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
Applicant’s arguments, see section titled “Objections to the Claims”, with respect to claims 1-2, 6, 11, and 25 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection of claims 1-2, 6, 11, and 25 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see section titled “35 U.S.C. § 112(b)”, with respect to claims 2-6 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claims 2-6 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see section titled “Independent Claim 1”, with respect to claim(s) 1 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.
Applicant’s arguments, see sections titled “Independent Claim 11”, “Independent Claim 21”, and “Independent Claim 26” with respect to claims 11, 21, and 26 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103 of claims 11, 21, and 26 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see section titled “Dependent Claims 2-6, 13-17, 22-25, and 28-33”, with respect to claim(s) 2-6 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.
Applicant’s arguments, see sections titled “Dependent Claims 2-6, 13-17, 22-25, and 28-33”, with respect to claims 13-17, 22-25, and 28-33 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103 of claims 13-17, 22-25, and 28-33 has been withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim(s) 21-25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 21, Applicant has amended claim 21 now recite, in view of “An apparatus for wireless communication at a base station”, “output an indication…set a bit…”. Applicant states that support is found in ¶ 81, 144, and 150. After a review of these paragraphs and the rest of the specification, the specification does not provide support for the above limitations. Claims 22-25 fails to resolve the deficiency of claim 21 and are thus rejected under similar rationale.
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 for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1 and 3-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20200389884 by Hakola et al. (hereinafter Hakola) in view of US 20200100311 by Cirik et al. (hereinafter Cirik) (IDS filed 6/7/24) and in further view of US 20220110181 by Miao.
Regarding claim 1, Hakola teaches a user equipment (UE) (fig. 3, UE 110), comprising:
obtain information identifying a resource set that includes a pair of reference signals (¶ 4, a UE is configured with a transmission configuration indication (TCI) table in which each row/state is associated with…two reference signals (RSs) that act as a source RS(s); ¶ 12, To declare beam failure…In the case where multiple RS are used (e.g.,…NW has configured multiple beam failure RS); ¶ 13, DL RSs associated to active TCI states configured for the CORESET are evaluated for beam failure detection; ¶ 64, all (periodic) DL RSs associated to active TCI states configured for the CORESET are evaluated for beam failure detection; ¶ 96, UE is configured with a TCI table to indicate source RSs; ¶ 101, UE in this exemplary embodiment is also configured with the following as shown in item 502: a TCI table to indicate source RSs; fig. 1); and
a processing system configured to (fig. 3, processor(s) 120 and memory(ies) 125; ¶ 85):
monitor for a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) transmission using at least two transmission control indicator (TCI) states (¶ 65, control resource sets that the UE is configured for monitoring PDCCH; ¶ 3, CORESET defines physical time and frequency resources on which NR-PDCCH (Physical Downlink Control Channel) can be transmitted; ¶ 13, DL RSs associated to active TCI states configured for the CORESET are evaluated for beam failure detection and when UE declares beam failure (all the active TCI states are considered to be in failure condition so that beam failure can be declared); ¶ 77, UE monitors from all configured CORESETs the active TCI state (or states) DL RS for determining the beam failure);
detect a beam failure according to the resource set and based at least in part on the monitoring (¶ 4, a UE is configured with a transmission configuration indication (TCI) table in which each row/state is associated with…two reference signals (RSs) that act as a source RS(s); ¶ 12, To declare beam failure…In the case where multiple RS are used (e.g.,…NW has configured multiple beam failure RS); ¶ 13, DL RSs associated to active TCI states configured for the CORESET are evaluated for beam failure detection; ¶ 64, all (periodic) DL RSs associated to active TCI states configured for the CORESET are evaluated for beam failure detection; ¶ 96, UE is configured with a TCI table to indicate source RSs; ¶ 101, UE in this exemplary embodiment is also configured with the following as shown in item 502: a TCI table to indicate source RSs; fig. 1; ¶ 65, control resource sets that the UE is configured for monitoring PDCCH; ¶ 3, CORESET defines physical time and frequency resources on which NR-PDCCH (Physical Downlink Control Channel) can be transmitted; ¶ 13, DL RSs associated to active TCI states configured for the CORESET are evaluated for beam failure detection and when UE declares beam failure (all the active TCI states are considered to be in failure condition so that beam failure can be declared); ¶ 77, UE monitors from all configured CORESETs the active TCI state (or states) DL RS for determining the beam failure).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hakola’s teachings with Hakola’s one or more other embodiments’ teachings. The motivation is preserving system PDCCH capacity or allowing fast PDCCH beam switch procedure (Hakola ¶ 109-110).
Although Hakola teaches a first interface configured to (fig. 3, one or more transceivers 130), obtain information identifying a resource set that includes a pair of reference signals, a processing system, determine a set of candidate beams (¶ 11, The RS in the list are referred as candidate beams and indicated by a Candidate-beam-RS-list; ¶ 65, higher layer parameter Candidate-Beam-RS-List for radio link quality measurements on the serving cell; ¶ 74, there are potential candidate beams; ¶ 75, when selecting candidate beams for beam recovery, the UE may prioritize candidate beams that are configured as TCI states (but are not active and are above the candidate beam selection threshold) over the other candidate beams…detected candidate beams), and the detection of the beam failure, Hakola does not explicitly disclose a first interface configured to: obtain a configuration signal identifying a resource set that includes a pair of reference signals and a processing system configured to: determine a set of candidate beams based at least in part on the detection of the beam failure.
Cirik in the same or similar field of endeavor teaches a first interface configured to: obtain a configuration signal identifying a resource set that includes a pair of reference signals (¶ 232, communication interface 320A of the base station 1, 120A, and/or the communication interface 320B of the base station 2, 120B, may be configured to communicate with the communication interface 310 of the wireless device 110, for example, via a wireless link 330A and/or via a wireless link 330B, respectively; ¶ 389, one or more RS indexes in the one or more RS sets may be indicated by one or more TCI-states (e.g., via a higher layer parameter TCI-states); ¶ 267, A base station may send (e.g., transmit) higher layer signaling (e.g., RRC signaling)… comprising parameters; ¶ 352, A base station may configure a wireless device with one or more TCI-states using, and/or via, a higher layer parameter; ¶ 354, wireless device receives a higher layer configuration of TCI-states; ¶ 355, A wireless device may be configured, by a base station, with a higher layer parameter) and a processing system configured to: determine a set of candidate beams based at least in part on detection of a beam failure (¶ 228-229; ¶ 379, The wireless device may detect at least one beam failure according to at least one of BFR parameters and trigger a BFR procedure…The wireless device may select a beam (e.g., a selected beam) in response to detecting the at least one beam failure. The selected beam may be a beam with good channel quality (e.g., determined based on RSRP, SINR, or BLER, etc.) from a set of candidate beams. The set of candidate beams may be identified and/or indicated by a set of reference signals (e.g., SSBs, or CSI-RSs)). By modifying Hakola’s teachings of a first interface configured to, obtain information identifying a resource set that includes a pair of reference signals, a processing system, determine a set of candidate beams, and the detection of the beam failure with Cirik’s teachings of a first interface configured to: obtain a configuration signal identifying a resource set that includes a pair of reference signals and a processing system configured to: determine a set of candidate beams based at least in part on detection of a beam failure, the modification results in a first interface configured to: obtain a configuration signal identifying a resource set that includes a pair of reference signals and a processing system configured to: determine a set of candidate beams based at least in part on the detection of the beam failure.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hakola’s teachings with Cirik’s above teachings. The motivation is facilitating beam failure recovery (Cirik ¶ 4). Known work in one field of endeavor (Cirik prior art) may prompt variations of it for use in either the same field or a different one (Hakola prior art) based on design incentives (facilitating beam failure recovery) or other market forces if the variations are predictable to one or ordinary skill in the art.
Although the combination teaches the first interface and the set of candidate beams, the combination does not explicitly disclose the first interface is further configured to output an indication of the set of candidate beams for transmission in a media access control (MAC) control element (MAC-CE) or a physical random-access channel (PRACH), and wherein a bit of the MAC-CE indicates whether there are one or two reference signals with beam failure detected in the MAC-CE.
Miao in the same or similar field of endeavor teaches an interface configured to output an indication of a set of candidate beams for transmission in a media access control (MAC) control element (MAC-CE) or a physical random-access channel (PRACH) (¶ 5, processor circuitry may be further configured to transmit the control signal…using the radio front end circuitry; ¶ 7, the control signal can be…a physical random access channel (PRACH) information element (IE); ¶ 9, when the control signal is a PRACH IE, a subset of cell-specific candidate beams can be identified in the PRACH IE by including indices associated with the subset of candidate beams in a cell-specific uplink configuration message; ¶ 50, a Physical Random Access Channel (PRACH); ¶ 107, PRACH transmission), and wherein a bit of the MAC-CE indicates whether there are one or two reference signals with beam failure detected in the MAC-CE (given non-patentable weight since this wherein clause further limits a non-chosen alternative). By modifying the combination’s teachings of the first interface and the set of candidate beams with Miao’s teachings of an interface configured to output an indication of a set of candidate beams for transmission in a media access control (MAC) control element (MAC-CE) or a physical random-access channel (PRACH), and wherein a bit of the MAC-CE indicates whether there are one or two reference signals with beam failure detected in the MAC-CE, the modification results in the first interface is further configured to output an indication of the set of candidate beams for transmission in a media access control (MAC) control element (MAC-CE) or a physical random-access channel (PRACH), and wherein a bit of the MAC-CE indicates whether there are one or two reference signals with beam failure detected in the MAC-CE.
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 combination with Miao’s above teachings. The motivation is fast link recovery can be accomplished (Miao ¶ 25). Known work in one field of endeavor (Miao prior art) may prompt variations of it for use in either the same field or a different one (Hakola prior art) based on design incentives (fast link recovery can be accomplished) or other market forces if the variations are predictable to one or ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 3, the combination teaches the UE of claim 1, wherein the pair of reference signals comprises periodic channel state information reference signals (CSI-RS) resource configuration indexes, a set of synchronization signal block indexes, or a set of physical broadcast channel (PBCH) block indexes (Hakola ¶ 4, a UE is configured with a transmission configuration indication (TCI) table in which each row/state is associated with…two reference signals (RSs) that act as a source RS(s); ¶ 13, DL RSs associated to active TCI states configured for the CORESET are evaluated for beam failure detection; ¶ 64, all (periodic) DL RSs associated to active TCI states configured for the CORESET are evaluated for beam failure detection; ¶ 96, UE is configured with a TCI table to indicate source RSs; ¶ 101, UE in this exemplary embodiment is also configured with the following as shown in item 502: a TCI table to indicate source RSs; fig. 1; Cirik ¶ 389, a first set of periodic CSI-RS resource configuration indexes…a first set to include up to two RS indexes).
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 combination with Hakola’s one or more other embodiments’ teachings. The motivation is preserving system PDCCH capacity or allowing fast PDCCH beam switch procedure (Hakola ¶ 109-110).
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 combination with Cirik’s teachings of a pair of reference signals comprises periodic channel state information reference signals (CSI-RS) resource configuration indexes, a set of synchronization signal block indexes, or a set of physical broadcast channel (PBCH) block indexes. The motivation is facilitating beam failure recovery (Cirik ¶ 4).
Regarding claim 4, the combination teaches the UE of claim 1, wherein each of the pair of reference signals are configured with either one or both of the at least two TCI states (Hakola ¶ 4, a UE is configured with a transmission configuration indication (TCI) table in which each row/state is associated with…two reference signals (RSs) that act as a source RS(s); ¶ 13, DL RSs associated to active TCI states configured for the CORESET are evaluated for beam failure detection; ¶ 64, all (periodic) DL RSs associated to active TCI states configured for the CORESET are evaluated for beam failure detection; ¶ 96, UE is configured with a TCI table to indicate source RSs; ¶ 101, UE in this exemplary embodiment is also configured with the following as shown in item 502: a TCI table to indicate source RSs; fig. 1).
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 combination with Hakola’s one or more other embodiments’ teachings. The motivation is preserving system PDCCH capacity or allowing fast PDCCH beam switch procedure (Hakola ¶ 109-110).
Regarding claim 5, the combination teaches the UE of claim 1, wherein the processing system is further configured to (Hakola fig. 3, processor(s) 120 and memory(ies) 125; ¶ 85): monitor at least one control resource set (CORESET) associated with the at least two TCI states, monitoring one search space set associated with at least two CORESETs, or monitoring two search space sets associated with two CORESETs each having an active TCI state (Hakola ¶ 65, control resource sets that the UE is configured for monitoring PDCCH; ¶ 3, CORESET defines physical time and frequency resources on which NR-PDCCH (Physical Downlink Control Channel) can be transmitted; ¶ 13, DL RSs associated to active TCI states configured for the CORESET are evaluated for beam failure detection and when UE declares beam failure (all the active TCI states are considered to be in failure condition so that beam failure can be declared); ¶ 77, UE monitors from all configured CORESETs the active TCI state (or states) DL RS for determining the beam failure).
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 combination with Hakola’s one or more other embodiments’ teachings. The motivation is preserving system PDCCH capacity or allowing fast PDCCH beam switch procedure (Hakola ¶ 109-110).
Regarding claim 6, the combination teaches the UE of claim 1, wherein the pair of reference signals is for the determination of the set of candidate beams upon the detection of the beam failure (Hakola ¶ 4, a UE is configured with a transmission configuration indication (TCI) table in which each row/state is associated with…two reference signals (RSs) that act as a source RS(s); ¶ 12, To declare beam failure…In the case where multiple RS are used (e.g.,…NW has configured multiple beam failure RS); ¶ 13, DL RSs associated to active TCI states configured for the CORESET are evaluated for beam failure detection and when UE declares beam failure (all the active TCI states are considered to be in failure condition so that beam failure can be declared); ¶ 64, all (periodic) DL RSs associated to active TCI states configured for the CORESET are evaluated for beam failure detection; ¶ 96, UE is configured with a TCI table to indicate source RSs; ¶ 101, UE in this exemplary embodiment is also configured with the following as shown in item 502: a TCI table to indicate source RSs; fig. 1; Cirik ¶ 382, beam failure may be detected on one or more serving SSB(s) and/or CSI-RS(s) of the serving base station; ¶ 445, wireless device may assess the one or more third RSs (e.g., SSBs, CSI-RSs) to detect a beam failure; ¶ 379, The wireless device may select a beam (e.g., a selected beam) in response to detecting the at least one beam failure. The selected beam may be a beam with good channel quality (e.g., determined based on RSRP, SINR, or BLER, etc.) from a set of candidate beams. The set of candidate beams may be identified and/or indicated by a set of reference signals; ¶ 492, candidate beam identification procedure for the beam failure recovery).
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 combination with Hakola’s one or more other embodiments’ teachings. The motivation is preserving system PDCCH capacity or allowing fast PDCCH beam switch procedure (Hakola ¶ 109-110).
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 combination with Cirik’s teachings of a pair of reference signals is for determining a set of candidate beams upon detection of a beam failure. The motivation is facilitating beam failure recovery (Cirik ¶ 4).
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hakola and Cirik and Miao and in further view of US 20230300645 by Kwak et al. (hereinafter Kwak).
Regarding claim 2, the combination teaches the UE of claim 1, further comprising: the first interface or a second interface.
Although the combination teaches the first interface or a second interface, the set of candidate beams, and the determination of the set of candidate beams, the combination does not explicitly disclose the first interface or a second interface configured to: output the set of candidate beams for transmission to a base station based at least in part on the determination of the set of candidate beams.
Kwak in the same or similar field of endeavor teaches a first interface or a second interface configured to: output a set of candidate beams for transmission to a base station based at least in part on determining the set of candidate beams (fig. 1b, WTRU comprising a transceiver 120; ¶ 90, a WTRU may support a BFR MAC CE to report BFR and/or selected beams to the network (e.g., a gNB)…the BFR MAC CE may report or indicate zero…or more new candidate beams; ¶ 240, The number of selected or determined new candidate beams). By modifying the combination’s teachings of the first interface or a second interface, the set of candidate beams, and the determination of the set of candidate beams with Kwak’s teachings of a first interface or a second interface configured to: output a set of candidate beams for transmission to a base station based at least in part on determining the set of candidate beams, the modification results in the first interface or a second interface configured to: output the set of candidate beams for transmission to a base station based at least in part on the determination of the set of candidate beams.
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 combination with Kwak’s above teachings. The motivation is enabling reliable BFR procedure(s) and/or enabling efficient resource utilization of resources for BFR (Kwak ¶ 94). Known work in one field of endeavor (Kwak prior art) may prompt variations of it for use in either the same field or a different one (Hakola prior art) based on design incentives (enabling reliable BFR procedure(s) and/or enabling efficient resource utilization of resources for BFR) or other market forces if the variations are predictable to one or ordinary skill in the art.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11, 13-20, 26 and 28-33 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the amendments made to independent claims 11 and 26, incorporating features of allowable subject matter cited in the non-final rejection indicates the reason(s) the above claims are patentable over the prior arts of record.
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 PETER P CHAU whose telephone number is (571)270-7152. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30 A.M - 6 P.M. ET M-F.
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, Ayaz Sheikh can be reached at 571-272-3795. 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.
/PETER P CHAU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2476
Prosecution Insights