DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Cross Reference to Related Applications
2. The present application is a continuation of International Application No. PCT/CN2021/111056, filed on August 5, 2021, the disclosures of which are incorporated by reference in their entirety.
Claims status
3. This office action is a response to an application filed on April 12, 2024 in which claims 1-20 are pending for examination.
Drawings
4. The Examiner contends that the drawings submitted on April 12, 2024 are acceptable for examination proceedings.
Information Disclosure Statement
5. The Examiner has considered the reference(s) listed on the Information Disclosure Statements submitted on February 21, 2024, January 15, 2025, April 16, 2025 and November 26, 2025.
Claim Objections (minor informalities)
6. Claims 1, 2, 3, 4 and 15 recites acronyms such as “TRP”, “DL BWP”, “BFR”, “SpCell”, “DCI”, “NDI”, “HARQ”, “ID”, “PUSCH”, “BFRQ” “MAC” “CE”; it is suggested to clearly spell out the specified acronyms in at least the first time it is mentioned in the claim [Note: for e.g. TRP (transmission/reception point); DL BWP (downlink bandwidth part); BFR (beam failure recovery); SpCell (special cell); DCI (downlink control information); NDI (new data indicator); HARQ (Hybrid Automatic Repeat Request); ID (identifier); PUSCH (Physical Uplink Shared Channel); BFRQ (beam failure recovery request) MAC (Medium Access Control); CE (Control Element)].
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
7. 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.
8. 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.
9. There are two separate requirements under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b). MPEP § 2171. The first is subjective and requires that the claims must set forth the subject matter that the Applicants regard as their invention. Id. The second is objective and requires that the claims must particularly point out and distinctively define the metes and bounds of the subject matter that will be protected by the patent grant (i.e., whether the scope of the claim is clear to one of ordinary skill in the art). Id.
10. Claim 20 is 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 20, the claim recites “…a network device configured to transmit…” in line 3 and “…transmitted by a network device, the configuration information configuring…” in line 4.
It is unclear whether “a network device” in line 4 is referring back to “a network device” of line 3.
Appropriate corrections are requested. For the purpose of examinations, the examiner will interpret the claims as best understood.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
11. 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.
12. 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.
13. Claims 1-5, 7-14 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Zhu et al. (US 2022/0132517 A1; support for the cited paragraphs sporadically through the disclosures of provisional application numbers 63/105,133 field on October 13, 2020, 63/139,110 field on January 19, 2021, and 63/179,752 field on April 26, 2021), hereinafter “Zhu”.
Regarding claim 1, Zhu discloses a beam failure processing apparatus, applicable to a terminal equipment (Figs. 1, 6A-6B, beam failure recovery in a wireless communication system), the apparatus comprising:
a receiver configured to receive (Figs. 2-3, example of hardware implementation according to embodiments of the present disclosure) configuration information transmitted by a network device (paragraphs [0107], [0425], configuration of the BFD RS(s)/BFD RS beam set(s)), the configuration information configuring at least two beam failure detection reference signal sets (BFD-RS sets) for the terminal equipment (paragraphs [0107], [0425], higher layer RRC signaling S_q0 (1≤S_q0≤maxS_q0) BFD RS beam sets each containing N_q0 (1≤N_q0≤maxN_q0) BFD RSs, where maxS_q0 is the maximum number of BFD RS beam sets (e.g., maxS_q0=2 per BWP)); and
a processor configured to initiate (Figs. 2-3, example of hardware implementation according to embodiments of the present disclosure), when beam failure recovery is triggered for the at least two BFD-RS sets and the at least two BFD-RS sets (paragraphs [0424]-[0425], [0428], [0447], BFR more than one TRP-specific or per TRP beam failure events simultaneously or within a time window) are associated with a cell (paragraphs [0424]-[0425], [0428], [0447], BFR procedure for the corresponding cell), or when a beam failure is detected or beam failure recovery is triggered (paragraphs [0424]-[0425], [0428], [0447], detected/declared beam failure(s) for the BFD RS(s)/BFD RS beam set(s) associated with the primary TRP) for a designated TRP (paragraphs [0424]-[0425], [0428], [0447], primary TRP), a random access procedure on the cell (paragraphs [0424]-[0425], [0428], [0447], RACH-based BFR procedure triggered for the cell).
Regarding claim 2, Zhu discloses the at least two BFD-RS sets are associated with a DL BWP of the cell (paragraph [0107], number of BFD-RS beam sets are associated with DL BWP).
Regarding claim 3, Zhu discloses when the terminal equipment is not configured with cell-specific BFD and/or cell-specific BFR, the processor initiates a random access procedure on the cell (paragraphs [0322], [0424], [0447], RACH based BFR procedure not configured with cell-specific BFD and/or cell-specific BFR).
Regarding claim 4, Zhu discloses the cell is a SpCell (paragraph [0428], RACH based BFR procedure triggered for SpCell).
Regarding claim 5, Zhu discloses the configuration information containing set indices of at least two BFD-RS set or at least two control resource pool indices, wherein one control resource pool index is associated with one BFD-RS set (paragraphs [0120], [0122], configured beam sets associated with TRP or TRP-specific index/ID values such as PCI or CORESETPoolIndex).
Regarding claim 7, Zhu discloses the at least two BFD-RS sets are associated with the cell comprises that at least two BFD-RS sets are associated with the same cell (paragraph [0428], BFD RS(s)/BFD RS beam set(s) associated with the primary TRP, the RACH-based BFR procedure could be triggered for the cell (e.g., a PCell or a SpCell)).
Regarding claim 8, Zhu discloses beam failure recovery is triggered for the at least two BFD-RS sets includes: beam failure recovery is triggered for the at least two BFD-RS sets and beam failure recovery procedure is not successfully completed and/or is not cancelled for any one of the at least two BFD-RS sets (paragraph [0450], before the UE sends to the network the PUCCH-SR for BFR to request beam failure recovery for the failed BFD RS beam set q0-0 (or q0-1), if the UE could detect/declare beam failure for the other BFD RS beam set q0-1 (or q0-0), i.e., the radio link quality for the other BFD RS beam set q0-1 (or q0-0) is below the corresponding BFD threshold or the maximum number of BFI count associated with the other BFD RS beam set q0-1 (or q0-0) is achieved/reached before the expiration of the BFD timer associated with the other BFD RS beam set q0-1 (or q0-0), the UE could trigger/initiate a CFRA or CBRA based transmission to send to the network the beam failure recovery request for both BFD RS beam sets q0-0 and q0-1).
Regarding claim 9, Zhu discloses beam failure recovery is triggered for the at least two BFD-RS sets includes beam failure recovery is triggered simultaneously for the at least two BFD-RS sets (paragraph [0447], UE could only configure a single MAC entity for multi-TRP BFR, which is the TRP-specific/per TRP BFR MAC entity (shown on the RHS in FIG. 12); in this case, the MAC entity for conventional cell-specific BFR (e.g., the BFD counter, timer and etc.) is no longer configured; hence, the UE could only be able to declare the beam failure event on a per TRP basis; under certain settings, initiating/triggering the TRP-specific or per TRP BFR procedure could become inefficient; hence, if the UE has detected more than one TRP-specific or per TRP beam failure events simultaneously or within a time window, the UE would trigger a conventional cell-specific BFR for the multi-TRP system rather than multiple independent/separate TRP-specific/per TRP BFR procedures; that is, if the UE has declared beam failures for all the configured BFD RS beam sets within the time window, the UE could initiate/trigger a RACH based transmission to send to the network the beam failure recovery request).
Regarding claim 10, Zhu discloses the number of related indices of each of the at least two BFD-RS sets received within a first predetermined time is greater than or equal to a configured threshold (paragraphs [0214], [0447], beam failures of configured BFD RS beam set within the time window).
Regarding claim 11, Zhu discloses the beam failure recovery is triggered for the at least two BFD-RS sets includes: beam failure recovery is triggered non-simultaneously for the at least two BFD-RS sets (paragraph [0450], before the UE sends to the network the PUCCH-SR for BFR to request beam failure recovery for the failed BFD RS beam set q0-0 (or q0-1), if the UE could detect/declare beam failure for the other BFD RS beam set q0-1 (or q0-0), i.e., the radio link quality for the other BFD RS beam set q0-1 (or q0-0) is below the corresponding BFD threshold or the maximum number of BFI count associated with the other BFD RS beam set q0-1 (or q0-0) is achieved/reached before the expiration of the BFD timer associated with the other BFD RS beam set q0-1 (or q0-0), the UE could trigger/initiate a CFRA or CBRA based transmission to send to the network the beam failure recovery request for both BFD RS beam sets q0-0 and q0-1).
Regarding claim 12, Zhu discloses when beam failure recovery is triggered on a latter BFD-RS set, a triggered BFR is not successfully completed and/or is not cancelled on a former BFD-RS set the beam failure recovery is triggered (paragraph [0450], before the UE sends to the network the PUCCH-SR for BFR to request beam failure recovery for the failed BFD RS beam set q0-0 (or q0-1), if the UE could detect/declare beam failure for the other BFD RS beam set q0-1 (or q0-0), i.e., the radio link quality for the other BFD RS beam set q0-1 (or q0-0) is below the corresponding BFD threshold or the maximum number of BFI count associated with the other BFD RS beam set q0-1 (or q0-0) is achieved/reached before the expiration of the BFD timer associated with the other BFD RS beam set q0-1 (or q0-0), the UE could trigger/initiate a CFRA or CBRA based transmission to send to the network the beam failure recovery request for both BFD RS beam sets q0-0 and q0-1).
Regarding claim 13, Zhu discloses the designated TRP is a TRP of a serving cell of the terminal equipment (paragraph [0425], primary TRP in muti-TRP system).
Regarding claim 14, Zhu discloses the receiver further configured to receive indication information transmitted by the network device, the indication information being used to indicate the designated TRP (paragraph [0425], indication indicating primary TRP in muti-TRP system).
Regarding claim 17, Zhu discloses an information transmitting apparatus, applicable to a network device (Figs. 1, 6A-6B, beam failure recovery in a wireless communication system), the apparatus comprising:
a transmitter configured to transmit configuration information to a terminal equipment (paragraphs [0107], [0425], configuration of the BFD RS(s)/BFD RS beam set(s)),
wherein the configuration information is information for configuring at least two BFD-RS sets to the terminal equipment (paragraphs [0107], [0425], higher layer RRC signaling S_q0 (1≤S_q0≤maxS_q0) BFD RS beam sets each containing N_q0 (1≤N_q0≤maxN_q0) BFD RSs, where maxS_q0 is the maximum number of BFD RS beam sets (e.g., maxS_q0=2 per BWP)).
Regarding claim 18, the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 2.
Regarding claim 19, the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 3.
Regarding claim 20, Zhu discloses a communication system (Figs. 1, 6A-6B, beam failure recovery in a wireless communication system), comprising
a terminal equipment (Figs. 1,2-3, 6A-6B); and
a network device (Figs. 1,2-3, 6A-6B) configured to transmit, to the terminal equipment, configuration information transmitted by a network device(paragraphs [0107], [0425], configuration of the BFD RS(s)/BFD RS beam set(s)), the configuration information configuring at least two beam failure detection reference signal sets (BFD-RS sets) for the terminal equipment (paragraphs [0107], [0425], higher layer RRC signaling S_q0 (1≤S_q0≤maxS_q0) BFD RS beam sets each containing N_q0 (1≤N_q0≤maxN_q0) BFD RSs, where maxS_q0 is the maximum number of BFD RS beam sets (e.g., maxS_q0=2 per BWP)),
wherein the terminal equipment is further configured to initiate (Figs. 2-3, example of hardware implementation according to embodiments of the present disclosure), when beam failure recovery is triggered for the at least two BFD-RS sets and the at least two BFD-RS sets are associated with a cell (paragraphs [0424]-[0425], [0428], [0447], BFR more than one TRP-specific or per TRP beam failure events simultaneously or within a time window), or when a beam failure is detected or beam failure recovery is triggered for a designated TRP (paragraphs [0424]-[0425], [0428], [0447], detected/declared beam failure(s) for the BFD RS(s)/BFD RS beam set(s) associated with the primary TRP), a random access procedure on the cell (paragraphs [0424]-[0425], [0428], [0447], RACH-based BFR procedure triggered for the cell).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
14. 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.
15. Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu et al. (US 2022/0132517 A1; support for the cited paragraphs sporadically through the disclosures of provisional application numbers 63/105,133 field on October 13, 2020, 63/139,110 field on January 19, 2021, and 63/179,752 field on April 26, 2021), hereinafter “Zhu” in view of Yi et al. (US 2020/0350972 A1), hereinafter “Yi”.
Regarding claim 6, Zhu discloses the apparatus according to claim 1.
Zhu does not explicitly disclose “the configuration information includes radio link monitoring configuration information, the configuration information being carried by BWP DL dedicated information”.
However, Yi from the same or similar field of endeavor discloses the configuration information includes radio link monitoring configuration information (paragraphs [0325], [0335], beam failure detecting (RadioLinkMonitoringRS in the IE RadioLinkMonitoringConfig)), the configuration information being carried by BWP DL dedicated information (paragraphs [0325], [0335], higher layer parameter failureDetectionResources (e.g., beam recovery RSs) for a downlink BWP (of configured downlink BWPs)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide “the configuration information includes radio link monitoring configuration information, the configuration information being carried by BWP DL dedicated information” as taught by Yi, in the system of Zhu, so that it would provide enabling beam failure recovery in multicarrier communication systems relate to radio access networks (Yi, paragraph [0036]).
16. Claims 15 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu et al. (US 2022/0132517 A1; support for the cited paragraphs sporadically through the disclosures of provisional application numbers 63/105,133 field on October 13, 2020, 63/139,110 field on January 19, 2021, and 63/179,752 field on April 26, 2021), hereinafter “Zhu” in view of Matsumura et al. (US 2023/0413080 A1), hereinafter “Matsumura”.
Regarding claim 15, Zhu discloses the apparatus according to claim 1.
Zhu does not explicitly disclose “the receiver is further configured to receive DCI transmitted by the network device, the DCI comprising a toggled NDI, and the processor is further configured to control to cancel the triggered BFR and/or stop the ongoing random access procedure when DCI of the toggled NDI schedules an HARQ process ID identical to a PUSCH carrying a BFRQ MAC CE”.
However, Matsumura from the same or similar field of endeavor discloses the receiver is further configured to receive DCI transmitted by the network device, the DCI comprising a toggled NDI, and the processor is further configured to control to cancel the triggered BFR and/or stop the ongoing random access procedure when DCI of the toggled NDI schedules an HARQ process ID identical to a PUSCH carrying a BFRQ MAC CE (paragraphs [0061], [0065], [0225], [0235], [0238], when the UE receives the PDCCH corresponding to the C-RNTI related to the UE itself, it may be judged that contention resolution is successful; PUSCH transmission may have the same HARQ process number as that of the first PUSCH (e.g., a PUSCH used for transmission of the MAC CE) and may have a toggled NDI field value).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide “the receiver is further configured to receive DCI transmitted by the network device, the DCI comprising a toggled NDI, and the processor is further configured to control to cancel the triggered BFR and/or stop the ongoing random access procedure when DCI of the toggled NDI schedules an HARQ process ID identical to a PUSCH carrying a BFRQ MAC CE” as taught by Matsumura, in the system of Zhu, so that it would provide performing procedures for switching to another beam in response to detection of beam failure when using a plurality of transmission/reception points (Matsumura, paragraph [0009]).
Regarding claim 16, Zhu in view of Matsumura disclose the apparatus according to claim 15.
Matsumura further discloses the DCI is associated with the cell or is associated with an other cell (paragraphs [0061], [0063], [0065], PDCCH corresponding to a cell).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide “the DCI is associated with the cell or is associated with an other cell” as taught by Matsumura, in the system of Zhu, so that it would provide performing procedures for switching to another beam in response to detection of beam failure when using a plurality of transmission/reception points (Matsumura, paragraph [0009]).
Conclusion
17. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SITHU KO whose telephone number is 571-272-8647. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Friday 8:30am-5:00pmEST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Edan Orgad can be reached on 571-272-7884. 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.
/SITHU KO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2414