Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12/22/25 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments 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. Please see rejections below for details.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 17,15,9,10,14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication No. 2023/0155783 A1 to Liu et al., in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2022/0294514 A1 to Kang et al.
As to claim 17, Liu discloses a system comprising a terminal and a base station (Fig. 3: UE and gNB), wherein the terminal comprises:
a receiver (Fig. 3: transceiver) that receives a MAC control element (MAC CE) indicating multiple transmission configuration indication (TCI) states for one control resource set (CORESET) (paragraphs 6, 11-17, 54-59, 74, 84: “for the CORESET transmitting the DCI scheduling the PDSCH (no matter whether or not tci-PresentInDCI or tci-PresentInDCI-ForFormat1_2 is configured for the CORESET), the default TCI state for the reception of the scheduled PDSCH is determined by one of the TCI states activated in the activation command (e.g. PDSCH TCI state activation/deactivation MAC CE)”, thus teaching that the MAC CE activates, or is associated with, multiple TCI states for one coreset, teaching this limitation); and
a processor (Fig. 3: transceiver and processor) that controls reception of a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) (paragraphs 11-17, disclosing reception of PDCCH), and
the base station comprises: a transmitter (Fig. 3, transceiver and processor) that transmits the MAC CE (paragraphs 6, 11-17, 54-59, 74: MAC CE activation command).
Liu does not appear to explicitly disclose controls reception of a first PDCCH and a second PDCCH, each carrying a same DCI, using the multiple TCI states, wherein the first PDCCH is from a first TRP and the second PDCCH is from a second TRP.
Kang discloses controls reception of a first PDCCH and a second PDCCH, each carrying a same DCI, using the multiple TCI states (paragraphs 190-197, especially 190 and 197: “TRP 1 transmits the same data/DCI in resource 1 and TRP 2 transmits the same data/DCI in resource 2” and “when the same data/DCI is received in resource 1 and resource 2, a DL TCI state used in resource 1 and a DL TCI state used in resource 2 may be configured”, where the “same data/DCI” is transmitted by the TRPs to a UE, where this same DCI is carried/transmitted in PDCCHs transmitted from the various TRPs), wherein the first PDCCH is from a first TRP and the second PDCCH is from a second TRP (see discussion above).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the teachings as disclosed in Kang, in conjunction with the method as disclosed and taught by Liu, to reject the limitations of this claim. In particular, it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA that the processor configured to receive pdcch in Liu could have been combined with or modified by Kang’s teachings above to receive multiple PDCCHs in the manner disclosed in Kang, so that Liu’s teaching of “a processor that controls reception of a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH)” and Kang’s teaching of “controls reception of a first PDCCH and a second PDCCH, each carrying a same DCI, using the multiple TCI states, wherein the first PDCCH is from a first TRP and the second PDCCH is from a second TRP” are combinable to reject “a processor that controls reception of a first PDCCH and a second PDCCH, each carrying a same DCI, using the multiple TCI states, wherein the first PDCCH is from a first TRP and the second PDCCH is from a second TRP”. Furthermore, Kang’s disclosed “multiple TCI states” may obviously be further characterized by and incorporated with the features of being “in the one coreset” as taught in Liu, so that Liu and Kang’s combined teaching above may be further combined with Liu’s teaching of “multiple TCI states for one CORESET”, to reject “a processor that controls reception of a first PDCCH and a second PDCCH, each carrying a same DCI, using the multiple TCI states in the one CORESET, wherein the first PDCCH is from a first TRP and the second PDCCH is from a second TRP”. The cited references are in the field of endeavor relating to the transmission of wireless/logical/physical channels based on TCI configurations. The suggestion/motivation would have been to optimize and improve methods for managing the configuration of TCI parameters for wireless communications. (Kang, paragraphs 1-27; Kim, cols. 1-3; Liu, paragraphs 1-17; Wu, paragraphs 1-16). Furthermore, please note that the features of the limitations above have been shown to be known or disclosed in the cited references, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date.
As to claims 9, 15, see rejection for claim 17.
As to claim 10, Liu and Kang teach the system as in the parent claim 9.
Liu discloses wherein the MAC CE includes a bit field indicating the one CORESET, and a bit field indicating the multiple TCI states. (paragraphs 74, 84: “for the CORESET transmitting the DCI scheduling the PDSCH (no matter whether or not tci-PresentInDCI or tci-PresentInDCI-ForFormat1_2 is configured for the CORESET), the default TCI state for the reception of the scheduled PDSCH is determined by one of the TCI states activated in the activation command (e.g. PDSCH TCI state activation/deactivation MAC CE)”, thus teaching that the MAC CE activates, or is associated with, multiple TCI states, thus containing information on the CORESET and the multiple TCI states, teaching this limitation).
Liu does not appear to explicitly disclose information on the serving cell.
Kang discloses information on the serving cell (paragraphs 118,187, Table 7: serving cells).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the teachings as disclosed in Kang, in conjunction with the combined teachings/method as disclosed and taught by Liu, to reject the limitations of this claim. In particular, it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA that MAC CE disclosed in Liu may be utilized to communicate the serving cell information disclosed in Kang, to reject “bit field indicating a serving cell” The cited references are in the field of endeavor relating to parameters for the transmission of wireless/logical/physical channels. The suggestion/motivation would have been to optimize and improve methods for managing the configuration of parameters for wireless communications. (Kim, cols. 1-3; Xiao, paragraphs 1-10; Liu, paragraphs 1-17; Wu, paragraphs 1-16; Kang, paragraphs 1-15). Furthermore, please note that the features of the limitations above have been shown to be known or disclosed in the cited references, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date.
As to claim 14, Liu and Kang teach the system as in parent claim 9.
Liu discloses capability information indicating support of a CORESET for which multiple TCI states are indicated. (paragraphs 6, 11-17, 54-59, 74, 84: “for the CORESET transmitting the DCI scheduling the PDSCH (no matter whether or not tci-PresentInDCI or tci-PresentInDCI-ForFormat1_2 is configured for the CORESET), the default TCI state for the reception of the scheduled PDSCH is determined by one of the TCI states activated in the activation command (e.g. PDSCH TCI state activation/deactivation MAC CE)”, thus teaching the UE being capable of supporting a CORESET for which multiple TCI states are indicated)
Liu does not appear to disclose a transmitter that transmits capability information.
Kang discloses a transmitter that transmits capability information (Fig. 9, paragraphs 275,276: UE transmitting “UE capability information to a base station”).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the transmitter disclosed in Kang, to transmit the capability information disclosed in Liu, to reject the limitations of this claim. The cited references are in the field of endeavor relating to parameters for the transmission of wireless/logical/physical channels. The suggestion/motivation would have been to optimize and improve methods for managing the configuration of parameters for wireless communications. (Kang, paragraphs 1-15; Kim, cols. 1-3; Baheri, paragraphs 5-8; Xiao, paragraphs 1-10; Liu, paragraphs 1-17; Wu, paragraphs 1-16). Furthermore, please note that the features of the limitations above have been shown to be known or disclosed in the cited references, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication No. 2023/0155783 A1 to Liu et al., in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2022/0294514 A1 to Kang et al., further in view of U.S. Patent No. 12,108,426 B2 to Kim et al.
As to claim 12, Liu and Kang teach the system as in parent claim 9.
Liu and Kang do not appear to explicitly disclose wherein the receiver receives the MAC CE when a higher layer parameter for configuring multiple TCI states for a CORESET is configured.
Kim discloses wherein the receiver receives the MAC CE when a higher layer parameter for configuring multiple TCI states for a CORESET is configured. (col. 39, lines 44-50: MAC CE activating multiple TCI states for one CORESET and thus configuring the parameters for communications)
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the teachings as disclosed in Kim, in conjunction with Liu and Kang’s combined teachings discussed above, to reject the limitations of this claim. In particular, it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA that the processor configured to transmit pdcch in Liu could have been combined with or modified by Kim’s teaching of communicating pdcch based on the multiple TCI states for one CORESET, to reject the claimed invention, at least since both of these teachings pertain to pdcch transmission. The cited references are in the field of endeavor relating to the transmission of wireless/logical/physical channels based on TCI configurations. The suggestion/motivation would have been to optimize and improve methods for managing the configuration of TCI parameters for wireless communications. (Kim, col. 1-3; Liu, paragraphs 1-17; Kang, paragraphs 1-27; Wu, paragraphs 1-16). Furthermore, please note that the features of the limitations above have been shown to be known or disclosed in the cited references, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication No. 2023/0155783 A1 to Liu et al., in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2022/0294514 A1 to Kang et al., further in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 20210112610 A1 to Xiao et al.
As to claim 11, Liu and Kang teach the system as in the parent claim 9.
Liu discloses a MAC CE indicating one TCI state for one CORESET (paragraphs 74, 84: “for the CORESET transmitting the DCI scheduling the PDSCH (no matter whether or not tci-PresentInDCI or tci-PresentInDCI-ForFormat1_2 is configured for the CORESET), the default TCI state for the reception of the scheduled PDSCH is determined by one of the TCI states activated in the activation command (e.g. PDSCH TCI state activation/deactivation MAC CE)”, thus teaching that a given MAC CE may activate, or be associated with, multiple TCI states for one coreset, teaching this limitation).
Liu and Kang do not appear to explicitly disclose wherein the MAC CE has a logical channel ID (LCID) different from an LCID of a second MAC CE.
Xiao discloses wherein the MAC CE has a logical channel ID (LCID) different from an LCID of a second MAC CE (paragraphs 151).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the teachings as disclosed in Xiao, in conjunction with Liu and Kang’s combined teachings discussed above, to reject the limitations of this claim. In particular, it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA that the second MAC CE disclosed in Xiao may be modified by Liu so that it indicates one TCI state for one CORESET, to reject this claim. The suggestion/motivation would have been to optimize and improve methods for managing the configuration of parameters for wireless communications. (Kim, cols. 1-3; Kang, paragraphs 1-15; Xiao, paragraphs 1-10; Liu, paragraphs 1-17; Wu, paragraphs 1-16). Furthermore, please note that the features of the limitations above have been shown to be known or disclosed in the cited references, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHI TANG P CHENG whose telephone number is (571)272-9021. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9:30AM - 6PM.
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, Asad M Nawaz can be reached at (571)272-3988. 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.
/CHI TANG P CHENG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2463