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 .
Response to Arguments
The 112 rejection have been withdrawn in view of the amendment.
Applicant's arguments filed 12-29-2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The amendment does overcome the previous 102 rejection, but not the 103 rejections. In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., Specific Selection Rule for Timing Conflicts; a deterministic rule to resolve the "beam switching time deficiency" that occurs when the scheduling offset is shorter than a reference value) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). 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).
Regarding the argument: “Kwak merely teaches that an offset exists for applying a beam, but fails to disclose or suggest a specific default selection rule when a PDSCH is scheduled within that offset period.”; the examiner’s position is that Kwak discloses more than just offset, but disclose a plurality of selection rules to apply TCI, including an offset period between DCI and PDSCH. Thereby, reading in the argued limitation.
The rest of the arguments they fall for the same reasons as shown above.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-6 and 14-19 and 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwak 20230216565.
As to claim 1, Kwak discloses a method of a terminal [WTRU 102], comprising:
receiving, from a base station [114, 160], indication information of a first unified [joint] transmission configuration indicator (TCI) including a first TCI and a second TCI (see abstract, par. 0003, 0074, 0078, 0204);
receiving, from the base station, first downlink control information (DCI) including first scheduling information of a first physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) and selecting one TCI among the first TCI and the second TCI belonging to the first unified TCI (see par. 0005, 0085, 0165-0166, 0222); and
performing a first reception operation for the first PDSCH based on the selected one TCI and the first scheduling information [The WTRU may receive the scheduled PDSCH transmission, for example, based on the determined TCI state] (see par. 0085, 0146, 0161), wherein based on a time offset between the first DCI and the first PDSCH being less than a reference value [TCI state indication may be based on a DCI-based TCI state indication … TCI state indication may be based on ACK/NACK of PDSCH … If a TCI state does not equal a previously indicated TCI state, an offset may be applied] [a TCI state group indication, for example, if at least one of the following occurs: a metric for a TCI state group (e.g., a TCI state group in use or currently used) becomes lower than a threshold] (see par.0078, 0127), the one TCI is determined to be first-indicated TCI among the first TCI and the second TCI [TCI selection/apply] (see par. 0127-0128, 0227-0228). Kwak discloses the teachings in more than embodiment; however, it would be obvious to combine the embodiments for transmitting the desired information and enabling the selection of the TCI. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to combine the embodiments for the simple purpose of effectively enabling the selection of the TCI.
As to claim 2, Kwak discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein information indicating the one TCI is included in the first DCI (see abstract, par. 0003, 0074, 0078, 0204).
As to claims 3 and 16, Kwak discloses the method according to claim 1/14, wherein information indicating the one TCI is information indicating to apply a first-indicated TCI to the first reception operation, and the one TCI is a TCI corresponding to the first-indicated TCI among the first TCI and the second TCI (see fig. 8, par. 0085, 0124, 0203). As indicated in the 112 rejection it is unclear if the corresponding to the first-indicated TCI is really a limitation which further limit the claim, it will be obvious that the one TCI is a TCI corresponding to the first-indicated TCI among the first TCI and the second TCI. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to apply a first-indicated TCI to the first reception operation to receive the desired information.
As to claims 4 and 17, Kwak discloses the method according to claim 1/14, wherein the first DCI further includes indication information of a second unified TCI, and the second unified TCI includes at least one of a third TCI corresponding to a first-indicated TCI or a fourth TCI corresponding to a second-indicated TCI fourth TCI belonging to the second unified TCI (see par. 0005, 0085, 0165-0166, 0222). As indicated in the 112 rejection it is unclear if the corresponding does actually modify anything. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to call the TCI as desired and performing the same predictable result.
As to claims 5 and 18, Kwak discloses the method according to claim 4/17, wherein based on the second unified TCI including the third TCI, in a time period to which the second unified TCI is applied, the first-indicated TCI corresponds to the third TCI belonging to the second unified TCI, and the second-indicated TCI corresponds to the first TCI or the second TCI belonging to the first unified TCI (see par. 0005, 0074, 0085, 0165-0166, 0222). Kwak fails to explicitly disclose not including the fourth TCI. However, from figure 4 and par. 0074, 0179, it can be seen only including some TCI per period; thereby, not including some TCI in the same period. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to that when only including some TCI that will result in not including others; thereby, including the desired TCI.
As to claims 6 and 19, Kwak discloses the method according to claim 4/17, wherein the first DCI further includes information indicating the one TCI, and a field including the information indicating the one TCI within the first DCI is distinguished from a field including the indication information of the second unified TCI (see par. 0133, 0162, 0169, 0192-0193).
As to claim 14, Kwak discloses a method of a base station [114, 160], comprising:
transmitting, to a terminal [WTRU 102], indication information of a first unified transmission configuration indicator (TCI) information including a first TCI and a second TCI (see abstract, par. 0003, 0074, 0078, 0204);
transmitting, to the terminal, first downlink control information (DCI) including first scheduling information of a first physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) (see par. 0005, 0085, 0165-0166, 0222); and
transmitting, to the terminal, the first PDSCH based on one TCI from among the first TCI and the second TCI belonging to the first unified TCI and the first scheduling information (see par. 0085, 0146, 0161), wherein based on a time offset between the first DCI and the first PDSCH being less than a reference value [TCI state indication may be based on a DCI-based TCI state indication … TCI state indication may be based on ACK/NACK of PDSCH … If a TCI state does not equal a previously indicated TCI state, an offset may be applied] [a TCI state group indication, for example, if at least one of the following occurs: a metric for a TCI state group (e.g., a TCI state group in use or currently used) becomes lower than a threshold] (see par.0078, 0127), the one TCI is determined to be first-indicated TCI among the first TCI and the second TCI [TCI selection/apply] (see par. 0127-0128, 0227-0228). Kwak discloses the teachings in more than embodiment; however, it would be obvious to combine the embodiments for transmitting the desired information and enabling the selection of the TCI. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to combine the embodiments for the simple purpose of effectively enabling the selection of the TCI.
As to claim 15, Kwak discloses the method according to claim 14, wherein information indicating the one TCI is included in the first DCI (see abstract, par. 0003, 0074, 0078, 0204).
As to claim 21, Kwak discloses the method according to claim 14, wherein information indicating the one TCJ is transmitted to the terminal before transmitting the first PDSCH based on a higher layer signaling procedure (see par. 0085, 0124).
As to claim 22, Kwak discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein information indicating the one TCI is received by the terminal before the terminal receives the first PDSCH based on a higher layer signaling procedure (see par. 0085, 0124).
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 MARCOS L TORRES whose telephone number is (571)272-7926. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00 AM - 6:00 PM M-F.
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, Alison Slater can be reached at (571)270-0375. 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.
MARCOS L. TORRES
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2647
/MARCOS L TORRES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2647