set (CORESET) with the lowest ID in the PDCCH and when the TCI field is configured in the DCI, determining whether the TCI field indicates a TCI codepoint includes two TCI states” (paragraph 0005). SUN states a UE can receive two physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) transmissions from two TRPs, and Release 16 also supports fully overlapping, partially overlapping, and non-overlapping PDSCHs in the time domain and/or the frequency domain. SUN continues when the TCI field is not configured in the DCI, determining a default beam based on a control resource set (CORESET) with the lowest ID in the PDCCH and when the TCI field is configured in the DCI, determining whether the TCI field indicates a TCI codepoint includes two TCI states. SUN indicates the number of default beams for the PDSCH is two and the two TCI states corresponding to the CORESET do not overlap and the beam for the PDSCH is identified based on one of the two default beams for the PDSCH and one of the two TCI states corresponding to the CORESET. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention and method of ZHOU, ABDELGHAFFAR, YAO, and CHENG to include aspects of the method and apparatus described by SUN in which "The exemplary embodiments relate to reporting user equipment (UE) physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) overlapping capability with a gNB of a 5G new radio (NR) network." SUN provides motivation for modification of the invention stating, "The exemplary embodiments advantageously improve throughput and reception by the UE" (paragraph 0014). Claim 9 is a method claim corresponding to the apparatus claim 19 that has already been rejected above. The applicant’s attention is directed to the rejection of claim 19. Claim 9 is rejected under the same rational as claim 19. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER A REYES whose telephone number is (703)756-4558. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 - 5:00 EDT. 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, KHALED KASSIM can be reached at (571) 270-3770. 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. /Christopher A. Reyes/Examiner, Art Unit 2475 2/24/2026 /KHALED M KASSIM/supervisory patent examiner, Art Unit 2475
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 10, 2022
Application Filed
Dec 20, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Mar 31, 2025
Response Filed
May 14, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Jul 21, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 20, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Aug 26, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 05, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Dec 02, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Dec 02, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Dec 09, 2025
Response Filed
Feb 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12598621
Device and Method for Handling a Multi-cell Scheduling
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593337
RESOURCE DETERMINATION METHOD AND APPARATUS, DEVICES, AND STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12457249
STORAGE MEDIUM TO STORE TRANSMISSION DATA SETTING SUPPORT PROGRAM, GATEWAY DEVICE, AND TRANSMISSION DATA SETTING SUPPORTING METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Oct 28, 2025
Patent 12294868
Method Of Building Ad-Hoc Network Of Wireless Relay Node And Ad-Hoc Network System
2y 5m to grant Granted May 06, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 4 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

4-5
Expected OA Rounds
88%
Grant Probability
81%
With Interview (-6.3%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 8 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month