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 .
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.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 7/26/2023 and 9/27/2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it should avoid the form and legal phraseology used in patent claims. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
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.
Claims 11-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over R1-2007763 “Enhancements on Multi-beam Operation” (hereinafter ZTE) in view of R1-2007546 “Enhancement on multi-beam operation” (hereinafter Futurewei) and US 2023/0050541(hereinafter Yi).
Regarding claims 11, 15 and 19, ZTE teaches a method performed by a user equipment (UE) for a beam operation, the method comprising: receiving, from a base station (BS), a radio resource control (RRC) configuration for configuring a set of joint transmission configuration indication (TCI) states (2.2.2; Figure 5: details Stage 1: RRC Signaling Configure multiple unified TCI states); receiving, from the BS, a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE) for activating a subset of joint TCI states in the set of joint TCI states (2.2.2; Figure 5: details Stage 2: MAC-CE Signaling Activating one or more states from the RRC pool); receiving, from the BS, the DCI indicating a joint TCI state included in the subset of joint TCI states activated by the MAC CE (2.2.2; Figure 5: details Stage 3 DCI Signaling Select one state; Mode-1: Single command – joint indication for PDSCH, PUSCH, PDCCH, PUCCH, CSI-RS and/or SRS).
ZTE does not explicitly teach wherein the MAC CE is used to map the subset of joint TCI states to codepoints of a TCI field in downlink control information (DCI); determining whether the DCI includes a downlink (DL) assignment; transmitting, in response to reception of the DCI, first hybrid automatic repeat request-acknowledgement (HARQ-ACK) information in a case that the DCI does not include the DL assignment; and transmitting, in response to the reception of the DCI and reception of a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH), second HARQ-ACK information in a case that the DCI includes the DL assignment.
However, Futurewei teaches wherein the MAC CE is used to map the subset of joint TCI states to codepoints of a TCI field in downlink control information (DCI) (2.3: details MAC-CE was enhanced to enable the mapping of two TCI states to one TCI codepoint such that one TCI codepoint in DCI TCI field can indicated two different TCI states, one for each TRP).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified ZTE to incorporate the teachings of Futurewei and include wherein the MAC CE is used to map the subset of joint TCI states to codepoints of a TCI field in downlink control information (DCI) of Futurewei with ZTE. Doing so would provide the advantage of supporting multiple simultaneous active TCI states at a UE (Futurewei, at 2.3).
Moreover, Yi teaches determining whether the DCI includes a downlink (DL) assignment ([0246]: details configuration parameters may indicate/comprise a parameter to indicate whether to use DAI for the DCI format 0_2 (e.g., Downlinkassignmentindex-ForDCIFormat0_2)... The second DAI may be present when the base station may transmit configuration parameters indicating a plurality of HARQ-ACK codebook groups); transmitting, in response to reception of the DCI, first hybrid automatic repeat request-acknowledgement (HARQ-ACK) information in a case that the DCI does not include the DL assignment ([0244][0253]: details The second DAI may be present when the base station may transmit configuration parameters indicating a plurality of HARQ-ACK codebook groups; “may be present” teaches “does not include”); and transmitting, in response to the reception of the DCI and reception of a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH), second HARQ-ACK information in a case that the DCI includes the DL assignment ([0244][0253]: details The first DAI may be used to indicate a first size of bits of first HARQ-ACK codebook group; “may be used” teaches “includes”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified ZTE to incorporate the teachings of Yi and include determining whether the DCI includes a downlink (DL) assignment; transmitting, in response to reception of the DCI, first hybrid automatic repeat request-acknowledgement (HARQ-ACK) information in a case that the DCI does not include the DL assignment; and transmitting, in response to the reception of the DCI and reception of a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH), second HARQ-ACK information in a case that the DCI includes the DL assignment of Yi with ZTE. Doing so would simplify wireless device complexity or reduce processing (Yi, at paragraph [0330]).
Regarding claims 12 and 16, ZTE does not explicitly teach wherein in a case that the DCI does not include the DL assignment, a bit value corresponding to a redundancy version (RV) field included in the DCI is set to a specific value.
However, Yi teaches teach wherein in a case that the DCI does not include the DL assignment ([0244][0253]: details The second DAI may be present when the base station may transmit configuration parameters indicating a plurality of HARQ-ACK codebook groups; “may be present” teaches “does not include”), a bit value corresponding to a redundancy version (RV) field included in the DCI is set to a specific value ([0244]: details A redundancy version (RV) field may indicate one or more RV values (e.g., a RV value may be 0, 2, 3, or 1) for one or more PUSCHs scheduled over the one or more slots of the scheduled cells).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified ZTE to incorporate the teachings of Yi and include wherein in a case that the DCI does not include the DL assignment, a bit value corresponding to a redundancy version (RV) field included in the DCI is set to a specific value of Yi with ZTE. Doing so would simplify wireless device complexity or reduce processing (Yi, at paragraph [0330]).
Regarding claims 13 and 17, ZTE does not explicitly teach wherein in a case that the DCI does not include the DL assignment, a bit value corresponding to a modulation and coding scheme (MCS) field included in the DCI is set to a specific value.
However, Yi teaches wherein in a case that the DCI does not include the DL assignment ([0244][0253]: details The second DAI may be present when the base station may transmit configuration parameters indicating a plurality of HARQ-ACK codebook groups; “may be present” teaches “does not include”), a bit value corresponding to a modulation and coding scheme (MCS) field included in the DCI is set to a specific value ([0244][0253]: details A DCI field of modulation and coding scheme (MCS) (shown as MCS in FIG. 19) may indicate a coding rate and a modulation scheme for the scheduled uplink data… MCS field being set to a second predetermined value (e.g., one(s), ‘1, . . . , 1’)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified ZTE to incorporate the teachings of Yi and include wherein in a case that the DCI does not include the DL assignment, a bit value corresponding to a modulation and coding scheme (MCS) field included in the DCI is set to a specific value of Yi with ZTE. Doing so would simplify wireless device complexity or reduce processing (Yi, at paragraph [0330]).
Regarding claims 14 and 18, ZTE does not explicitly teach wherein in a case that the DCI does not include the DL assignment, a bit value corresponding to the frequency domain resource assignment (FDRA) field is set to a specific value.
However, Yi teaches wherein in a case that the DCI does not include the DL assignment ([0244][0253]: details The second DAI may be present when the base station may transmit configuration parameters indicating a plurality of HARQ-ACK codebook groups; “may be present” teaches “does not include”), a bit value corresponding to the frequency domain resource assignment (FDRA) field is set to a specific value ([0253]: details the FDRA field being set to a third predetermined value (e.g., zero(s) for resource allocation type 0 or a resource allocation type 2 with mu=1, one(s) for resource allocation type 1 or the resource allocation type 2 with mu=0)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified ZTE to incorporate the teachings of Yi and include wherein in a case that the DCI does not include the DL assignment, a bit value corresponding to the frequency domain resource assignment (FDRA) field is set to a specific value of Yi with ZTE. Doing so would simplify wireless device complexity or reduce processing (Yi, at paragraph [0330]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Park (US 12,143,222) details transmitting and receiving wireless signal in wireless communication system.
Zhou (US 2023/0291533) details joint DL/UL TCI state activation.
Li (US 2023/0055619) details HARQ-ACK information transmission.
Si (US 2022/0330287) details Hybrid automatic repeat request acknowledgement transmission indication.
Si (US 2022/0272734) details HARQ-ACK feedback.
Yin (US 2013/0336160) details sending and receiving feedback information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jasper Kwoh whose telephone number is (408)918-7644. The examiner can normally be reached Tuesday through Friday, 10am to 4pm Pacific.
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, Jeffrey Rutkowski can be reached at (571) 270-1215. 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.
/JASPER KWOH/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2415
Prosecution Insights