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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 02/12/2026 has been entered.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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.
Claims 1 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al. (WO 2024065528), hereinafter Zhang in view of Bhamri et al (2022/0338235), hereinafter Bhamri.
Re. Claims 1, 13, 25 and 28, Zhang teaches a user equipment (UE) for wireless communication, comprising: one or more memories; and one or more processors, coupled to the one or more memories (Fig. 22), configured to: receive downlink control information (DCI) including a transmission configuration indicator (TCI) field value (Pg. 9, Line 3 - The terminal device receives a DCI indicating a TCI state, wherein the TCI state is associated with a non-serving cell (e.g., the second network device 102 in FIG. 1)), the TCI field value mapping to a first TCI state for a first Cell and a second TCI state for a second cell (Pg. 12, Line 42 - the first set of cells to which the first TCI state is applied only includes the primary target cell in the simultaneous TCI update list. Afterwards, the terminal device receives another signaling indicating a TCI state, which indicates a second TCI state for the simultaneous TCI update list; since the second TCI state is not indicated by the handover signaling, the terminal device applies the second TCI state on all cells included in the simultaneous TCI update list. Therefore, the second set of cells to which the second TCI state is applied includes all cells in the simultaneous TCI update list, and the first set of cells to which the first TCI state is applied is a subset of the second set of cells to which the second TCI state is applied); and communicate on one or more of the first cell using the first TCI state or the second cell using the TCI state (Pg. 13, Line 6 - the terminal device also needs to perform the above-mentioned operation of applying the TCI state, that is, applying the TCI state on the second set of cells different from the first set of cells).
However, Zhang does not explicitly teach receiving radio resource control (RRC) signaling identifying a mapping of a plurality of field values to a plurality of transmission configuration indicator (TCI) states for a set of co-scheduled cells.
Yet, Bhamri expressly teaches receiving radio resource control (RRC) signaling identifying a mapping of a plurality of field values to a plurality of transmission configuration indicator (TCI) states for a set of co-scheduled cells (Pg. 6, Line 10 - receiving, by a UE, a set of TCI states corresponding to each of a plurality of cells can include receiving RRC configuration, from the network, that configures the UE to include a set of TCI states corresponding to each of a plurality of cells).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Bhamri to the teaching of Zhang. The motivation for such would be to improve efficiency and connectivity over the disclosure of Zhang as Bhamri provides an RRC configuration sent to the UE that indicates a mapping between TCI states and a series of cells (Pg. 6, Line 10, Bhamri). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements, as claimed by known methods, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Re. Claims 13 and 28, Zhang teaches a network node for wireless communication, comprising: a memory; and one or more processors, coupled to the memory (Fig. 21), configured to: transmit downlink control information (DCI) including a transmission configuration indicator (TCI) field value (Pg. 9, Line 3 - The terminal device receives a DCI indicating a TCI state, wherein the TCI state is associated with a non-serving cell (e.g., the second network device 102 in FIG. 1 ). Additionally, Examiner interprets that in order for the terminal to receive the DCI from the network device, the network device had to have sent the DCI to begin with.), the TCI field value mapping to a first TCI state for a first Cell and a second TCI state for a second cell (Pg. 12, Line 42 - the first set of cells to which the first TCI state is applied only includes the primary target cell in the simultaneous TCI update list. Afterwards, the terminal device receives another signaling indicating a TCI state, which indicates a second TCI state for the simultaneous TCI update list; since the second TCI state is not indicated by the handover signaling, the terminal device applies the second TCI state on all cells included in the simultaneous TCI update list. Therefore, the second set of cells to which the second TCI state is applied includes all cells in the simultaneous TCI update list, and the first set of cells to which the first TCI state is applied is a subset of the second set of cells to which the second TCI state is applied); and communicate on one or more of the first cell using the first TCI state or the second cell using the TCI state (Pg. 13, Line 6 - the terminal device also needs to perform the above-mentioned operation of applying the TCI state, that is, applying the TCI state on the second set of cells different from the first set of cells).
However, Zhang does not explicitly teach receiving radio resource control (RRC) signaling identifying a mapping of a plurality of field values to a plurality of transmission configuration indicator (TCI) states for a set of co-scheduled cells.
Yet, Bhamri expressly teaches receiving radio resource control (RRC) signaling identifying a mapping of a plurality of field values to a plurality of transmission configuration indicator (TCI) states for a set of co-scheduled cells (Pg. 6, Line 10 - receiving, by a UE, a set of TCI states corresponding to each of a plurality of cells can include receiving RRC configuration, from the network, that configures the UE to include a set of TCI states corresponding to each of a plurality of cells).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Bhamri to the teaching of Zhang. The motivation for such would be to improve efficiency and connectivity over the disclosure of Zhang as Bhamri provides an RRC configuration sent to the UE that indicates a mapping between TCI states and a series of cells (Pg. 6 Line 10, Bhamri). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements, as claimed by known methods, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Claim(s) 2-12, 14-24, 26-27, and 29-30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang in view of Bhamri and Bagheri et al (2022/0338235), hereinafter Bagheri.
Re. Claims 2, 14, 26, and 29, Zhang and Bhamri teach Claims 1, 13, 25, and 28.
Yet, Zhang does not explicitly teach wherein the TCI field value maps to an entry in a statically configured table storing sets of TCI states.
However, Bhamri expressly teaches where the table is statically configured (Pg. 16, Line 20 - the number of activated states for each of the table can depend on the associated number of cells. This can be fixed or semi-statically configured) and the sets of TCI States are stored (Pg. 14, Line 40 - a CORESET that is not “enhanced” only stores one or more TCI states for a single scheduled cell).
Additionally, Bagheri further teaches wherein the TCI field value maps to an entry in a… table [with] sets of TCI states (Fig. 3. Examiner interprets that the table of TCI mappings found in Fig. 3 implicitly shows that the TCI data is being stored statically within the table itself, however, to ensure clarity, Examiner interprets the table of Bagheri in tandem with the explanation provided in Bhamri).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Bhamri and Bagheri to the teaching of Zhang. The motivation for such would be to improve efficiency and connectivity over the disclosure of Zhang as Bhamri provides that the TCI State is stored in the table (Bhamri, Pg. 14, Line 40) and the table is statically configured (Bhamri, Pg. 16, Line 20). Further, the motivation to include Bagheri would be, similarly to Bhamri, to improve efficiency via mapping, as Bagheri teaches a table of TCI states mapped to TCI field values (Fig. 3 Bagheri). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements, as claimed by known methods, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Re. Claims 3, 15, 27, and 30, Zhang and Bhamri teach Claims 1, 13, 25, and 28.
However, Zhang does not explicitly teach wherein the TCI field value maps to an entry in a table storing sets of TCI states, wherein a set of TCI states, of the sets of TCI states, is based at least in part on an activation status of one or more TCI states in the table.
Yet, Bhamri expressly teaches where the TCI values are stored in the table (Pg. 14, Line 40 - a CORESET that is not “enhanced” only stores one or more TCI states for a single scheduled cell).
Additionally, Bagheri further teaches wherein the TCI field value maps to an entry in a table [containing] sets of TCI states (Fig. 3. Examiner interprets that the table of TCI mappings found in Fig. 3 implicitly shows that the TCI data is being stored statically within the table itself, however, to ensure clarity, Examiner interprets the table of Bagheri in tandem with the explanation provided in Bhamri), wherein a set of TCI states, of the sets of TCI states, is based at least in part on an activation status of one or more TCI states of a plurality of TCI states in the table (¶0146 - In accordance with at least some embodiments of the present application a TCI Indication can be supported. For example, one simple way to determine the active TCI state set (from which DCI indicates one TCI for each scheduled PDSCH) is to send separate MAC-CEs—one MAC-CE corresponding to eMBB (DCI format 1-1) and one MAC-CE corresponding to URLLC (DCI format 1-2)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Bhamri and Bagheri to the teaching of Zhang. The motivation for such would be in order to improve data storage and make recall more efficient as Bhamri provides that the TCI State is stored in the table (Bhamri, Pg. 14, Line 40). Further, the motivation to include Bagheri would be for the same reason to improve storage and data recall as Bagheri teaches a mapping of TCI states to TCI fields and where the sets are based on activation status (¶0146, Bagheri). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements, as claimed by known methods, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Re. Claims 4, and 16, Zhang and Bhamri teach Claims 1 and 13.
However, Zhang does not explicitly teach wherein whether a cell, of the set of co-scheduled cells, is scheduled by the DCI is based at least in part on whether a corresponding TCI state is active.
Additionally, Bagheri further teaches wherein whether a cell, of the set of co-scheduled cells, is scheduled by the DCI is based at least in part on whether a corresponding TCI state is active (¶0146 - In accordance with at least some embodiments of the present application a TCI Indication can be supported. For example, one simple way to determine the active TCI state set (from which DCI indicates one TCI for each scheduled PDSCH) is to send separate MAC-CEs—one MAC-CE corresponding to eMBB (DCI format 1-1) and one MAC-CE corresponding to URLLC (DCI format 1-2)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Bagheri to the teaching of Zhang. The motivation for such would be to improve transmission efficiency via scheduling across cells as Bagheri teaches where scheduling the TCI state is based on activity (¶0146, Bagheri). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements, as claimed by known methods, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Re. Claims 5, and 17, Zhang, Bhamri, and Bagheri teach Claims 4 and 16.
However, the combination of Zhang and Bhamri does not explicitly teach wherein a scheduling of the cell by the DCI is invalid based at least in part on the corresponding TCI state not being active.
Additionally, Bagheri further teaches wherein a scheduling of the cell by the DCI is invalid based at least in part on the corresponding TCI state not being active (¶0067 - The Ti field is set to 0 to indicate that the TCI state with TCI-StateId i shall be deactivated and is not mapped to the codepoint of the DCI Transmission Configuration Indication field).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Bagheri to the teaching of Zhang. The motivation for such would be to improve transmission efficiency via improving scheduling as Bagheri teaches where scheduling the TCI state is based on activity (¶0067, Bagheri). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements, as claimed by known methods, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Re. Claims 6, and 18, Zhang and Bhamri teach Claims 1 and 13.
However, the combination of Zhang and Bhamri does not explicitly teach wherein a first TCI state is inactive, and wherein a second TCI state is applied to the first cell based at least in part on a rule and based at least in part on the first TCI state being inactive.
Additionally, Bagheri further teaches wherein a first TCI state is inactive, and wherein a second TCI state is applied to the first cell based at least in part on a rule and based at least in part on the first TCI state being inactive (¶0067 - The Ti field is set to 0 to indicate that the TCI state with TCI-StateId i shall be deactivated and is not mapped to the codepoint of the DCI Transmission Configuration Indication field. The codepoint to which the TCI State is mapped is determined by its ordinal position among all the TCI States with Ti field set to 1, i.e. the first TCI State with Ti field set to 1 shall be mapped to the codepoint value 0, second TCI State with Ti field set to 1 shall be mapped to the codepoint value 1 and so on).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Bagheri to the teaching of Zhang. The motivation for such would be to improve efficiency in transmission by minimizing down time as Bagheri teaches that a second TCI may be used when a first TCI state is inactive (¶0067, Bagheri). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements, as claimed by known methods, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Re. Claims 7, and 19, Zhang and Bhamri teach Claims 1 and 13.
However, the combination of Zhang and Bhamri does not explicitly teach wherein the TCI field value maps to the first TCI state and the second TCI state based at least in part on an ordering of TCI state identifiers.
Additionally, Bagheri further teaches wherein the TCI field value maps to the first TCI state and the second TCI state based at least in part on an ordering of TCI state identifiers (Fig. 3, & ¶0067 - The Ti field is set to 0 to indicate that the TCI state with TCI-StateId i shall be deactivated and is not mapped to the codepoint of the DCI Transmission Configuration Indication field. The codepoint to which the TCI State is mapped is determined by its ordinal position among all the TCI States with Ti field set to 1, i.e. the first TCI State with Ti field set to 1 shall be mapped to the codepoint value 0, second TCI State with Ti field set to 1 shall be mapped to the codepoint value 1 and so on).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Bagheri to the teaching of Zhang. The motivation for such would be to improve efficiency via scheduling as Bagheri teaches where scheduling the TCI state is based on ordering of identifiers (¶0067, Bagheri). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements, as claimed by known methods, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Re. Claims 8, and 20, Zhang and Bhamri teach Claims 1 and 13.
However, Zhang does not explicitly teach wherein a TCI state, is included in a plurality of sets of TCI states in a table.
Additionally, Bagheri further teaches wherein the first TCI state, is included in a plurality of sets of TCI states in a table (Fig. 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Bagheri to the teaching of Zhang. The motivation for such would be to improve data storage as Bagheri provides that the first TCI State is stored in the table (Bagheri, Fig. 3). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements, as claimed by known methods, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Re. Claims 9, and 21, Zhang and Bhamri teach Claims 1 and 13.
However, the combination of Zhang and Bhamri does not explicitly teach wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: receive radio resource control (RRC) signaling associated with configuring a table that includes the first TCI state and the second TCI state the RRC signaling identifying a list of configured TCI state identifiers associated with a set of possible TCI field value, the table being based at least in part on the list of configured TCI state identifiers, the value mapping to the set of the first TCI state and the second TCI state based at least in part on the table.
Additionally, Bagheri further teaches wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: receive radio resource control (RRC) signaling associated with configuring a table that includes the first TCI state and the second TCI state (¶0070 - a UE is configured with TCI reception in DCI (e.g., RRC parameter tci-PresentInDCI)), the RRC signaling identifying a list of configured TCI state identifiers associated with a set of possible TCI field value (¶0070 - the UE receives an activation command, used to map up to 8 TCI states to the codepoints of the DCI field ‘Transmission Configuration Indication’), the table being based at least in part on the list of configured TCI state identifiers (Fig. 3), the value mapping to the set of the first TCI state and the second TCI state based at least in part on the table (Fig. 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Bagheri to the teaching of Zhang. The motivation for such would be in order to improve data efficiency as Bagheri teaches where the UE receives an RRC signal associated with the table to identify associated TCI values (¶0070, Bagheri). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements, as claimed by known methods, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Re. Claims 10, and 22, Zhang and Bhamri teach Claims 1 and 13.
However, the combination of Zhang and Bhamri does not explicitly teach wherein the mapping of the TCI field value to the first TCI state and the second TCI state is an ordered mapping between TCI field values and active TCI states.
Additionally, Bagheri further teaches wherein the mapping of the TCI field value to the first TCI state and the second TCI state is an ordered mapping between TCI field values and active TCI states (¶0067 - The codepoint to which the TCI State is mapped is determined by its ordinal position among all the TCI States with T.sub.i field set to 1, i.e. the first TCI State with T.sub.i field set to 1 shall be mapped to the codepoint value 0, second TCI State with T.sub.i field set to 1 shall be mapped to the codepoint value 1 and so on. The maximum number of activated TCI states is 8).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Bagheri to the teaching of Zhang. The motivation for such would be in order to improve data management and data recall in order to improve efficiency as Bagheri teaches where scheduling the TCI state is based on an ordered mapping between values and active states (¶0067, Bagheri). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements, as claimed by known methods, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Re. Claims 11, and 23, Zhang and Bhamri teach Claims 1 and 13.
However, the combination of Zhang and Bhamri does not explicitly teach wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: receive a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE) associated with altering an activation status of one or more TCI states, wherein the first TCI state and the second TCI state are based at least in part on the altering of the activation status of the one or more TCI states.
Additionally, Bagheri further teaches wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: receive a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE) associated with altering an activation status of one or more TCI states (¶0070 - The activation command is sent via a MAC-CE (a PDSCH can contain MAC-CE)), wherein the first TCI state and the second TCI state are based at least in part on the altering of the activation status of the one or more TCI states (¶0070 - If a UE is configured with TCI reception in DCI (e.g., RRC parameter tci-PresentInDCI), the UE receives an activation command, used to map up to 8 TCI states to the codepoints of the DCI field ‘Transmission Configuration Indication’).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Bagheri to the teaching of Zhang. The motivation for such would be in order to improve data management and data recall in order to improve efficiency as Bagheri teaches where a MAC element is used in order to change the activation status of the mapped TCI states (¶0070, Bagheri). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements, as claimed by known methods, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Re. Claims 12, and 24, Zhang and Bhamri teach Claims 1 and 13.
However, the combination of Zhang and Bhamri does not explicitly teach wherein the TCI field value is mapped to the first TCI state and the second TCI state state based at least in part on a per bandwidth part or per cell set of entries, the set of entries identifying one or more active TCI states for a bandwidth part or a cell.
Additionally, Bagheri further teaches wherein the TCI field value is mapped to the first TCI state and the second TCI state based at least in part on a per bandwidth part or per cell set of entries, the set of entries identifying one or more active TCI states for a bandwidth part or a cell (¶0038 - the TCI field in DCI in the scheduling component carrier points to the activated TCI states in the scheduled component carrier or DL BWP and when the PDSCH is scheduled by DCI format 1_1, the UE shall use the TCI-State according to the value of the ‘Transmission Configuration Indication’ field in the detected PDCCH with DCI for determining PDSCH antenna port quasi co-location).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Bagheri to the teaching of Zhang. The motivation for such would be in order to improve data management and data recall in order to improve efficiency as Bagheri teaches where the mapping of TCI states is based on a bandwidth part (¶0038, Bagheri). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements, as claimed by known methods, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 02/12/2026 have been fully considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection. Examiner appreciates Applicant’s explanation during the meeting held on 12/23/2025 and maintains the agreement held at that time. As per this understanding, Examiner has changed the grounds of the rejection to newly introduced reference Zhang and maintained subsequent dependent rejections under the previous grounds in light of Zhang’s disclosure. Examiner finds that Zhang adequately discloses the newly amended claim limitations and cures the deficiencies addressed in Applicant’s remarks. Additionally, Examiner has considered the arguments being brought forth regarding the arguments provided in Examiner’s Advisory Action, but considers them moot as well in view of the new grounds of rejection. Finally, regarding the argument pertaining to Compact Prosecution, Examiner finds that the amendment constitutes a narrowing of the claim language that allows the Examiner to conduct further search. As such, Examiner upholds the rejections previously provided under 35 U.S.C. ¶ 103.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Zhang et al. (2024/0048340) - ¶0004-0029.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NOAH JAMES SUGDEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7406. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 9:00-6:00 ET, Fri 9:00-1:00 ET.
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.
/N.J.S./Examiner, Art Unit 2475
/HASHIM S BHATTI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2475