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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on June 9, 2026 was filed after the mailing date of the previous office action. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
Acknowledgment is made of Applicant’s submission of amendment with remarks/arguments, dated June 16, 2026. Claims 2-7, 16 have been canceled; claims 25-31 are newly added.
Upon entering the amendment, claims 1, 8-13, 15, 17-20, 23, and 25-31 are pending. This communication is considered fully responsive and sets forth below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
4. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
5. Claims 1, 8-15, 23, and 25-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a), as failing to comply with the written description requirement.
The amended claim 1 recites, “1. (Currently Amended) A method for information configuration, performed by a terminal, comprising:
obtaining configuration information by at least determining the configuration information according to beam information historically sent or received by the terminal; and
updating beam information in a configured grant physical uplink shared channel (CG PUSCH) configuration according to the configuration information; and
sending updated beam information to a base station.”
Regarding “obtaining configuration information,” the presence of the language “by at least determining the configuration information according to beam information historically sent or received by the terminal” is not supported by Applicant's specification.
Specifically, obtaining configuration information appears multiple times in the specification, e.g., in paragraphs [0008], [0016], [0037], etc,, but the specification does not describe “obtaining beam information by at least determining the configuration information…” Therefore, the amended limitation “obtaining beam information by at least determining the configuration information…” is not commensurate with the originally filed disclosure, which contemplates a separate scenario of how to obtain configuration information. Accordingly, this language is found to encompass new matter.
Same rejection applies to claim 23.
Claims 8-15 and 25-31 are rejected by virtue of dependency on Claims 1 and 23.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. 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 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.
7. 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 of this title, 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.
8. Claims 1, 8-13, 15, 17-20, 23, and 25-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Marinier et al. (US 2023/0148282) in view of Xiong et al. (US 2020/0245200).
Regarding claim 1, Marinier et al. teach the method for information configuration, performed by a terminal (paragraph [0072] lines 1-10; Examiner’s Notes: WTRU depicted in FIG. 2 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a terminal” in the instant application), comprising:
obtaining configuration information (paragraph [0102] lines 1-16; Examiner’s Notes: the information, e.g., configuration included in a MAC CE, in the prior art teaches the limitation of “configuration information;”
in fact, WTRU receiving the information, e.g., configuration included in a MAC CE, as depicted in FIG. 2, in the prior art teaches the limitation of “obtaining configuration information” in the instant application);
updating beam information in a configured grant physical uplink shared channel (CG PUSCH) configuration according to the configuration information (paragraph [0102] lines 2-16; Examiner’s Notes: the PUSCH configured grant in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a configured grant physical uplink shared channel (CG PUSCH) configuration;”
in fact, modifying the beam information in the configuration regards to the PUSCH configured grant according to the configuration/information, e.g., configuration included in a MAC CE, in the prior art teaches the limitation of “updating beam information in a configured grant physical uplink shared channel (CG PUSCH) configuration according to the configuration information” in the instant application); and
sending updated beam information to a base station (paragraph [0072] lines 1-10; Examiner’s Notes: TRP A depicted in FIG. 2 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a base station;”
In fact, WTRU sending modified/updated beam information to TRP A as illustrated in FIG. 2 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “sending updated beam information to a base station” in the instant application)
Marinier et al. teach the method without explicitly teaching obtaining configuration information by at least determining the configuration information according to beam information historically sent or received by the terminal.
Xiong et al. from the same or similar field of endeavor teach implementing fairness of the method, obtaining configuration information by at least determining the configuration information according to beam information historically sent or received by the terminal (paragraph [0757] lines 1-6; Examiner’s Notes: receiving the configuration according to determining/identifying the configuration information, e.g., bit length, according to beam information, e.g., random access preamble format, received by the terminal in the prior art teaches the limitation of “obtaining configuration information by at least determining the configuration information according to beam information historically sent or received by the terminal” in the instant application), and
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in art to implement the method of Xiong et al. in the system of Marinier et al.
The motivation for implementing obtaining configuration information by at least determining the configuration information according to beam information historically sent or received by the terminal, is to enhance the mechanism for converging a 5G communication system for supporting higher data rates beyond a 4G system with a technology for Internet of Things (IoT), and improving the performance of the UE randomly accessing the target cell.
Regarding claim 8, Marinier et al. further teach the method, wherein determining the configuration information according to the beam information historically sent or received by the terminal comprises:
in response to receiving update indication information configured by a base station, determining the configuration information according to the beam information historically sent or received by the terminal (paragraph [0072] lines 1-10; Examiner’s Notes: TRP A depicted in FIG. 2 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a base station;”
In fact, in response to receiving adaptation indication configured by TRP A, determining the configuration according to the signaling/beam information received by WTRU, as illustrated in FIG. 2, in the prior art teaches the limitation of “in response to receiving update indication information configured by a base station, determining the configuration information according to the beam information historically sent or received by the terminal” in the instant application).
Similar rejection applies to claims 18 and 25.
Regarding claim 9, Marinier et al. further teach the method, wherein the beam information historically sent or received by the terminal comprises at least one of:
configured beam information for scheduling transmission;
configured beam information for an uplink channel for scheduling-free transmission;
measured and reported beam information for coordinated transmission; or
beam information in at least one CG PUSCH configuration that the base station has configured for the terminal, wherein each CG PUSCH configuration comprises at least one beam information (paragraph [0073] lines 1-12; Examiner’s Notes: configuring the beam for scheduling PUSCH transmission in the prior art teaches the limitation of “configured beam information for scheduling transmission” in the instant application;
in fact, configuring the beam for scheduling PUSCH transmission in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein the beam information sent or received by the terminal comprises at least one of:
configured beam information for scheduling transmission;
configured beam information for an uplink channel for scheduling-free transmission;
measured and reported beam information for coordinated transmission; or
beam information in at least one CG PUSCH configuration that the base station has configured for the terminal, wherein each CG PUSCH configuration comprises at least one beam information” in the instant application as well).
Similar rejection applies to claims 19 and 26.
Regarding claim 10, Marinier et al. further teach the method, wherein the beam information historically sent or received by the terminal comprises the configured beam information for scheduling transmission (paragraph [0073] lines 1-12; Examiner’s Notes: configuring the beam for scheduling PUSCH transmission in the prior art teaches the limitation of “configured beam information for scheduling transmission;”
in fact, receiving, by WTRU, the beam information configured for scheduling PUSCH transmission, as illustrated in FIG. 2, in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein the beam information sent or received by the terminal comprises the configured beam information for scheduling transmission” in the instant application);
in a case that the terminal has a beam consistency capability, the configured beam information for scheduling transmission comprises at least one of beam information for uplink transmission or beam information for downlink transmission; or,
in a case that the terminal does not have the beam consistency capability, the configured beam information for scheduling transmission only comprises beam information for uplink transmission (paragraph [0072] lines 1-10; Examiner’s Notes: the WTRU is constrained to transmit during Slot 0, e.g., with TRP A only, as illustrated in FIG. 2 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “the terminal has a beam consistency capability;”
In fact, in a case that the WTRU is constrained to transmit during Slot 0, e.g., with TRP A only, the configurated beam for scheduling including scheduling PUSCH transmission as illustrated in FIG. 2 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “in a case that the terminal has a beam consistency capability, the configured beam information for scheduling transmission comprises at least one of beam information for uplink transmission or beam information for downlink transmission” in the instant application;
Consequently, in a case that the WTRU is constrained to transmit during Slot 0, e.g., with TRP A only, the configurated beam for scheduling including scheduling PUSCH transmission as illustrated in FIG. 2 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “in a case that the terminal has a beam consistency capability, the configured beam information for scheduling transmission comprises at least one of beam information for uplink transmission or beam information for downlink transmission; or,
in a case that the terminal does not have the beam consistency capability, the configured beam information for scheduling transmission only comprises beam information for uplink transmission” in the instant application as well).
Similar rejection applies to claims 20 and 27.
Regarding claim 11, Marinier et al. further teach the method, wherein updating the beam information in the configured grant physical uplink shared channel CG PUSCH configuration according to the configuration information, comprises:
determining, from the historically sent or received beam information, at least one uplink beam corresponding to at least one latest transmission as updated beam information (paragraph [0073] lines 1-12; Examiner’s Notes: the adapted beam transmission in the prior art teaches the limitation of “one latest transmission as updated beam information;”
in fact, determining, from the received beam information, an uplink beam, e.g., via a PUSCH, corresponding to the adapted beam transmission in the prior art teaches the limitation of “determining, from the sent or received beam information, at least one uplink beam corresponding to at least one latest transmission as updated beam information” in the instant application),
wherein the beam information sent or received by the terminal comprises at least one of the configured beam information for scheduling transmission or the configured beam information for the uplink channel for scheduling-free transmission (paragraph [0073] lines 1-12; Examiner’s Notes: configuring the beam for scheduling PUSCH transmission in the prior art teaches the limitation of “configured beam information for scheduling transmission” in the instant application;
in fact, configuring the beam for scheduling PUSCH transmission in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein the beam information sent or received by the terminal comprises at least one of the configured beam information for scheduling transmission or the configured beam information for the uplink channel for scheduling-free transmission” in the instant application as well).
Similar rejection applies to claim 28.
Regarding claim 12, Marinier et al. further teach the method, wherein updating the beam information in the configured grant physical uplink shared channel CG PUSCH configuration according to the configuration information, comprises:
selecting and determining at least one piece of beam information from the beam information as updated beam information (paragraph [0102] lines 1-16; Examiner’s Notes: adapting the beam information in the prior art teaches the limitation of “selecting and determining at least one piece of beam information from the beam information as updated beam information” in the instant application),
wherein the beam information historically sent or received by the terminal comprises the measured and reported beam information for coordinated transmission (paragraph [0102] lines 1-16; Examiner’s Notes: the spatial filter information, e.g., a serving cell identity, in the prior art teaches the limitation of “the measured and reported beam information for coordinated transmission;”
in fact, the WTRU receiving the beam information, e.g., the serving cell identity for transmission in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein the beam information sent or received by the terminal comprises the measured and reported beam information for coordinated transmission” in the instant application).
Similar rejection applies to claim 29.
Regarding claim 13, Marinier et al. further teach the method, wherein updating the beam information in the CG PUSCH configuration according to the configuration information, comprises:
selecting one or more CG PUSCH configurations from the at least one CG PUSCH configuration (paragraph [0102] lines 1-16; Examiner’s Notes: identifying/selecting the configuration regards to the PUSCH configured grant in the prior art teaches the limitation of “selecting one or more CG PUSCH configurations from the at least one CG PUSCH configuration” in the instant application); and
determining the selected CG PUSCH configuration as a CG PUSCH configuration actually used in the terminal (paragraph [0102] lines 1-16; Examiner’s Notes: adapting the configuration regards to the PUSCH configured grant used in the WTRU, as illustrated in FIG. 2, in the prior art teaches the limitation of “determining the selected CG PUSCH configuration as a CG PUSCH configuration actually used in the terminal” in the instant application), and
determining beam information in the selected CG PUSCH configuration as updated beam information (paragraph [0102] lines 1-16; Examiner’s Notes: modifying/adapting the beam information in the configuration regards to the PUSCH configured grant in the prior art teaches the limitation of “determining beam information in the selected CG PUSCH configuration as updated beam information” in the instant application),
wherein beam indication information sent or received by the terminal comprises the beam information in the at least one CG PUSCH configuration that the base station has configured for the terminal (paragraphs [0073] lines 1-12 & [0102] lines 1-16; Examiner’s Notes: the WTRU receiving the beam indication, e.g., the PUSCH configured grant configured by TRP A, as illustrated in FIG. 2, in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein beam indication information sent or received by the terminal comprises the beam information in the at least one CG PUSCH configuration that the base station has configured for the terminal” in the instant application).
Similar rejection applies to claim 30.
Regarding claim 15, Marinier et al. further teach the method, wherein, in the CG PUSCH configuration, beam information is different, and other transmission parameter configurations are the same (paragraphs [0079] lines 1-22 & [0102] lines 1-16; Examiner’s Notes: in the configuration regards to the PUSCH configured grant, the beam information, e.g., configured grant type 1 and configured grant type 2, is different in the prior art teaches the limitation of “in the CG PUSCH configuration, beam information is different;”
the transmission parameter configurations, e.g., frequency allocations, are the same in the prior art teaches the limitation of “other transmission parameter configurations are the same;”
in fact, the cited prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein, in the CG PUSCH configuration, beam information is different, and other transmission parameter configurations are the same” in the instant application).
Similar rejection applies to claim 31.
Regarding claim 17, Marinier et al. teach the method for information configuration, performed by a base station (paragraph [0072] lines 1-10; Examiner’s Notes: TRP A depicted in FIG. 2 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a base station” in the instant application), comprising:
receiving updated beam information in a configured grant physical uplink shared channel (CG PUSCH) configuration sent by a terminal (paragraphs [0072] lines 1-10 & [0102] lines 1-16; Examiner’s Notes: WTRU depicted in FIG. 2 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a terminal;”
the PUSCH configured grant in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a configured grant physical uplink shared channel (CG PUSCH) configuration;”
in fact, receiving modified beam information in the configuration regards to the PUSCH configured grant sent by the WTRU in the prior art teaches the limitation of “receiving updated beam information in a configured grant physical uplink shared channel (CG PUSCH) configuration sent by a terminal” in the instant application);
wherein the updated beam information is determined by the terminal according to configuration information (paragraph [0102] lines 2-16; Examiner’s Notes: the WTRU determining the modified beam information according to the configuration/information in the prior art teaches the limitation of “wherein the updated beam information is determined by the terminal according to configuration information” in the instant application).
Marinier et al. teach the method without explicitly teaching the configuration information is determined by the terminal according to beam information historically sent or received by the terminal.
Xiong et al. from the same or similar field of endeavor teach implementing fairness of the method, the configuration information is determined by the terminal according to beam information historically sent or received by the terminal (paragraph [0757] lines 1-6; Examiner’s Notes: receiving the configuration according to determining/identifying the configuration information, e.g., bit length, according to beam information, e.g., random access preamble format, received by the terminal in the prior art teaches the limitation of “the configuration information is determined by the terminal according to beam information historically sent or received by the terminal” in the instant application), and
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in art to implement the method of Xiong et al. in the system of Marinier et al.
The motivation for implementing the configuration information is determined by the terminal according to beam information historically sent or received by the terminal, is to enhance the mechanism for converging a 5G communication system for supporting higher data rates beyond a 4G system with a technology for Internet of Things (IoT), and improving the performance of the UE randomly accessing the target cell.
the configuration information is determined by the terminal according to beam information historically sent or received by the terminal.
Regarding claim 23, Marinier et al. teach the terminal (paragraphs [0029] lines 1-10 & [0072] lines 1-10; Examiner’s Notes: WTRU, e.g., WTRU 102 depicted in FIG. 1B and WTRU depicted in FIG. 2, in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a terminal” in the instant application), comprising:
a processor (paragraph [0029] lines 1-10; Examiner’s Notes: processor 118 in WTRU 102 depicted in FIG. 1B in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a processor” in the instant application);
a memory configured to store processor-executable instructions (paragraph [0029] lines 1-10; Examiner’s Notes: non-removable memory 130 in WTRU 102 depicted in FIG. 1B in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a memory” in the instant application); wherein the processor is configured to:
obtain configuration information (paragraph [0102] lines 1-16; Examiner’s Notes: the information, e.g., configuration included in a MAC CE, in the prior art teaches the limitation of “configuration information;”
in fact, WTRU receiving the information, e.g., configuration included in a MAC CE, as depicted in FIG. 2, in the prior art teaches the limitation of “obtain configuration information” in the instant application); and
update beam information in a configured grant physical uplink shared channel (CG PUSCH) configuration according to the configuration information (paragraph [0102] lines 2-16; Examiner’s Notes: the PUSCH configured grant in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a configured grant physical uplink shared channel (CG PUSCH) configuration;”
in fact, modifying the beam information in the configuration regards to the PUSCH configured grant according to the configuration/information, e.g., configuration included in a MAC CE, in the prior art teaches the limitation of “update beam information in a configured grant physical uplink shared channel (CG PUSCH) configuration according to the configuration information” in the instant application).
send updated beam information to a base station (paragraph [0072] lines 1-10; Examiner’s Notes: TRP A depicted in FIG. 2 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “a base station;”
In fact, WTRU sending modified/updated beam information to TRP A as illustrated in FIG. 2 in the prior art teaches the limitation of “send updated beam information to a base station” in the instant application)
Marinier et al. teach the terminal without explicitly teaching obtaining configuration information by at least determining the configuration information according to beam information historically sent or received by the terminal.
Xiong et al. from the same or similar field of endeavor teach implementing fairness of the method, obtaining configuration information by at least determining the configuration information according to beam information historically sent or received by the terminal (paragraph [0757] lines 1-6; Examiner’s Notes: receiving the configuration according to determining/identifying the configuration information, e.g., bit length, according to beam information, e.g., random access preamble format, received by the terminal in the prior art teaches the limitation of “obtaining configuration information by at least determining the configuration information according to beam information historically sent or received by the terminal” in the instant application), and
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in art to implement the method of Xiong et al. in the system of Marinier et al.
The motivation for implementing obtaining configuration information by at least determining the configuration information according to beam information historically sent or received by the terminal, is to enhance the mechanism for converging a 5G communication system for supporting higher data rates beyond a 4G system with a technology for Internet of Things (IoT), and improving the performance of the UE randomly accessing the target cell.
Response to Remarks/Arguments
9. Claims Objections: in the Response, filed June 16, 2026, Applicants amended claim(s) for the purpose of correcting the informalities. Therefore, the previous objections to the claim(s) are withdrawn.
10. Claim 112(b) Rejection: Applicants amended the claim limitations that obviate the basis of the previous rejection. Therefore, the previous rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) is withdrawn.
11. Claims Art Rejections: Applicants’ amendment with arguments filed June 16, 2026 have been fully considered but they are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Conclusion
12. 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 extension fee 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 WEI ZHAO whose telephone number is (571)270-5672. The examiner can normally be reached from 8:00AM to 5:00PM Monday through Friday.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor JAE Y LEE can be reached on (571) 270-3936. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/WEI ZHAO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2479
Prosecution Insights