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 Arguments
Claims 1, 4, 6, 9, 11, and 14 have been amended.
Claims 1, 4, 6, 9, 11, 14, 21-23, and 29-33 are pending.
1. Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claim(s) have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Election/Restrictions
Newly submitted claims 29-30 are directed to an invention that is independent or distinct from the invention originally claimed for the following reasons:
Claims 29-30 are directed to a method for grouping CORESETs and monitoring PDCCH based on TCI state relationships among overlapping CORESETS in a monitoring occasion. This is in contrast to the originally claimed invention which is directed to a UE configured to group resource sets and monitor a channel based on matching spatial states across overlapping resources sets in a time window, which are mutually exclusive limitations that reflect different species that would be considered a search burden for having divergent subject matter requiring different search strategies.
Since applicant has received an action on the merits for the originally presented invention, this invention has been constructively elected by original presentation for prosecution on the merits. Accordingly, claims 29-30 are withdrawn from consideration as being directed to a non-elected invention. See 37 CFR 1.142(b) and MPEP § 821.03.
To preserve a right to petition, the reply to this action must distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement. Otherwise, the election shall be treated as a final election without traverse. Traversal must be timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are subsequently added, applicant must indicate which of the subsequently added claims are readable upon the elected invention.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 6, 11, and 31-33 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In Claim 1, line 22, “a first QCL type” should be “the first QCL type”.
In Claims 1, 6, and 11, the acronym “QCL” should be spelled out the first time it is mentioned.
In Claims 31-33, “the first resource set group comprises is a plurality…” should be “the first resource set group comprises a plurality…”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1, 4, 6, 9, 11, 14, 21-23, 31-33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LIU et al. (US 20210235431, hereinafter, “Liu”) in view of KIM et al. (US 20220217694, hereinafter, “KIM”), and further in view of JANG et al. (US 20220295457, hereinafter, “JANG”).
Claim 1. Liu teaches: A User Equipment (UE) for wireless communications, comprising: - See Fig. 7, ¶ [0126], (“user equipment”)
a processor, - See Fig. 7, ¶ [0021], (processor) the processor configured to determine a first resource set out of M resource sets and a first resource set group, - in ¶ [0080], (“the obtaining a first resource pool in at least one of the following manners: obtaining the predefined first resource pool; obtaining the preconfigured first resource pool; and obtaining the configured first resource pool”); ¶ [0086 -0087], (“at least one resource pool entity used in the first resource pool is determined”) wherein M is a positive integer greater than 1, - in ¶ [0095], (“When M resource pool entities are configured…1 to M are used as identifiers of the resource pool entities.”, 1 to M (M is greater than 1))
wherein the first resource set group comprises the first resource set, wherein the first resource set group comprises resource sets that the UE monitors together based on matching a first QCL type; - in ¶ [0085 - 0086], (“the first resource pool includes at least one resource pool entity…If the first resource pool includes a plurality of resource pool entities, the first resource pool is a collective name of resource pool entities having a same property.”) and
the processor operatively connected to a transceiver, - in ¶ [0371], (“a transceiver”) wherein the transceiver and processor are configured to monitor a first-type channel in the first resource set group in a first time window; - in ¶ [0041], (“monitoring the first resource pool in a first time window”)
wherein any two of the M resource sets are overlapped in time domain in the first time window; - in ¶ [0083 - 0084], (“at least two of the predefined first resource pool…the preconfigured first resource pool are compatible, and being compatible includes at least one of the following…time domain resources are same”, time domain resources are the same (overlap))
Liu does not explicitly teach:
wherein each of the M resource sets is associated with one or two spatial states, wherein a reference resource set is any of the M resource sets different from the first resource set, wherein the reference resource set is connected to a reference spatial state, wherein the first resource set group further comprises the reference resource set, wherein the first resource set is connected to a first spatial state and a second spatial state, and wherein one of the first spatial state and the second spatial state is configured with a same property of a first QCL type as the reference spatial state, wherein the first QCL type is QCL-TypeD.
However, KIM teaches:
wherein each of the M resource sets is associated with one or two spatial states, - in ¶ [0289-290], (“two TCI states configured in CORESET 1 are defined as different QCL properties…if there is a CORESET in which two TCI states are configured among CORESETs”)
wherein a reference resource set is any of the M resource sets different from the first resource set, - See Fig. 9, ¶ [0309], (“a QCL configuration for a second CORESET (CORESET B) may include different information on QCL type-D properties (e.g., QCL type-D RS) from a first CORESET (CORESET A).”)
wherein the reference resource set is connected to a reference spatial state, - in ¶ [0309 - 0310], (“a QCL configuration for a second CORESET (CORESET B) may include different information on QCL type-D properties…(e.g., same QCL type-D RS)…of CORESET B”, Reference spatial state = QCL-TypeD RS associated with CORESET B (reference resource set))
wherein the first resource set group further comprises the reference resource set, - in ¶ [0308 - 0309], (“a UE may select a total of two CORESETs (i.e., a first CORESET selected by a priority rule and a second CORESET linked to the first CORESET)…a UE may monitor/receive a PDCCH in the selected first CORESET (CORESET A) and the second CORESET (CORESET B).”)
wherein the first resource set is connected to a first spatial state and a second spatial state, - in ¶ [0289], (“two TCI states configured in CORESET 1…”) and wherein one of the first spatial state and the second spatial state is configured with a same property of a first QCL type as the reference spatial state, - in ¶ [0289], (“a union of QCL properties defined in the two TCI states may be applied. As a result, a UE can perform channel estimation…from the QCL reference RS.”); ¶ [0310], (“a UE may monitor…any CORESET(s) configured with the same properties (e.g., same QCL type-D RS)…as QCL type-D properties (e.g., QCL type-D RS) of CORESET B”) wherein the first QCL type is QCL-TypeD. - in ¶ [0310], (“a UE may monitor…any CORESET(s) configured with the same properties (e.g., same QCL type-D RS)…as QCL type-D properties (e.g., QCL type-D RS) of CORESET B”)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Liu with KIM to include resource sets sharing a QCL property through spatial states, as taught by KIM. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to ensure compatibility between resource sets and improve reliability, as suggested by KIM, This may increase the possibility of transmission/reception of high reliability traffic by prioritizing a CORESET configured for reliability improvement over a CORESET that are not. - ¶ [0291]
Combination of Liu and KIM does not explicitly teach:
wherein the first resource set group comprises resource sets that the UE monitors together based on matching a first QCL type;
However, JANG teaches:
wherein the first resource set group comprises resource sets that the UE monitors together – in ¶ [0656], (“The UE may receive the control resource sets connected to the same number, the same type of QCL-TypeD characteristics, and the same type of search space as the specific control resource set determined by the reference 1 in the corresponding PDCCH monitoring period using the corresponding QCL-TypeD characteristics.”) based on matching a first QCL type; - in ¶ [0606], (“all QCL-TypeD characteristics of each control resource set are a subset of all QCL-TypeD characteristics of a specific control resource set determined by the reference 1 among the control resource sets”)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Liu and KIM with JANG to include the first resource set group comprises resource sets that the UE monitors together based on matching a first QCL type, as taught by JANG. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to improve reliability, as suggested by JANG, The UE may improve reception reliability of the control information. - ¶ [0508]
Claim 4. Combination of Liu, KIM, and JANG teaches The UE according to claim 1, - refer to the indicated claim for reference(s).
Liu teaches:
wherein the processor and transceiver receives first information; - See Fig. 7, (processor); ¶ [0371], (“a transceiver”) wherein the first information is used to determine first resource set. - in ¶ [0087 - 0088], (“at least one resource pool entity used in the first resource pool is determined in at least one of the following manners…selecting a resource pool entity…based on indication information sent by the network side device”)
Claim 6. Liu teaches: A base station for wireless communications, comprising: - See Fig. 6, ¶ [0315], (“the network side device 500 includes: a processor 501, a transceiver 502”)
a processor operatively connected to a transceiver, the processor and transceiver - See Fig. 6, ¶ [0315], (“the network side device 500 includes: a processor 501, a transceiver 502”) configured to
transmit a first-type channel in a first resource set group in a first time window, - in ¶ [0041], (“monitoring the first resource pool in a first time window”) wherein the first resource set group comprises at least one resource set in M resource sets, - in ¶ [0085], (“the first resource pool includes at least one resource pool entity); ¶ [0087], (“at least one resource pool entity used in the first resource pool is determined”) M being a positive integer greater than 1, - in ¶ [0095], (“When M resource pool entities are configured…1 to M are used as identifiers of the resource pool entities.”, 1 to M (eq. M is greater than 1))
wherein each of the M resource sets are overlapped in time domain in the first time window, wherein the first resource set group comprises resource sets that the UE monitors together based on matching a first QCL type; - in ¶ [0083 - 0084], (“at least two of the predefined first resource pool…the preconfigured first resource pool are compatible, and being compatible includes at least one of the following…time domain resources are same”, time domain resources are the same (overlap))
wherein the first resource set group comprises a first resource set, - in ¶ [0085], (“the first resource pool includes at least one resource pool entity)
Liu does not explicitly teach:
wherein each of the M resource sets is connected to one or two spatial states, wherein a reference resource set is any of the M resource sets different from the first resource set, wherein the reference resource set is connected to a reference spatial state, wherein the first resource set group further comprises the reference resource set, wherein the first resource set is connected to a first spatial state and a second spatial state, and wherein one of the first spatial state and the second spatial state is configured with a same property for the first QCL type as the reference spatial state, wherein the first QCL type is QCL-TypeD.
However, KIM teaches:
wherein each of the M resource sets is connected to one or two spatial states, - in ¶ [0289-290], (“two TCI states configured in CORESET 1 are defined as different QCL properties…if there is a CORESET in which two TCI states are configured among CORESETs”)
wherein a reference resource set is any of the M resource sets different from the first resource set, - in ¶ [0309], (“a QCL configuration for a second CORESET (CORESET B) may include different information on QCL type-D properties (e.g., QCL type-D RS) from a first CORESET (CORESET A).”)
wherein the reference resource set is connected to a reference spatial state, - in ¶ [0309 - 0310], (“a QCL configuration for a second CORESET (CORESET B) may include different information on QCL type-D properties…(e.g., same QCL type-D RS)…of CORESET B”, Reference spatial state = QCL-TypeD RS associated with CORESET B (reference resource set))
wherein the first resource set group further comprises the reference resource set, - in ¶ [0308], (“a UE may select a total of two CORESETs (i.e., a first CORESET selected by a priority rule and a second CORESET linked to the first CORESET)”)
wherein the first resource set is connected to a first spatial state and a second spatial state, - in ¶ [0289], (“two TCI states configured in CORESET 1…”) and wherein one of the first spatial state and the second spatial state is configured with a same property for the first QCL type as the reference spatial state, - in ¶ [0289], (“a union of QCL properties defined in the two TCI states may be applied. As a result, a UE can perform channel estimation…from the QCL reference RS.”); ¶ [0310], (“a UE may monitor…any CORESET(s) configured with the same properties (e.g., same QCL type-D RS)…as QCL type-D properties (e.g., QCL type-D RS) of CORESET B”) wherein the first QCL type is QCL-TypeD. - in ¶ [0310], (“a UE may monitor…any CORESET(s) configured with the same properties (e.g., same QCL type-D RS)…as QCL type-D properties (e.g., QCL type-D RS) of CORESET B”)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Liu with KIM to include resource sets sharing a QCL property through spatial states, as taught by KIM. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to ensure compatibility between resource sets and improve reliability, as suggested by KIM, a higher priority may be configured in a CORESET in which multiple TCI states are configured. This may increase the possibility of transmission/reception of high reliability traffic by prioritizing a CORESET configured for reliability improvement over a CORESET that are not. - ¶ [0291]
Combination of Liu and KIM does not explicitly teach:
wherein the first resource set group comprises resource sets that the UE monitors together based on matching a first QCL type;
However, JANG teaches:
wherein the first resource set group comprises resource sets that the UE monitors together – in ¶ [0656], (“The UE may receive the control resource sets connected to the same number, the same type of QCL-TypeD characteristics, and the same type of search space as the specific control resource set determined by the reference 1 in the corresponding PDCCH monitoring period using the corresponding QCL-TypeD characteristics.”) based on matching a first QCL type; - in ¶ [0606], (“all QCL-TypeD characteristics of each control resource set are a subset of all QCL-TypeD characteristics of a specific control resource set determined by the reference 1 among the control resource sets”)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Liu and KIM with JANG to include the first resource set group comprises resource sets that the UE monitors together based on matching a first QCL type, as taught by JANG. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to improve reliability, as suggested by JANG, The UE may improve reception reliability of the control information. - ¶ [0508]
Claim 21. Combination of Liu, KIM, and JANG teaches The UE of claim 1, - refer to the indicated claim for reference(s).
KIM further teaches:
wherein the first-type channel is a control channel. - See Fig. 6, ¶ [0180], (“PDCCH candidates that a UE monitors“)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Liu with KIM to include the first-type channel is a control channel, as taught by KIM. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to clarify the channel being monitored and improve reliability, as suggested by KIM, reliability and robustness of downlink control information transmission and reception can be improved. - ¶ [0011]
Claim 31. Combination of Liu, KIM, and JANG teaches The UE of claim 1, - refer to the indicated claim for reference(s).
KIM further teaches:
wherein the first resource set group comprises is a plurality of CORESETS from one bandwidth part. - See Table 9, (“CORESETs with non-zero CORESET ID (controlResourceSetId) are configured in the same BWP…”); ¶ [0258], (“monitors PDCCHs in one or more CORESETs having the same QCL-typeD properties as the ‘one CORESET’ among the multiple CORESETs on an activated DL BWP”)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Liu with KIM to include the first resource set group comprises a plurality of CORESETS from one bandwidth part, as taught by KIM. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification to ensure compatibility between resource sets and improve reliability, as suggested by KIM, This may increase the possibility of transmission/reception of high reliability traffic by prioritizing a CORESET configured for reliability improvement over a CORESET that are not. - ¶ [0291]
Claims 9, 14 are rejected under the same rationale as Claim 4 since they recite nearly identical limitations.
Claim 11 is rejected under the same rationale as Claim 1 since they recite nearly identical limitations.
Claims 22, 23 are rejected under the same rationale as Claim 21 since they recite nearly identical limitations.
Claims 32, 33 are rejected under the same rationale as Claim 31 since they recite nearly identical limitations.
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 Shima Wasel whose telephone number is (703)756-4725. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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.
/SHIMA WASEL/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2475
/KHALED M KASSIM/supervisory patent examiner, Art Unit 2475
Prosecution Insights