DETAILED ACTION
Notice of 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 .
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.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 24 Dec 2025 has been entered.
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged. In particular, this Application is the national stage application of an international application that claims foreign priority to a Chinese application filed on 15 Oct 2020. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Response to Arguments
The Reply finds Lee’s “indication, at best indicates an association relationship between PDCCH candidates in different CORESETs, which is not the same as an association relationship between different search spaces, that is, different sets of all possible PDCCH locations.” Reply, 9 (emphasis in original and omitted). The Reply does not persuasively rebut the arguments provided in the Advisory Action. As a result, a search space in the claimed invention remains undistinguished from a CORESET in Lee. In particular, a CORESET may be one or more search spaces. Lee, ¶59. In the embodiment in which each CORESET of Lee is one search space, there is no difference between the invention of the Reply’s arguments and Lee.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement, submitted on 11 June 2024, is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
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, 2, 6, 7, 10, and 19-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Lee (US 20200029310) or, in the alternative, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (of record) in view of Gong (US 20200154467).
Regarding claims 1 and 19-20, Lee teaches a communication method, a terminal device comprising a transceiver, processor, and memory, and a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, which stores computer-executable instructions, so that a processor implements the method comprising:
acquiring, by a terminal device, first information (Lee, ¶64 – UE receives RRC message with an indication),
wherein the first information is used to indicate an association relationship of physical downlink control channels (PDCCH) transmitted by N transmission-reception points, and the N is an integer greater than or equal to 2 (Lee, ¶65 – the indication indicates candidate PDCCHs in different CORESETs that correspond to one another; Lee, ¶64 – each CORESET is associated with one of two TRPs in figure 6);
receiving, by the terminal device, the PDCCHs based on the first information (Lee, ¶72 and figure 6 (UE receives and decodes multiple PDCCHs in accordance with the RRC message);
wherein the first information is used to indicate an association relationship between different search spaces (Lee, ¶59 – each CORESET is a different search space for the UE to find PDCCH; Lee, ¶65 – as a result, by indicating PDCCHs in different CORESETS that correspond to one another, the indication also indicates an association between PDCCHs in different search spaces).1
In the alternative, Lee also teaches
. . . different transmission-reception points correspond to different PDCCH candidate sets (Lee, ¶66 and item 625 in figure 6 – TRP A indicates PDCCH candidates 1-4, while TRP B indicates PDCCH candidates 1 and 2), and
the first information is used to indicate an association relationship between different PDCCH candidate sets (Lee, ¶¶64, 66 - indication in RRC message provides the corresponding pairs of PDCCH candidates),
wherein the N transmission-reception points comprise a first transmission-reception point and a second transmission-reception point (Lee, figures 5 and 6 – TRP A and TRP B);
the first transmission-reception point corresponds to a first PDCCH candidate set, and the second transmission-reception point corresponds to a second PDCCH candidate set (Lee, ¶66 and item 625 in figure 6 – TRP A indicates PDCCH candidates 1-4, while TRP B indicates PDCCH candidates 1 and 2);
the first information is used to indicate an association relationship between the first PDCCH candidate set and the second PDCCH candidate set (Lee, ¶¶64, 66 - indication in RRC message provides the corresponding pairs of PDCCH candidates);
wherein the first information is used to indicate an association relationship between an i-th PDCCH in the first PDCCH candidate set and an i-th PDCCH in the second PDCCH candidate set (Lee, ¶65 and element 620 in figure 6 (the PDCCH candidate 2 in CORESET A for TRP A corresponds to PDCCH candidate 2 in CORESET B for TRP B, where 2 is less than or equal to the at least 4 PDCCHs in each candidate set); wherein the i is less than or equal to a number of PDCCHs comprised in the first PDCCH candidate set, and the i is less than or equal to a number of PDCCHs comprised in the second PDCCH candidate set. Ibid. (with PDCCH candidate 2, is less than the 4 PDCCHs in each set).
Though Lee teaches both TRPs supporting the same radio access technology and thus the set of frequencies licensed for the RAT (Lee, ¶¶35, 47-48), Lee does not explicitly teach “wherein the N transmission-reception points correspond to a same frequency domain resource set.” However, Gong teaches two TRPs (Gong, figure 31A) that transmit control information in the same CORESET. Gong, ¶464. At the time of the invention (pre-AIA ) or at the effective filing date of the invention (AIA ), it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to enable the two TRPs, taught by Lee, to use the same CORESET, as taught by Gong, in order to have bot TRPs schedule duplicate transmissions, which may limit interference. Gong, ¶¶464-645.
Regarding claim 6, Lee teaches the method according to claim 1 . . . [and] the first information is used to indicate an association relationship between different PDCCH candidates in a same aggregation level. Lee, ¶65 (PDCCH candidates in CORESET A and CORESET B have the same aggregation level, 4). Lee does not explicitly teach “wherein the N transmission-reception points correspond to a same frequency domain resource set,” though Lee does teach both TRPs supporting the same radio access technology and thus the set of frequencies licensed for the RAT. Lee, ¶¶35, 47-48. However, Gong teaches two TRPs (Gong, figure 31A) that transmit control information in the same CORESET. Gong, ¶464. At the time of the invention (pre-AIA ) or at the effective filing date of the invention (AIA ), it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to enable the two TRPs, taught by Lee, to use the same CORESET, as taught by Gong, in order to have bot TRPs schedule duplicate transmissions, which may limit interference. Gong, ¶¶464-645.
Regarding claim 7, Lee also teaches wherein multiple search spaces correspond to a same frequency domain resource set; and the first information is used to indicate an association relationship between PDCCHs in at least two search spaces. Lee, ¶59 (each CORESET includes one or more search spaces for candidate PDCCHs); Lee, ¶65 (PDCCH candidates in CORESET A are associated with PDCCH candidates in CORESET B).
Regarding claim 10, Lee also teaches wherein one search space is associated with at least two frequency domain resource sets (Lee, ¶59 – each CORESET includes one or more search spaces, where a search space is a set of CCE locations that may include a PDCCH; Lee, ¶56 – CORESET comprising multiple resource blocks in the frequency domain; Lee, ¶57 e.g. CORESET [search space] 520 comprises two CCEs [frequency domain resource sets] 525); and the first information is used to indicate an association relationship between PDCCHs corresponding to the at least two frequency domain resource sets. Lee, ¶65 (indication provides a correspondence between PDCCH candidate locations [i.e. CCE locations that may include a PDCCH] in two CORESETs [i.e. at least two CCEs]).
Regarding claim 21, Lee also teaches wherein the first information may2 also be pre-configured or stipulated by a protocol. Lee, ¶64 (indication is included in a radio resource control [RRC is a layer 3 protocol] message); Lee, figure 10 (the indication is configured and transmitted before it is used to decode PDCCH candidates).
Claims 8 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (of record) or Lee in view of Gong (both of record), further in view of Moon (US 20200280971).
Regarding claim 8, Lee teaches the method according to claim 7, wherein the multiple search spaces comprise a first search space and a second search space (Lee, ¶59 – each CORESET may include one or more search spaces), . . . [and] the first information is used to indicate an association relationship between an i-th PDCCH candidate set in the first search space and an i-th PDCCH candidate set in the second search space, i≤M.sub.1, and i≤M.sub.2. Lee, figure 6 (in 620 and 625, PDCCH candidates on one CORESET are associated with PDCCH candidates in another CORESET, where each has a candidate PDCCH 1, where 1 is less than or equal to the number of search spaces).
Lee does not explicitly teach “the first search space comprises M.sub.1 PDCCH candidate sets in a period, the second search space comprises M.sub.2 PDCCH candidate sets in a period.” However, Moon teaches two search spaces for a terminal for two different periods. Moon, ¶307. The terminal monitors for PDCCHs in both periods. Ibid. At the time of the invention (pre-AIA ) or at the effective filing date of the invention (AIA ), it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to include two periods, as taught by Moon, within the search spaces, taught by Lee, in order to dynamically adjust the terminal’s PDCCH monitoring at different time periods, which is required when operating over an unlicensed band. Id. at ¶283.
Regarding claim 9, Lee teaches the method according to claim 7, but does not explicitly teach “wherein, in time domain, the M.sub.1 PDCCH candidate sets are arranged sequentially, and the M.sub.2 PDCCH candidate sets are arranged sequentially.” However, Moon teaches sequentially mapping the PDCCH candidates for search space sets within a time slot. Moon, ¶358. At the time of the invention (pre-AIA ) or at the effective filing date of the invention (AIA ), it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to sequentially arrange the PDCCH candidates, as taught by Moon, within the CORESETs/search space sets, taught by Lee, in order to ensure all PDCCH candidates can be monitored by the UE in a slot. Id. at ¶359.
Claims 11, 12, 14, 16, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (of record) or Lee in view of Gong (both of record), further in view of Noh (US 20200305134).
Regarding claim 11, Lee teaches the method according to claim 10 . . . [and] the first information is used to indicate an association relationship between PDCCH candidates in the third PDCCH candidate set and PDCCH candidates in the fourth PDCCH candidate set. Lee, ¶65-66 (elements 620 and 625 in figure 6 show a relationship between PDCCH candidates in each CORESET, transmitted by different TRPs). Lee does not explicitly teach “wherein different control resource sets (CORESET) are frequency division multiplexing (FDM); the at least two frequency domain resource sets comprise a first frequency domain resource set and a second frequency domain resource set, the first frequency domain resource set corresponds to a third PDCCH candidate set, and the second frequency domain resource set corresponds to a fourth PDCCH candidate set.” However, Noh teach frequency-division-multiplexing CORESETs 1210 and 1215, where each CORESET includes a PDCCH from its respective TRP. Noh, figure 12 and ¶256. At the time of the invention (pre-AIA ) or at the effective filing date of the invention (AIA ), it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to use FDM, as taught by Noh, when transmitting the PDCCH candidates, taught by Lee, in order to permit a multi-PDCCH transmission in frequency range 1 where the TRPs use the same QCL. Id. at ¶257.
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Lee and Noh also teaches wherein the first information is used to indicate an association relationship between an i-th PDCCH candidate in the third PDCCH candidate set and an i-th PDCCH candidate in the fourth PDCCH candidate set, the i is a positive integer less than or equal to P, and the P is a number of PDCCH candidates comprised in the search space. Lee, ¶65 and figure 6 (indication information 620 provides an association between each PDCCH candidate transmitted by TRP A and each PDCCH candidate transmitted by TRP B, where 4 is the number of PDCCH candidates in each search space and that equals the number of PDCCH candidates that have an association).
Regarding claim 14, Lee teaches the method according to claim 10, . . . [and] the first information is used to indicate an association relationship between an i-th first PDCCH candidate set in the T first PDCCH candidate sets and an i-th second PDCCH candidate set in the T second PDCCH candidate sets, and the i is a positive integer less than or equal to the T. Lee, ¶65-66 (elements 620 and 625 in figure 6 show a relationship between PDCCH candidates in each CORESET, transmitted by different TRPs). Lee does not explicitly teach “wherein the at least two frequency domain resource sets comprise a first frequency domain resource set and a second frequency domain resource set, the first frequency domain resource set corresponds to T third PDCCH candidate sets, the second frequency domain resource set corresponds to T fourth PDCCH candidate sets, and the T is an integer greater than or equal to 1.” However, Noh teaches two CORESETs 1210 and 1215, where each CORESET includes a PDCCH from its respective TRP. Noh, figure 12 and ¶256. Noh also teaches PDCCH monitoring that is based on the CORESET group ID, which is used to define which PDCCHs the UE will monitor. Id. at ¶¶11, 290. At the time of the invention (pre-AIA ) or at the effective filing date of the invention (AIA ), it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to use define PDCCH candidate sets based on CORESET groups, as taught by Noh, when transmitting the PDCCH candidates, taught by Lee, in order to comply with the restriction on the processing time needed by the UE to execute PDCCH monitoring. Id. at ¶255.
Regarding claim 16, Lee teaches the method according to claim 1, . . . [and] the first information is used to indicate an association relationship between PDCCH candidates in the first search space and PDCCH candidates in the second search space. Lee, ¶65-66 (elements 620 and 625 in figure 6 show a relationship between PDCCH candidates in each CORESET, transmitted by different TRPs); see also id. at ¶59 for each CORESET being a different search space for the UE to find PDCCHs. Lee does not explicitly teach “wherein a first search space is associated with a first frequency domain resource set, and a second search space is associated with a second frequency domain resource set.” However, Noh teach frequency-division-multiplexing CORESETs 1210 and 1215, where each CORESET includes a search space for a candidate PDCCH from its respective TRP. Noh, figure 12 and ¶256. At the time of the invention (pre-AIA ) or at the effective filing date of the invention (AIA ), it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to use FDM, as taught by Noh, when transmitting the CORESETs, taught by Lee, in order to permit a multi-PDCCH transmission in frequency range 1 where the TRPs use the same QCL. Id. at ¶257.
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Lee and Noh also teaches wherein the first information is used to indicate an association relationship between a third PDCCH candidate set in the first search space and a fourth PDCCH candidate set in the second search space (Lee, figure 6 – indications 620 and 625 provide the associated of PDCCH candidates within each CORESET); wherein, in time domain, the fourth PDCCH candidate set is a PDCCH candidate set closest to the third PDCCH candidate set and after the first PDCCH candidate set. Noh, figure 12 (case #2) and ¶259 (distance 1230 between each CORESET, which each contain at least one PDCCH candidate, is smaller than a predetermined value). At the time of the invention (pre-AIA ) or at the effective filing date of the invention (AIA ), it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to define associate CORESETs within the same slot, as taught by Noh, when defining the PDCCH candidates for monitoring, as taught by Lee, in order to enable the base station to change beams when transmitting the PDCCHs. Noh, ¶257.
Claims 13 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (of record) or Lee in view of Gong (both of record), further in view of Noh (US 20200305134) and Su (US 20230071462).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Lee and Noh teaches the method according to claim 11, but does not explicitly teach “wherein the third PDCCH candidate set comprises Q first PDCCH candidate sub-sets, and the fourth PDCCH candidate set comprises Q second PDCCH candidate sub-sets; the first information is used to indicate an association relationship between an i-th first PDCCH candidate sub-set in the third PDCCH candidate set and an i-th second PDCCH candidate sub-set in the fourth PDCCH candidate set.” However, Su teaches two subsets in each of two CORESETs. Su, figure 4C. Each sub-set includes at least two search spaces for PDCCH candidates. Su, ¶284. In one example, a search space consists of two PDCCH candidates and a second search space that consists of three PDCCH candidates, where PDCCH candidates in one search space are associated with a PDCCH candidates in the other search space. Su, ¶285. At the time of the invention (pre-AIA ) or at the effective filing date of the invention (AIA ), it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to divide the PDCCH candidates, taught by the combination of Lee and Noh, into subsets with each CORESET, as taught by Su, in order to send multiple PDCCH candidates for a TCI state, which improves the relability of DCI transmissions sent via the PDCCH. Su, ¶155.
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Lee and Noh teaches the method according to claim 14, but does not explicitly teach “wherein the i-th third PDCCH candidate set comprises S PDCCH candidates, and the i-th fourth PDCCH candidate set comprises S PDCCH candidates, the S is an integer greater than or equal to 1; the first information is further used to indicate an association relationship between a j-th PDCCH candidate in the i-th first PDCCH candidate set and a j-th PDCCH candidate in the i-th second PDCCH candidate set, and the j is an integer less than or equal to the S.” However, Su teaches two subsets in each of two CORESETs. Su, figure 4C. Each sub-set includes at least two search spaces for PDCCH candidates. Su, ¶284. In one example, a search space consists of two PDCCH candidates and a second search space that consists of three PDCCH candidates, where PDCCH candidates in one search space are associated with a PDCCH candidates in the other search space. Su, ¶285. At the time of the invention (pre-AIA ) or at the effective filing date of the invention (AIA ), it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to divide the PDCCH candidates, taught by the combination of Lee and Noh, into subsets with each CORESET, as taught by Su, in order to send multiple PDCCH candidates for a TCI state, which improves the reliability of DCI transmissions sent via the PDCCH. Su, ¶155.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (of record) or Lee in view of Gong (both of record), in view of Noh (US 20200305134) and further in view of Cai (US 20220361013).
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Lee and Noh teaches the method according to claim 16, . . . the first information is used to indicate an association relationship between an i-th PDCCH candidate set in the K.sub.1 PDCCH candidate sets and an i-th PDCCH candidate set in the K.sub.2 PDCCH candidate sets, i≤K.sub.1, and i≤K.sub.2. Lee, figure 6 (indication 620 and 625 show the association relationship between PDCCH candidate sets for each TRP).
The combination of Lee and Noh does not explicitly teach “wherein a period of the first search space comprises K.sub.1 PDCCH candidate sets, a period of the second search space comprises K.sub.2 PDCCH candidate sets, the K.sub.1 is an integer greater than or equal to 1, and the K.sub.2 is an integer greater than or equal to 1” or “wherein, in time domain, the K.sub.1 PDCCH candidate sets are arranged sequentially, and the K.sub.2 PDCCH candidate sets are arranged sequentially.” However, Cai teaches a UE that receives two search space configurations. Cai, ¶242. Each search space configuration provides a PDCCH monitoring period and a quantity of PDCCH candidates. Cai, ¶243. The PDCCH(s) found within the first and second search space are sequential to each other in the time domain. Cai, figure 4a (first search space [with first candidate PDCCHs] runs from T1 to T2, while the second search space [with the second candidate PDCCHs] runs from T2 to T3). At the time of the invention (pre-AIA ) or at the effective filing date of the invention (AIA ), it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize two different search space configurations for different time periods, as taught by Cai, when executing the multi-TRP PDCCH repetitions, taught by the combination of Lee and Noh, in order to enable the UE to reduce power consumption needed for PDCCH monitoring. Cai, ¶8.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN S LAMONT whose telephone number is (571)270-7514 and fax number is 571-270-8514 and email address is benjamin.lamont@uspto.gov (see MPEP 502.03 for authorizing unsecure communication). The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7am to 3pm EST.
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, Huy Vu can be reached at 571-272-3155. 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.
/Benjamin Lamont/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2461
1 The two wherein clauses that were added to claim 1 have an “or” between them. As a result, the second wherein clause is optional, which triggers the alternative obviousness rejection.
2 The use of the word “may” in claim 21 appears to make the limitation optional.