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 .
Called 5/14/2026 Allison Howard 720-739-8137
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.
Claim(s) 1, 4-6, 23, 26, 27, 31, and 33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shi WO 2019191881 in view of Farag US 20230123718.
Regarding claims 1, 23, Shi teaches a user equipment (UE) for wireless communication,
comprising:
a memory; and
one or more processors, coupled to the memory, configured to:
receive an indication of a control resource set (CORESET) configuration that indicates a transmission control indicator (TCI) state to use for communication in;
monitor at least one search space associated with the CORESET based at least in part on the CORESET configuration and based at least in part on a TCI state sharing configuration of the CORESET (The network configures the UE with N CORESETs, of which K TCI states are configured on CORESET X. The network configures M search spaces Search space for the UE to monitor the monitor PDCCH, where CORESET X is associated with one or more of the search space).
Shi is silent on a CORESET, wherein the CORESET is associated with UE-dedicated control channel reception and non-UE-dedicated control channel reception.
Farag teaches a CORESET, wherein the CORESET is associated with UE-dedicated control channel reception and non-UE-dedicated control channel reception (CORESET C is associated with both UE-dedicated and non-UE-dedicated reception on PDCCH, [0203]).
Therefore 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 system of Shi by a CORESET, wherein the CORESET is associated with UE-dedicated control channel reception and non-UE-dedicated control channel reception, as shown by Farag. This modification would benefit the system by since Coreset C is a common type of coreset employed in many communication systems.
Regarding claims 4, 5 and 26, monitor, in a monitoring occasion of the CORESET, one or more search spaces of the at least one search space, wherein the one or more search spaces comprise at least one of a UE-dedicated search space or a non-UE-dedicated search space (Farag: UE dedicated .. search space, [0145]). Given a single search space, the search space must be UE-dedicated or non-UE-dedicated.
Regarding claims 6, 27, 33, wherein the one or more processors, to monitor the at least one search space, are configured to monitor the at least one search space based at least in part on a per-CORESET determination of a monitoring TCI state (Shi: The network configures the UE with N CORESETs, of which K TCI states are configured on CORESET X. The network configures M search spaces Search space for the UE to monitor the monitor PDCCH, where CORESET X is associated with one or more of the search space).
Regarding claim 31, receive an indication of the TCI state sharing configuration (Shi: The network configures the UE with N CORESETs, of which K TCI states are configured on CORESET X. The network configures M search spaces Search space for the UE to monitor the monitor PDCCH, where CORESET X is associated with one or more of the search space).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Shi and Farag as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Wang US 20240155690.
The combination is silent on the TCI state comprises the indicated TCI state based at least in part on the TCI configuration.
Kwon teaches the TCI state comprises the indicated TCI state based at least in part on the TCI configuration (claims 3, 13).
Therefore 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 system of the combination by the TCI state comprises the indicated TCI state based at least in part on the TCI configuration, as shown by Kwon. This modification would benefit the system by ensuring that the TCI state is relevant based upon the configuration information.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Shi and Farag as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kwon US 20190141691.
The combination is silent on to receive the indication of the TCI configuration, are configured to receive a radio resource control message that includes the indication of the TCI configuration.
Kwon teaches to receive the indication of the TCI configuration, are configured to receive a radio resource control message that includes the indication of the TCI configuration ([0062] A UE is configured using radio resource
control (RRC) messaging with a list of up to M candidate transmission configuration indication (TCI) states at least
for the purposes of sharing QCL information).
Therefore 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 system of the combination by receive the indication of the TCI configuration, are configured to receive a radio resource control message that includes the indication of the TCI configuration, as shown by Kwon. This modification would benefit the system by providing a proven, reliable method for receiving the TCI configuration.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10-22, 28-30, 34, and 35 are allowed.
Claims 32 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RONALD B ABELSON whose telephone number is (571)272-3165. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-4:30.
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.
/RONALD B ABELSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2476
Prosecution Insights