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 .
Claim Status
This office action is in response to the communication(s) filed on 04/08/2026.
Claim(s) 1, and 25-39 is/are currently presenting for examination.
Claim(s) 1 and 31 is/are independent claim(s).
Claim(s) 1, 25, 29-32, and 36-39 is/are rejected.
Claim(s) 26-28, and 33-35 is/are objected.
This action has been made FINAL.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 04/08/2026 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 29-31, and 36-39 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US_20250317821_A1_Yuan.
Regarding claim 1, Yuan teaches a method of wireless communication, comprising: receiving, by a wireless device, a plurality of signaling comprising a first signaling comprising a medium access control-control element (MAC-CE) that activates or deactivates one or more transmission configuration information (TCI) states associated with one or more tracking reference signal (TRS) for a candidate cell (Yuan paragraph 135, “Additionally or alternatively, in some other aspects, such as to reduce TRS tracking latency after a cell switch or a cell change, a MAC-CE may activate a TCI state configured for a candidate cell which is not selected for use yet. In some cases, a MAC-CE may be sent from a currently used cell (or old cell) with an applied cell ID as the intended candidate cell (or new cell). The MAC-CE may be sent before the cell switching or the cell change…”), and a second signaling comprising a cell switch command MAC-CE that indicates a TCI state from the activated TCI states and a candidate cell identification (Yuan paragraph 142, “…the switching to a new SpCell may be indicated by a MAC-CE activating at least one TCI state configured for the new cell.…”, paragraph 126, “A second option (referred to as Option B) for the L1/L2 signaling to indicate the cell change may include a dedicated cell switch command. For instance, according to Option B, the switching to a new cell may be signaled by a dedicated MAC-CE or DCI that at least includes an identifier (ID) of the new cell…”, paragraph 157, “Additionally or alternatively, in some other aspects respect to dedicated signaling of a cell and/or beam change, the switching to a new cell may be signaled by dedicated MAC-CE or DCI that at least includes the ID or the new cell, e.g. PCI or serving cell ID…”); and performing, by the wireless device, an operation according to the plurality of signaling (Yuan figures 13, 15, paragraph 158).
Regarding claim 29, Yuan teaches the method of claim 1, wherein a maximum number of activated TCI states is determined based on a wireless device capability, or by pre-defined downlink control information (DCI) signaling, MAC-CE signaling, or radio resource control (RRC) signaling (Yuan paragraphs 135, 172).
Regarding claim 30, Yuan teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the plurality of signaling further comprises a cell information that includes a field indicating a cell identification or a cell index of at least one of serving cell or candidate cell (Yuan paragraph 126, “A second option (referred to as Option B) for the L1/L2 signaling to indicate the cell change may include a dedicated cell switch command. For instance, according to Option B, the switching to a new cell may be signaled by a dedicated MAC-CE or DCI that at least includes an identifier (ID) of the new cell…”, paragraph 157, “Additionally or alternatively, in some other aspects respect to dedicated signaling of a cell and/or beam change, the switching to a new cell may be signaled by dedicated MAC-CE or DCI that at least includes the ID or the new cell, e.g. PCI or serving cell ID…”).
Regarding claim 38, Yuan teaches the apparatus for wireless communication comprising at least one processor that is configured to cause the apparatus to implement the method of claim 1 (Yuan figures 4, 34).
Regarding claim 31, Yuan teaches the limitations as set forth in claim 1.
Regarding claim 36, Yuan teaches the limitations as set forth in claim 29.
Regarding claim 37, Yuan teaches the limitations as set forth in claim 30.
Regarding claim 39, Yuan teaches the limitations as set forth in claim 38.
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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) 25 and 32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US_20250317821_A1_Yuan in view of US_20230362852_A1_He.
Regarding claim 25, Yuan teaches the method of claim 1, but does not teach wherein the one or more TRS is a periodic TRS.
He from the same or similar fields of endeavor teaches: wherein the one or more TRS is a periodic TRS (He paragraph 27, “…where Trs is an SSB measurement timing configuration (SMTC) periodicity of the target SCell…”).
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the teachings of He into Yuan, since Yuan suggests a technique for using TRS in a wireless network, and He suggests the beneficial way of a periodic TRS thus maintain precise time and frequency synchronization with a base station in the analogous art of communication.
Regarding claim 32, Yuan and He teach the limitations as set forth in claim 25.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 26-28, and 33-35 is/are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
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 WEIBIN HUANG whose telephone number is (571)270-3695. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:30AM - 6:00PM.
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, Sujoy Kundu can be reached at (571)272-8586. 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.
/W.H/Examiner, Art Unit 2471
/SUJOY K KUNDU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2471
Prosecution Insights