DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Remarks
This Office action is considered fully responsive to the amendments filed 06/17/2026.
Claims 1-2, 4-6, 8-10, 12 are pending in the application. Claims 1, 5, 9 have been amended, and claims 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12 were previously presented.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 06/17/2026 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of (US-20180115996-A1).
A) Regarding independent claims 1, 5 and 9, see the U.S.C. 103 rejection below.
B) Regarding all dependent claims, see the U.S.C. 103 rejection below. The Claim Rejections section below details the rejections of the instant claims.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-2, 4-6, 8-10, 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oteri al. (US-20210058967-A1) in view of Si et al. (US-20180115996-A1).
Regarding claim 1 (Currently Amended), Oteri teaches a wireless communication method (Figs. 1A-1D and Fig. 6 are described a method in wireless communication system), comprising: performing, by a wireless device, a channel access operation on each listen before talk (LBT) beam related to a transmission beam from a plurality of beams to be transmitted by the wireless device (Claim 36, lines 10-19, [0122], the UE, wireless device, performs channel access (via listen before talk (LBT)) for each sensing beam associated with transmission beam, which enable an independent process for multiple beams that assigned for transmission, [0128] and claim 26 discuss the process for directional LBT for beam based transmission); and
Oteri fails to teach performing, by the wireless device, another channel access operation in a period immediately before a start of a transmission of the plurality of beams if the channel access operation is completed in advance of the start of the transmission of the plurality of beams; and transmitting, by the wireless device, one or more of the plurality of beams in response to the another channel access operation being successful
However, Si teaches performing, by the wireless device, another channel access operation in a period immediately before a start of a transmission of the plurality of beams if the channel access operation is completed in advance of the start of the transmission of the plurality of beams; ([0133] states “ In one embodiment of scheme 5, the transmitter may transmit (1403, 1405) within the MCOT after a combination of Type B directional LBT (1401b) or (quasi-) omni-directional LBT (1401a) before the MCOT and Type A LBT before each TTI within the MCOT (1402, 1404) both complete wherein all the scheduled transmission directions within the Type B directional LBT or (quasi-) omni-directional LBT before the MCOT are sensed to be clear, clear (in advance check for clear channel), and all directions in Type A LBT before each TTI within the MCOT are sensed to be clear (another check for clear channel and right before sending the beam(s), as shown in Fig. 14)”, see also [0132]-[0134] that describes the UE can performs a Type B directional LBT or quasi-omni directional LBT, as shown clearly in Fig. 14 (1401a or 1401b), then before each TTI within the MCOT, the UE performs another channel access operation, Type A LBT (1402), then immediately transmit (right after the second LPT) the beam 1403 as shown in the figure, where the FIG. 14 illustrates an example, and note that transmission direction may not be limited to one within each transmission block, although the figure only illustrates one. [0093] illustrates that the proposed directional clear channel assessment and directional listen-before-talk (LBT) procedures hold for both downlink and uplink transmissions for multi-beam operation wireless communication systems; and transmitting, by the wireless device, one or more of the plurality of beams in response to the another channel access operation being successful ([0121] states “ One or multiple of the following directional LBT based schemes or their combinations can be utilized for transmission including downlink or uplink data transport blocks in multi-beam operation system.” Claim 14 states “transmitting, to a receive apparatus, at least one of discovery signal or data signal when all states of the sensed additional number of CCA slots are determined as the idle state based on the configurable directional energy threshold.” See also abstract Fig. 14, and [0132]-[0134] That confirms the wireless device transmits one or multi beams only when another channel access operation, such as Type A LBT, being successful immediately before the transmission process).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Oteri to incorporate the teachings of Si (in analogous art) by performing another channel access operation in a period immediately before a start of the transmitting of one or more beams of the plurality of beams to ensure the channel is clear for transmission in the specified directions during each TTI. “In this way, effort to align the transmission to different directions can be reduced, e.g. reservation signal or self-defer may not be needed or may be minimized”( Si, [0142], [0145], lines 14-19).
Regarding claim 2 (original), Oteri and Si teach the method of claim 1.
Oteri further teaches wherein the plurality of beams are transmitted at a same time (Fig. 16, [0122], [0180], lines 1-2, [0259]-[0260], the multiple beams can be transmitted at the same time after provided that each beam has successfully passed the LBT process and the channel is determined free).
Regarding claim 4 (original), Oteri and Si teach the method of claim 1.
Oteri fails to teach wherein a random back-off counter is determined independently for each beam.
However, Si teaches wherein a random back-off counter is determined independently for each beam ([0113]-[0114], describe the transmitter generates and maintains a backoff counter Nm for every sensing direction or group of direction Dm . This backoff counter is direction-specific/group-of-direction-specific or (equivalently, receiver or group-of-receiver specific). The counter Nm is initialized as a random integer uniformly generated between 0 and the contention window size CWm , which can be direction specific. This approach to ensure the Back-off counter is independently determined for each beam or direction.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Oteri to incorporate the teachings of Si (in analogous art) by including a random back-off counter is determined independently for each beam. Independent back-off counters allow beams to operate in parallel, reducing delays and improving the efficiency of multi-beam transmissions( Si, [0125], lines 8-12).
Regarding claim 5 (Currently Amended), Oteri teaches a wireless device for wireless communication, (Figs. 1A-1D and Fig. 6 are described a method in wireless communication system, including a wireless devices), comprising: at least one processor configured to implement a method, wherein the processor is configured to cause the wireless device to: ([0051]-[0052] and Fig. 1B describe the system of WTRW may include a processor 118, a transceiver 120, a transmit/receive element 122 which cause the processor to perform the method functions): perform a channel access operation on each listen before talk (LBT) beam related to a transmission beam from a plurality of beams to be transmitted by the wireless device; (Claim 36, lines 10-19, [0122], the UE, wireless device, performs channel access (via listen before talk (LBT)) for each sensing beam associated with transmission beam, which enable an independent process for multiple beams that assigned for transmission, [0128] and claim 26 discuss the process for directional LBT for beam based transmission);
Oteri fails to teach perform another channel access operation in a period immediately before a start of a transmission of the plurality of beams if the channel access operation is completed in advance of the start of the transmission of the plurality of beams; and transmit one or more of the plurality of beams in response to the another channel access operation being successful.
However, Si teaches perform another channel access operation in a period immediately before a start of a transmission of the plurality of beams if the channel access operation is completed in advance of the start of the transmission of the plurality of beams ([0133] states “ In one embodiment of scheme 5, the transmitter may transmit (1403, 1405) within the MCOT after a combination of Type B directional LBT (1401b) or (quasi-) omni-directional LBT (1401a) before the MCOT and Type A LBT before each TTI within the MCOT (1402, 1404) both complete wherein all the scheduled transmission directions within the Type B directional LBT or (quasi-) omni-directional LBT before the MCOT are sensed to be clear, clear (in advance check for clear channel), and all directions in Type A LBT before each TTI within the MCOT are sensed to be clear (another check for clear channel and right before sending the beam(s), as shown in Fig. 14)”, see also [0132]-[0134] that describes the UE can performs a Type B directional LBT or quasi-omni directional LBT, as shown clearly in Fig. 14 (1401a or 1401b), then before each TTI within the MCOT, the UE performs another channel access operation, Type A LBT (1402), then immediately transmit (right after the second LPT) the beam 1403 as shown in the figure, where the FIG. 14 illustrates an example, and note that transmission direction may not be limited to one within each transmission block, although the figure only illustrates one. [0093] illustrates that the proposed directional clear channel assessment and directional listen-before-talk (LBT) procedures hold for both downlink and uplink transmissions for multi-beam operation wireless communication system; and transmit one or more of the plurality of beams in response to the another channel access operation being successful ([0121] states “ One or multiple of the following directional LBT based schemes or their combinations can be utilized for transmission including downlink or uplink data transport blocks in multi-beam operation system.” Claim 14 states “transmitting, to a receive apparatus, at least one of discovery signal or data signal when all states of the sensed additional number of CCA slots are determined as the idle state based on the configurable directional energy threshold.” See also abstract Fig. 14, and [0132]-[0134] That confirms the wireless device transmits one or multi beams only when the another channel access operation, such as Type A LBT, being successful immediately before the transmission process).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Oteri to incorporate the teachings of Si (in analogous art) by performing another channel access operation in a period immediately before a start of the transmitting of one or more beams of the plurality of beams to ensure the channel is clear for transmission in the specified directions during each TTI. “In this way, effort to align the transmission to different directions can be reduced, e.g. reservation signal or self-defer may not be needed or may be minimized”( Si, [0142], [0145], lines 14-19).
Regarding claim 6 (original), Oteri and Si teach the wireless device of claim 5.
Oteri teaches wherein the plurality of beams are transmitted at a same time (Fig. 16, [0122], [0180], lines 1-2, [0259]-[0260], the multiple beams can be transmitted at the same time after provided that each beam has successfully passed the LBT process and the channel is determined free).
Regarding claim 8 (original), Oteri and Si teach the wireless device of claim 5.
Oteri fails to teach wherein a random back-off counter is determined independently for each beam.
However, Si teaches wherein a random back-off counter is determined independently for each beam ([0113]-[0114], the transmitter generates and maintains a backoff counter Nm for every sensing direction or group of direction Dm . This backoff counter is direction-specific/group-of-direction-specific or (equivalently, receiver or group-of-receiver specific). The counter Nm is initialized as a random integer uniformly generated between 0 and the contention window size CWm , which can be direction specific. This approach to ensure the
Back-off counter is independently determined for each beam or direction.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Oteri to incorporate the teachings of Si (in analogous art) by including a random back-off counter is determined independently for each beam. Independent back-off counters allow beams to operate in parallel, reducing delays and improving the efficiency of multi-beam transmissions( Si, [0125], lines 8-12).
Regarding claim 9 (Currently Amended), Oteri teaches a non-transitory computer readable program storage medium having code stored thereon, the code, when executed by a processor, causing the processor to implement a method (Fig. 1B, [0345] and [0363], lines 5-8, describe a non-transitory computer-readable medium program storage medium that contains code), comprising: performing, by a wireless device, a channel access operation on each listen before talk (LBT) beam related to a transmission from a plurality of beams to be transmitted by the wireless device (Claim 36, lines 10-19, [0122], the UE, wireless device, performs channel access (via listen before talk (LBT)) for each sensing beam associated with transmission beam, which enable an independent process for multiple beams that assigned for transmission, [0128] and claim 26 discuss the process for directional LBT for beam based transmission);
Oteri fails to teach performing, by the wireless device, another channel access operation in a period immediately before a start of a transmission of the plurality of beams if the channel access operation is completed in advance of the start of the transmission of the plurality of beams; and transmitting, by the wireless device, one or more of the plurality of beams in response to the another channel access operation being successful.
However, Si teaches performing, by the wireless device, another channel access operation in a period immediately before a start of a transmission of the plurality of beams if the channel access operation is completed in advance of the start of the transmission of the plurality of beams; ([0133] states “ In one embodiment of scheme 5, the transmitter may transmit (1403, 1405) within the MCOT after a combination of Type B directional LBT (1401b) or (quasi-) omni-directional LBT (1401a) before the MCOT and Type A LBT before each TTI within the MCOT (1402, 1404) both complete wherein all the scheduled transmission directions within the Type B directional LBT or (quasi-) omni-directional LBT before the MCOT are sensed to be clear, clear (in advance check for clear channel), and all directions in Type A LBT before each TTI within the MCOT are sensed to be clear (another check for clear channel and right before sending the beam(s), as shown in Fig. 14)”, see also [0132]-[0134] that describes the UE can performs a Type B directional LBT or quasi-omni directional LBT, as shown clearly in Fig. 14 (1401a or 1401b), then before each TTI within the MCOT, the UE performs another channel access operation, Type A LBT (1402), then immediately transmit (right after the second LPT) the beam 1403 as shown in the figure, where the FIG. 14 illustrates an example, and note that transmission direction may not be limited to one within each transmission block, although the figure only illustrates one. [0093] illustrates that the proposed directional clear channel assessment and directional listen-before-talk (LBT) procedures hold for both downlink and uplink transmissions for multi-beam operation wireless communication systems; and transmitting, by the wireless device, one or more of the plurality of beams in response to the another channel access operation being successful ([0121] states “ One or multiple of the following directional LBT based schemes or their combinations can be utilized for transmission including downlink or uplink data transport blocks in multi-beam operation system.” Claim 14 states “transmitting, to a receive apparatus, at least one of discovery signal or data signal when all states of the sensed additional number of CCA slots are determined as the idle state based on the configurable directional energy threshold.” See also abstract Fig. 14, and [0132]-[0134] That confirms the wireless device transmits one or multi beams only when another channel access operation, such as Type A LBT, being successful immediately before the transmission process).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Oteri to incorporate the teachings of Si (in analogous art) by performing another channel access operation in a period immediately before a start of the transmitting of one or more beams of the plurality of beams to ensure the channel is clear for transmission in the specified directions during each TTI. “In this way, effort to align the transmission to different directions can be reduced, e.g. reservation signal or self-defer may not be needed or may be minimized”( Si, [0142], [0145], lines 14-19).
Regarding claim 10 (original), Oteri and Si teach the non-transitory computer readable program storage medium of claim 9.
Oteri teaches wherein the plurality of beams are transmitted at a same time (Fig. 16, [0122], [0180], lines 1-2, [0259]-[0260], the multiple beams can be transmitted at the same time after provided that each beam has successfully passed the LBT process and the channel is determined free).
Regarding claim 12 (original), Oteri and Si teach the non-transitory computer readable program storage medium of claim 9.
Oteri fails to teach wherein a random back-off counter is determined independently for each beam.
However, Si teaches wherein a random back-off counter is determined independently for each beam ([0113]-[0114], the transmitter generates and maintains a backoff counter Nm for every sensing direction or group of direction Dm . This backoff counter is direction-specific/group-of-direction-specific or (equivalently, receiver or group-of-receiver specific). The counter Nm is initialized as a random integer uniformly generated between 0 and the contention window size CWm , which can be direction specific. This approach to ensure the
Back-off counter is independently determined for each beam or direction.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Oteri to incorporate the teachings of Si (in analogous art) by including a random back-off counter is determined independently for each beam. Independent back-off counters allow beams to operate in parallel, reducing delays and improving the efficiency of multi-beam transmissions( Si, [0125], lines 8-12).
Relevant Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's
disclosure.
Tooher et al. (US-20210153245-A1), Goyal et al. (US-20200314906-A1), LI et al. (US-20190200389-A1), Nam et al. (US-11324042-B2), Kannan et al. (US-11140558-B2), Xian et al. (WO-2021108817-A2) teach methods for channel access technique in wireless communication systems.
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 SANAA S AL SAMAHI whose telephone number is (571)272-4171. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5 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, Asad Nawaz can be reached at (571) 272-3988. 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.
/SANAA AL SAMAHI/Examiner, Art Unit 2463
/ASAD M NAWAZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2463
Prosecution Insights