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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of the invention covered by claims 1-10, 12, and 14-21 in the reply filed on 2/3/2026 is acknowledged. The non-elected claims have been cancelled.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 3-10 and 15-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 3 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential steps, such omission amounting to a gap between the steps. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted steps are: Claim 3 and 15 claim the step of initiating a random access procedure that is based on two conditions: whether the service cell is a special cell and whether both BFI counters are larger than a configured maximum value. The applicant is missing steps for evaluating both of these claimed conditions.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5, 12-15, and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2022/0132517 by Zhu et al. in view of the article entitled “Beam Management in Millimeter-Wave Communications for 5G and Beyond” by Li et al.
As to claim 1, Zhu (the examiner is mapping according to the provisional of Zhu, 63/105,133, in order to show priority) teaches a method performed by a UE, the method comprising: receiving a configuration including at least two NBI RS sets and two BFI counters for a serving cell (on page 17, which shows Figure 7, the final paragraph describes the NBI RS set configuration, and on page 22, the paragraph before Figure 10 and Figure 10, itself shows a maxBFI count for each TRP); however Li does not explicitly teach transmitting a capability report in the manner claimed.
Li teaches a method performed by a UE, the method comprising: transmitting a capability report indicating support for configuring BFD RS sets for a serving cell (Page 8 and Figure 8, section IV(A), in the right column panel specific information of the UE can be reported, the plurality of panels support reception of different BFD RS sets, respectively).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the telecommunication art at the time of the applicant’s filing to combine the teachings of Zhu regarding receiving configuration information at a UE with the teachings of Li regarding the UE sending capability information because the panel information sent by Li could be relevant to the information provided for configuration by the UE. The Examiner notes that the current claim language does not relate the two limitations explicitly in any cause and effect manner.
As to claim 2, see page 17, final paragraph of Zhu.
As to claim 3, see Figure 9, step 3 of Zhu.
As to claim 5, see page 15 of Zhu, which shows figure 5B, final paragraph. As shown in Figure 5B the UE can send information via MAC-CE for BFR. The explanation on page 22 of Figure 10 of Zhu shows how the new beam information shown in Figure 5B can be based on the BFI counters reaching a max.
As to claims 12-15 and 17, they are rejected for the same reasoning as claims 1-3 and 5, respectively.
Claim(s) 4, 6-10, 16, and 18-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2022/0132517 by Zhu et al. in view of the article entitled “Beam Management in Millimeter-Wave Communications for 5G and Beyond” by Li et al. in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication Number 2023/0199529 by Koskela et al.
Koskela is mapped according to its provisional, 63/030,523, in order to show priority.
As to claim 4, the Zhu-Li combination teaches the subject matter of claim 3, including a BFR MAC CE as part of a PDU of a random access procedure (see Zhu figure 9 and mapping of the rejection of claim 5); however it does not explicitly teach the BFR MAC CE containing 2 bits fields to indicate a beam failover.
Koskela a BFR MAC CE indicates whether at least one new beam is identified from a second NBI RS set of two NBI RS sets and a candidate RS identifier (ID) corresponding to the at least one new beam if the at least one new beam is identified from the second NBI RS set (Figures 6A-F and corresponding disclosure).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the telecommunication art at the time of the applicant’s filing to combine the teachings of Zhu regarding reporting using BFR MAC CE with the teachings of Koskela regarding the particular format claimed for a BFR MAC CE because such information would enhance the BFR MAC CE of Zhu.
As to claims 6 and 9, the Zhu-Li combination teaches the subject matter of claim 5 however it does not explicitly teach the BFR MAC CE containing 2 bits fields to indicate a beam failover.
Kosela teaches BFR MAC CE contains a first bit field to indicate whether beam failure is detected for one of the two BFD RS sets for the SpCell and Kosela teaches if the two BFD RS sets are configured for the SCell, then the BFR MAC CE contains two bit fields, each of which indicates whether beam failure is detected for one BFD RS set for the SCell (see figures 6A-F and corresponding text).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the telecommunication art at the time of the applicant’s filing to combine the teachings of Zhu regarding reporting using BFR MAC CE with the teachings of Koskela regarding the particular format claimed for a BFR MAC CE because such information would enhance the BFR MAC CE of Zhu.
As to claims 7 and 8, see Figures 6A-6F, ref. no. 602 and 604.
As to claim 10, the applicant defines the special cell as the serving cell so claim 10 is rejected for the same reasoning as claim 9.
As to claims 18-21, they are rejected for the same reasoning as claims 6-9.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DOUGLAS B BLAIR whose telephone number is (571)272-3893. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5pm.
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, Glenton Burgess can be reached at 571-272-3949. 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.
/DOUGLAS B BLAIR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2454
Prosecution Insights