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 .
This Office Action is in response to claim amendment filed on December 17, 2025 and wherein claims 1-5, and 7-15 being currently amended, claims 6 and 16-20 being cancelled.
In virtue of this communication, claims 1-5, 7-15 are currently pending in this Office Action.
The Office appreciates the explanation of the amendment and analyses of the prior arts, and however, although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993) and MPEP 2145.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments regarding Double patenting rejection, Applicant acknowledge “Once the claims of this application are in condition for allowance but for this issue, Applicant will consider whether a terminal disclaimer is required”. Thus, the rejection under Double Patenting is maintained.
Applicant argue “Gao teaches multi-TRP beam failure detection, but does not disclose two different link recovery procedures” has been fully considered and is not persuasive.
Gao disclose UE (terminal device 130) detect link failure based on RSs detection, and the set of RSs including two RSs, one for the first TRP 120-1, and second for TRP 120-2, which TRP 120-1 is reading as the first link and TRP 120-2 is reading as the second link, first RS is serving the similar as a first signal set, and the second RS is serving the similar as a second signal set. See paragraph [0042], “a higher layer parameter about beam failure detection resources (for example, known as “failureDectctionResource”) can be configured to the terminal device 130, which may indicate a set of beam failure detection RSs. In this case, the terminal device130 may determine the set of RSs for beam failure detection based on the higher layer parameter”, and paragraph [0051], “the set of RSs for beam failure detection may include two RSs, one for the first TRP 120-1 (which may be referred to as “RS1” in the following text) and the other for the second TRP 120-2”.
Gao further disclose link failure recovery based on TRPs 120 beam failure detection, wherein TRPs 120 including first link TRP 120-1 and second link TRP 120-2. See Fig.2 and paragraph [0040], “In response to determining that a beam failure occurs in at least one of the first and second TRPs 120, at block 230, the terminal device 130 performs BFR for the first and second TRPs 120 at least based on the determined configuration for PDCCH transmission”. Also see paragraph [0052], “In response to the first radio link quality being below a predetermined threshold, the terminal device 130 may determine that a beam failure occurs in the first TRP 120-1. In some embodiments, the terminal device 130 may determine second radio link quality associated with the second TRP 120-2 by measuring RS2 from the second TRP 120-2. In response to the second radio link quality being below the predetermined threshold, the terminal device 130 may determine that a beam failure occurs in the second TRP 120-2”, and in Abstract, “The method further comprises determining whether a beam failure occurs in at least one of the first and second TRPs. In addition, the method further comprises, in response to determining that a beam failure occurs in at least one of the first and second TRPs, performing beam failure recovery (BFR) for the first and second TRPs at least based on the configuration”.
Gao further disclose the Beam Failure Recovery (BFR) procedure on terminal deice in paragraph [0023], “A mechanism to recover from a beam failure may be triggered when the
beam failure occurs. The beam failure recovery mechanism on terminal device side usually includes the following operations: beam failure detection, identification of a new candidate beam, transmission of a beam failure recovery request and monitoring a response for the beam failure recovery request from a network device”.
Based on the aforementioned reasoning, therefore, the Applicant’s argument is not
persuasive. Further, the new ground(s) of rejection is necessitated by the applicant amendment. The Office has thoroughly reviewed Applicants' arguments but firmly believes that the cited references to reasonably and properly meet the claimed limitations.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1, 4, 11 and 14 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 2, 11 and 12 of Application No. 18197109. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims cover substantially the same subject matter and recite similar limitations.
Regarding claims 1, 4, 11, 14, see the table below.
Application No. 18/204391
Application No. 18/197109
Claim 1. A user equipment (UE) for wireless communications, comprising:
a processor and a receiver, configured to receive a first target signal set;
determine a first target link failure according to a measurement performed on the first target signal set; and
the processor and a transceiver, configured to in response to determining the first target link failure, start a first target link recovery procedure
wherein when the first target signal set comprises a second signal set, the first target link recovery procedure is a second link recovery procedure;
wherein the first signal set and the second signal set respectively comprise at least one reference signal associated with a first cell, at least one reference signal belongs to one of the first signal set or the second signal set; wherein both the first link recovery procedure and the second link recovery procedure comprise a random access procedure on a same cell.
Claim 1. A user equipment (UE) for wireless communications, comprising:
a receiver and a processor, configured to receive a first signal set and a second signal set;
the processor is configured to determine a first link failure based on a measurement of the first signal set;
the processor is further configured to, in response to the determination of the first link failure, performing a first link recovery procedure; the processor is further configured to determine a second link failure based on a measurement of the second signal set;
the processor is further configured to, in response to determination of the second link failure, determine whether to trigger a second link recovery procedure based on at least one of a first parameter or a second parameter, wherein the first parameter is a time of the first link recovery procedure relative to the determination of the second link failure, and wherein the second parameter is whether the second link recovery procedure comprises a random access procedure.
wherein each of the first signal set and the second signal set respectively comprises at least one reference signal associated with a first cell, and there exists at least one reference signal that only belongs to one of the first signal set or the second signal set;
Claim 4. The UE according to claim 1, wherein determining THE first target link failure according to a measurement performed on the first target signal set comprises:
in response to a signal quality of each reference signal in the first target signal set being less than a first threshold,
reporting to a first-type indication used to update a counter; and determining the first target link failure according to the counter not being less than a value
Claim 2. The UE according to claim 1, wherein:
the processor is further configured to
in as a response to a received quality of each reference signal in the first signal set being lower than a first threshold,
report to a higher layer first-type indication used for updating a first counter;
the processor is further configured to,
in response to a received quality of each reference signal in the second signal set being lower than a second threshold, report to the higher layer a second-type indication used for updating a second counter.
Claim 11 is analyzed and rejected according to the similar analysis as specified in claim 1.
Claim 17 is analyzed and rejected according to the similar analysis as specified in claim 7.
Claim 14 is analyzed and rejected according to the similar analysis as specified in claim 4.
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 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.
Claims 1-5, 7-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gao et al. (US 20210320764 A1, hereinafter Gao) in view of Yi et al. (US 20200350972 A1, hereinafter Yi).
Claim 1: Gao teaches User Equipment (UE) (Fig. 1,130, [0003], “The beam failure recovery mechanism on terminal device (such as, user equipment (UE))” ), comprising:
a processor and a receiver (Fig. 6, element 610, 640, [0064], “the device 600 can be implemented at or as at least a part of the network device 110 or the terminal device 120”, [0065], “the device 600 includes a processor 610, a memory 620 coupled to the processor 610, a suitable transmitter (TX) and receiver (RX) 640 coupled to the processor 610…The TX/RX 640 is for bidirectional communications. The TX/RX 640 has at least one antenna to facilitate communication”) configured to receive a first target signal set (Fig. 2, elements 210, [0035], “the configuration may indicate which one of the TRPs 120 the PDCCHs come from”, [0042], “a higher layer parameter about beam failure detection resources (for example, known as “failureDectctionResource”) can be configured to the terminal device 130, which may indicate a set of beam failure detection RSs. In this case, the terminal device 130 may determine the set of RSs for beam failure detection based on the higher layer parameter”, [0051], “the set of RSs for beam failure
detection may include two RSs, one for the first TRP 120-1 (which may be referred to as “RS1” in the following text) and the other for the second TRP 120-2”); determine a first target link failure according to a measurement performed on the first target signal set (Fig. 2, elements 220, [0033], “To perform beam failure detection, the terminal device 130 may estimate the quality of a hypothetical PDCCH reception based on reception of a certain reference signal (RS)”, [0052], “the terminal device 130 may determine first radio link
quality associated with the first TRP 120-1 by measuring RS1 from the first TRP 120-1. In response to the first radio link quality being below a predetermined threshold, the terminal device 130 may determine that a beam failure occurs in the first TRP 120-1. In some embodiments, the terminal device 130 may determine second radio link quality associated with the second TRP 120-2 by measuring RS2 from the second TRP 120-2. In response to the second radio link quality being below the predetermined threshold, the terminal device 130 may determine that a beam failure occurs in the second TRP 120-2”);
and the processor and a transceiver (Fig. 6, elements 610,640, [0066], “a combination of the processor 610 and memory 620 may form processing means 650 adapted to implement various embodiments of the present disclosure”, [0065], “the device 600
includes a processor 610, a memory 620 coupled to the processor 610, a suitable transmitter (TX) and receiver (RX) 640 coupled to the processor 610”), configured to in response to determining the first target link failure, start a first target link recovery procedure (Fig. 2, element 230, [0040], “In response to determining that a beam failure occurs in at least one of the first and second TRPs 120, at block 230, the terminal device 130 performs BFR for the first and second TRPs 120 at least based on the determined configuration for PDCCH transmission”, [0023], “a beam failure may occur when the quality of beam pair(s) of an associated control channel falls low enough (for example, comparison with a predetermined threshold or time-out of an associated timer). A mechanism to recover from a beam failure may be triggered when the beam failure occurs. The beam failure recovery mechanism on terminal device side usually includes the following operations: beam failure detection, identification of a new candidate beam, transmission of a beam failure recovery request and monitoring a response for the beam failure recovery request from a network device”, Abstract, “The method further comprises determining whether a beam failure occurs in at least one of the first and second TRPs. In addition, the method further comprises, in response to determining that a beam failure occurs in at least one of the first and second TRPs, performing beam failure recovery (BFR) for the first and second TRPs at least based on the configuration”),
wherein, when the first target signal set comprises a first signal set, the first target link recovery procedure is a first link recovery procedure, wherein, when the first target signal set comprises a second signal set, the first target link recovery procedure is a second link recovery procedure ([0052], “In response to the first radio link quality being below a predetermined threshold, the terminal device 130 may determine that a beam failure occurs in the first TRP 120-1. In some embodiments, the terminal device 130 may determine second radio link quality associated with the second TRP 120-2 by measuring RS2 from the second TRP 120-2. In response to the second radio link quality being below the predetermined threshold, the terminal device 130 may determine that a beam failure
occurs in the second TRP 120-2”, [0051], “the set of RSs for beam failure detection may include two RSs, one for the first TRP 120-1 (which may be referred to as “RS1” in the following text) and the other for the second TRP 120-2”, wherein TRP 120-1 is reading as the first link and TRP 120-2 is reading as the second link, first RS is serving the similar as a first signal set, and the second RS is serving the similar as a second signal set. [0023], “a beam failure may occur when the quality of beam pair(s) of an associated control channel falls low enough (for example, comparison with a predetermined threshold or time-out of an associated timer). A mechanism to recover from a beam failure may be triggered when the beam failure occurs”, [0035], “the configuration may indicate which one of the TRPs 120 the PDCCHs come from”, if configuration indicate the PDCCH come from the first TRPs, then the first target link recovery procedure is a first link recovery procedure, otherwise, the first target link recovery procedure is a second link recovery procedure, Abstract, “The method further comprises determining whether a beam failure occurs in at least one of the first and second TRPs. In addition, the method further comprises, in response to determining that a beam failure occurs in at least one of the first and second TRPs, performing beam failure recovery (BFR) for the first and second TRPs at least based on the configuration”);
Wherein the first signal set and the second signal set respectively comprise at least one reference signal associated with a first cell, at least one reference signal belongs to one of the first signal set or the second signal set ([0051], “the set of RSs for beam failure
detection may include two RSs, one for the first TRP 120-1 RS1… and the other for the second TRP 120-2 RS2”, [0055], disclose first set of RS and second set of RS could have different numbers of RS. [0035], “the configuration may indicate which one of the TRPs 120 the PDCCHs come from”, if configuration indicate the PDCCH come from the first TRPs, then the first target link recovery procedure is a first link recovery procedure, otherwise, the first target link recovery procedure is a second link recovery procedure);
both the first link recovery procedure and the second link recovery procedure on a same cell ([0035], “the first TRP 120-1 and the second TRP 120-2 may be included in a same serving cell provided by the network device 110. In addition, the first TRP 120-1 and the second TRP 120-2 may be associated with a same activated bandwidth part (BWP)).
However, Gao does not explicitly teach both the first link recovery procedure and the second link recovery procedure comprise a random access procedure.
Yi, from the same or similar field of endeavor, teaches both the first link recovery procedure and the second link recovery procedure comprise a random access procedure ([0329], “a higher layer (RRC) parameter may configure the set of random-access preambles for the BFRQ for the random-access procedure for the beam failure recover”, [0276], “a beam failure indication may initiate a random access procedure”).
Gao and Yi are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of wireless communication. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the system of Gao and the features of both the first link recovery procedure and the second link recovery procedure comprise a configurable random access procedure as taught by Yi, for the benefit for more flexible configuration , and allowing a device to quickly re-establish a connection with the network after a link failure (paragraph [0276]).
Claim 7: Gao teaches a base station (Fig. 1, element 110, [0029], “the term “network device” or “base station” (BS) refers to a device which is capable of providing or hosting a cell or coverage where terminal devices can communicate”), comprising:
a processor and a transmitter (Fig. 6, element 610, 640, [0065], “the device 600 includes a processor 610, a memory 620 coupled to the processor 610, a suitable transmitter (TX) and receiver (RX) 640 coupled to the processor 610…The TX/RX 640 is for bidirectional communications. The TX/RX 640 has at least one antenna to facilitate communication”, [0064], “The device 600 can be considered as a further example implementation of the network device 110 or the terminal device 120 as shown in FIG. 1”), configured to transmit a first target signal set (Fig. 2, elements 210, [0035], “the configuration may indicate which one of the TRPs 120 the PDCCHs come from”, [0042], “a higher layer parameter about beam failure detection resources (for example, known as “failureDectctionResource”) can be configured to the terminal device 130, which may indicate a set of beam failure detection RSs. In this case, the terminal device 130 may determine the set of RSs for beam failure detection based on the higher layer parameter”, [0051], “the set of RSs for beam failure detection may include two RSs, one for the first TRP 120-1 (which may be referred to as “RS1” in the following text) and the other for the second TRP 120-2”);
the processor and a transceiver (Fig. 6, elements 610,640, [0066], “a combination of the processor 610 and memory 620 may form processing means 650 adapted to implement various embodiments of the present disclosure”), configured to monitor whether a first target link recovery procedure is started (Fig., 3, element 230, [0023], “beam failure
detection, identification of a new candidate beam, transmission of a beam failure
recovery request and monitoring a response for the beam failure recovery request from a network device”),
wherein a measurement performed on the first target signal set is used to determine a first target link failure, and the first target link recovery procedure is started; wherein, when the first target signal set comprises a first signal set, the first target link recovery procedure is a first link recovery procedure, wherein, when the first target signal set comprises a second signal set, the first target link recovery procedure is a second link recovery procedure (Fig. 3, element 220, 230, [0052], “In response to the first radio link quality being below a predetermined threshold, the terminal device 130 may determine that a beam failure occurs in the first TRP 120-1. In some embodiments, the terminal device 130 may determine second radio link quality associated with the second TRP 120-2 by measuring RS2 from the second TRP 120-2. In response to the second radio link quality being below the predetermined threshold, the terminal device 130 may determine that a beam failure
occurs in the second TRP 120-2”, [0051], “the set of RSs for beam failure detection may include two RSs, one for the first TRP 120-1 (which may be referred to as “RS1” in the following text) and the other for the second TRP 120-2”, wherein TRP 120-1 is reading as the first link and TRP 120-2 is reading as the second link, first RS is serving the similar as a first signal set, and the second RS is serving the similar as a second signal set. [0023], “a beam failure may occur when the quality of beam pair(s) of an associated control channel falls low enough (for example, comparison with a predetermined threshold or time-out of an associated timer). A mechanism to recover from a beam failure may be triggered when the beam failure occurs”, [0035], “the configuration may indicate which one of the TRPs 120 the PDCCHs come from”, if configuration indicate the PDCCH come from the first TRPs, then the first target link recovery procedure is a first link recovery procedure, otherwise, the first target link recovery procedure is a second link recovery procedure, Abstract, “The method further comprises determining whether a beam
failure occurs in at least one of the first and second TRPs. In addition, the method further comprises, in response to determining that a beam failure occurs in at least one of the first and second TRPs, performing beam failure recovery (BFR) for the first and second TRPs at least based on the configuration”);
wherein the first signal set and the second signal set respectively comprise at least one reference signal associated with a first cell, and at least one reference signal belongs to one of the first signal set or the second signal set ([0051], “the set of RSs for beam failure
detection may include two RSs, one for the first TRP 120-1 RS1… and the other for the second TRP 120-2 RS2”, [0055], disclose first set of RS and second set of RS could have different numbers of RS, [0035], “the configuration may indicate which one of the TRPs 120 the PDCCHs come from”, if configuration indicate the PDCCH come from the first TRPs, then the first target link recovery procedure is a first link recovery procedure, otherwise, the first target link recovery procedure is a second link recovery procedure),
and wherein both the first link recovery procedure and the second link recovery procedure are on a same cell ([0035], “the first TRP 120-1 and the second TRP 120-2 may be included in a same serving cell provided by the network device 110. In addition, the first TRP 120-1 and the second TRP 120-2 may be associated with a same activated bandwidth part (BWP)”).
However, Gao does not explicitly teach both the first link recovery procedure and the second link recovery procedure comprise a random access procedure.
Yi, from the same or similar field of endeavor, teaches both the first link recovery procedure and the second link recovery procedure comprise a random access procedure ([0329], “a higher layer (RRC) parameter may configure the set of random-access
preambles for the BFRQ for the random-access procedure for the beam failure recover”, [0276], “a beam failure indication may initiate a random access procedure”).
The motivation for combining Gao and Yi regarding to the claim 1 is also applied to claim 7.
Claim 11 is a method of claim1, is analyzed and rejected according to claim 1.
Claim 2: Gao teaches the UE of claim 1, wherein only one of the first link recovery procedure and the second link recovery procedure comprises a contention-free random access procedure ([0054], “If the first set of candidate beams is detected by the terminal device 130, the terminal device 130 may initiate a contention free random
access (CFRA) procedure for the BFR based on the first set of candidate beams”, [0057], “two sets of candidate beams (such as, two set of beam identification RSs) may be configured for the BFR via higher layer signaling .. in response to determining that a beam failure occurs in the first TRP 120-1 instead of the second TRP 120-2, … If the first set of candidate beams are detected by the terminal device 130, the terminal device 130 may indicate information on the first set of candidate beams (such as, beam indices) to the second TRP 120-2, without initiating the CFRA-based BFR”).
Claim 8 is analyzed and rejected according to claim 7 and claim 2.
Claim 12 is analyzed and rejected according to claim 11 and claim 2.
Claim 3: The combination of Gao and Yi teaches the UE of claim 1, wherein the processor and the first transceiver are further configured to perform the first target link recovery procedure by transmitting a target message, wherein, when the first target link recovery procedure is the first link recovery procedure, the target message is a first-type message, and wherein, when the first target link recovery procedure is the second link recovery procedure, the first target message is a second-type message (Gao, [0003], “ the terminal device may send a beam failure recovery request carrying information on the identified candidate beam to the network device”. Abstract, “determining whether a beam failure occurs in at least one of the first and second TRPs. In addition, the method further comprises, in response to determining that a beam failure occurs in at least one of the first and second TRPs, performing beam failure recovery (BFR) for the first and second TRPs at least based on the configuration”, [0052], “In response to the first radio link quality being below a predetermined threshold, the terminal device 130 may determine that a beam failure occurs in the first TRP 120-1. In some embodiments, the terminal device 130 may determine second radio link quality associated with the second TRP 120-2 by measuring RS2 from the second TRP 120-2. In response to the second radio link quality being below the predetermined threshold, the terminal device 130 may determine that a beam failure occurs in the second TRP 120-2”. Yi, [0409], “a list of beam recovery information (e.g., a list of new candidate beam) of a first TRP of one or more cells (a first TRP may be the same as a cell when one TRP operates on the cell) may be reported. In second MAC CE(s), a list of beam recovery information of a second TRP of one or more cells may be reported… To differentiate first and second MAC CE(s), different RNTI (e.g., a first RNTI for the first MAC CE(s) and a second RNTI for the second MAC CE(s)) may be used or a 1 bit indication to indicate whether MAC CE(s) is for the first TRP or the second TRP”, wherein first-type and second-type message are interpreted as report specifically for first and second TRPs).
Claim 9 is analyzed and rejected according to claim 7 and claim 3.
Claim 13 is analyzed and rejected according to claim 11 and claim 3.
Claim 4: The combination for Gao and Yi teaches the UE of claim 1, teaches wherein determining first target link failure according to a measurement performed on the first target signal set comprises: in response to a signal quality of each reference signal in the first target signal set being less than a first threshold (Gao, [0023], “ a beam failure may occur when the quality of beam pair(s) of an associated control channel falls low enough (for example, comparison with a predetermined threshold or time-out of an associated timer)”), reporting to a first-type indication used to update a first counter (Yi, Fig. 21, [0392], “When the first beam failure counter reaches the first beam failure instance max count, the wireless device may declare/identify/detect a beam failure for the first TRP”, Fig.3,element 3030 [0360], disclose UE repeat RACH procedure (BRF request to BS) until reaching the configured maximum transmission number, and declare BFR procedure is unsuccessfully if not receiving a response. The transmission number will be set to zero (or initialized) at the BF is detected and/or after the BFR procedure is completed. [0323], “the base station may reconfigure the beamFailureDetectionTimer or the beamFailureInstanceMaxCount … Based on the reconfiguring, the MAC entity of the wireless device may set the BFI_COUNTER to zero”.);
And determining the first target link failure according to the counter not being less than a value (Yi, [0314], “the BFI_COUNTER may be equal to or greater than the beamFailureInstanceMaxCount. Based on the BFI_COUNTER being equal to or greater than the beamFailureInstanceMaxCount, the MAC entity of the wireless device may initiate a random-access procedure (e.g. on an SpCell) for a beam failure recovery”, [0388], “The wireless device may detect a beam failure incident for the first TRP in response to the link qualities of the one or more first recovery reference signals become lower than the first threshold. Based on a number of beam failure incidents become larger than the first maximum counter, the wireless device may declare a first BF of the first TRP”).
Gao and Yi are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of wireless communication. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the system of Gao and the features of providing beamFailureInstanceMaxCount from BS for link failure detection as taught by Yi, for the benefit for achieving more robust and accurate beam failure detection comparing with one-shot detection.
Claim 14 is analyzed and rejected according to claim 11 and claim 4.
Claim 5: The combination of Gao and Yi teaches the UE of claim 1, wherein the processor and the receiver are further configured to receive a second target signal set; and determines second target link failure according to a measurement performed on the second target signal set; as a response to the behavior of determining second target link failure, the first transceiver starts a second target link recovery procedure (Gao, [0052], “In response to the first radio link quality being below a predetermined threshold, the terminal device 130 may determine that a beam failure occurs in the first TRP 120-1. In some embodiments, the terminal device 130 may determine second radio link quality associated with the second TRP 120-2 by measuring RS2 from the second TRP 120-2. In response to the second radio link quality being below the predetermined threshold, the terminal device 130 may determine that beam failure occurs in the second TRP 120-2”, [0051], “the set of RSs for beam failure detection may include two RSs, one for the first TRP 120-1 (which may be referred to as “RS1” in the following text) and the other for the second TRP 120-2”, [0043], “the terminal device 130 may be configured with a number of TCI-States by higher layer signaling to decode a PDSCH according to a detected PDCCH with downlink control information (DCI) intended for the terminal device and the given serving cell, where the number of TCI-States may depend on capability of the terminal device 130. Each of the configured TCI states may include a respective RS set (for example, known as “TCI-RS-SetConfig”)”);
Claim 10 is analyzed and rejected according to claim 7 and claim 5.
Claim 15 is analyzed and rejected according to claim 11 and claim 5.
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 YONGHONG ZHAO whose telephone number is (571)272-4089. The examiner can normally be reached Monday -Friday 9:00 am - 5:00pm.
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, NICHOLAS JENSEN can be reached on (571) 270-5443. 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.
/Y.Z./Examiner, Art Unit 2472
/NICHOLAS A JENSEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2472