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 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.
DETAILED ACTION
1. The application of Shao et al. for the "METHOD OF DYNAMIC SWITCH INDICATION" filed 11/28/2023 has been examined. This application is a Continuation of PCT/CN2022/089594, filed 04/27/2022. Claims 1-20 are pending in the present application.
2. The applicant should use this period for response to thoroughly and very closely proof read and review the whole of the application for correct correlation between reference numerals in the textual portion of the Specification and Drawings along with any minor spelling errors, general typographical errors, accuracy, assurance of proper use for Trademarks TM, and other legal symbols @, where required, and clarity of meaning in the Specification, Drawings, and specifically the claims (i.e., provide proper antecedent basis for “the'' and “said'' within each
claim). Minor typographical errors could render a Patent unenforceable and so the applicant is
strongly encouraged to aid in this endeavor.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
3. 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.
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.
4. Claims 11, 16 (& their dependent claims 12-15, 17-20) are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ),
second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential elements, such omission
amounting to a gap between the elements. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted
element is memory. As the independent claims 11, 16 (& their dependent claims 12-15, 17-20) recites an apparatus for wireless communication comprising a processor configured to
implement a method, but it needs a memory configured to store instructions to
implement the method (see Fig. 2 & para [0125] of specification of Application publication).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. 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.
6. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims under 35 U.S.C. 103, the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned at the time any inventions covered therein were made absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and invention dates of each claim that was not commonly owned at the time a later invention was made in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 103 and potential 35 U.S.C. 102(e), (f) or (g) prior art under 35 U.S.C. 103.
7. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bai et al. (US#12,382,482) in view of Cirik et al. (US#12,219,557).
In sofar as understood, Regarding claims 11, 16, the references disclose a system and method for providing transmission configuration indicator (TCI) state mode switching in wireless communication, according to the essential features of the claims. Bai et al. (US#12,382,482) discloses a device of wireless communication, comprising at least one processor (see Figs. 10, 14 for the structure of the devices includes processors 1040, 1440 and memories 1030, 1430) configured to: receive/transmit, from a network/wireless device, a switch mode indicated by a first signaling message, wherein the switch mode is configured to indicate a selection of a transmission configuration indicator (TCI) state from a plurality of TCI states (Figs. 2, 4; Col. 21, lines 15-26; Col. 22, lines 59-67 & Col. 24, lines 27-39; Col. 25, lines 8-14: The UE may identify a transmission configuration indicator (TCI) state to use for communications with a network entity after switching between TCI modes - switch modes at 240 e.g., between joint TCI states 220 and separate TCI states 225 for beam indications or select a mode and corresponding TCI state for UE 115-a to use); determine the TCI state applicable to a transmission based on the switch mode; and perform the transmission according to the TCI state (Fig. 4; Col. 25, lines 8-16: At 430, the UE 115-c may communicate with a network entity, such as base station 105-c, using the TCI state identified at 425)
However, Haustein reference does not disclose expressly wherein receive/transmit, from/to the network/wireless device, a codepoint value indicating the plurality of TCI states in a second signaling message. In the same field of endeavor, Cirik et al. (US#12,219,557) teaches in Fig. 24 where the TCI codepoint may comprise/indicate TCI state(s) of the at least one TCI state activated by the MAC CE 2408. The mapping the at least one TCI state to the one or more TCI codepoints may comprise grouping the at least one TCI state into the one or more TCI codepoints 2428. For example, TCI state 10 may be mapped to TCI codepoint 00, TCI state 4 and TCI state 23 may be mapped to TCI codepoint 01, TCI state 8 and TCI state 15 may be mapped to TCI codepoint 10, and TCI state 6 may be mapped to TCI codepoint 11 (Col. 79, lines 15-55: a codepoint value e.g., 000, 010, 111, 100, etc, indicated by the TCI field, indicates the at least two TCI states e.g., TCI state 23, TCI state 15).
One skilled in the art would have recognized the need for effectively and efficiently providing TCI state mode switching in wireless communication, and would have applied Cirik’s codepoint values indicating the at least two TCI states into Bai’s TCI state mode switching in wireless communications. Therefore, It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply Cirik’s wireless communications for scheduling transmissions into Bai’s transmission configuration indicator state mode switching with the motivation being to provide a method and system for providing dynamic switch indication in wireless communication systems
Regarding claims 12, 17, Bai et al. in view of Cirik et al. teaches the apparatus of claims 11, 16 as set forth above, Bai et al. further teach wherein (Figs. 4-6; Col. 24, lines 53-59: the RRC protocol layer may provide establishment, configuration, and maintenance of an RRC connection between a UE 115 and a base station 105)
Regarding claim 13, 18, Bai et al. in view of Cirik et al. teaches the apparatus of claims 11, 16 as set forth above, Bai et al. further teach wherein (Figs. 4-6; Col. 21, lines 15-26: base station 105-a may transmit control signaling, such as a MAC-CE or DCI message, to select a pool to activate).
Regarding claims 14, 19, Bai et al. in view of Cirik et al. teaches the apparatus of claims 11, 16 as set forth above, Bai et al. further teach wherein (Figs. 4-6; Col. 24, lines 53-59: Base station 105-c may include the TCI mode switch signaling in control signaling, such as RRC signaling, a MAC-CE, a DCI message, or the like).
Regarding claims 15, 20, Bai et al. in view of Cirik et al. teaches the apparatus of claims 11, 16 as set forth above, Bai et al. further teach wherein the plurality of TCI states is determined based on a TCI state set indicated by a DCI signaling (Fig. 2; Col. 21, lines 19-22: Base station 105-a may use control signaling, such as a MAC-CE or a DCI message, to activate or select a mode and corresponding TCI state for UE 115-a to use)
Regarding claims 1-10, they are method claims corresponding to the apparatus claims 11-20 examined above. Therefore, claims 1-10 are analyzed and rejected as previously discussed in paragraph above with respect to claims 11-20.
Conclusion
8. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
The Bai et al. (US#2026/0012970) is cited to show transmission configuration indicator state mode switching.
The Caporal Del Barrio et al. (US#2025/0158785) shows management of transmission configuration indicator states.
The Matsumura et al. (US#2025/0159693) shows terminal, radio communication method and base station.
The Matsumura et al. (US#2025/0089068) shows terminal radio communication & BS.
The Yang (US#12,389,385) shows method for transmitting indication information and communications device.
The Ling et al. (US#2025/0071765) shows methods and apparatus of beam determination of PUSCH scheduled or activated with DCI format 0_0 where two common beams are indicated for UL transmission.
The Matsumura et al. (US#2025/0007679) shows terminal, radio communication method, and BS.
The Muruganathan et al. (US#2024/0205695) shows common spatial filter updates for multi-DCI based MTRP systems.
The Yu et al. (US#2024/0089943) shows method and UE for beam operation.
The Zhang et al. (US#12,068,861) shows TCI determination and acknowledgement.
The Muruganathan et al. (US#12,114,304) shows MAC-CE signaling for multi-transmission point/multi panel PDSCH transmission.
9. Applicant's future amendments need to comply with the requirements of MPEP § 714.02, MPEP § 2163.04 and MPEP § 2163.06.
"with respect to newly added or amended claims, applicant should show support in the original disclosure for the new or amended claims." See MPEP § 714.02 and § 2163.06 ("Applicant should * * * specifically point out the support for any amendments made to the disclosure."); and MPEP § 2163.04 ("If applicant amends the claims and points out where and/or how the originally filed disclosure supports the amendment(s), and the examiner finds that the disclosure does not reasonably convey that the inventor had possession of the subject matter of the amendment at the time of the filing of the application, the examiner has the initial burden of presenting evidence or reasoning to explain why persons skilled in the art would not recognize in the disclosure a description of the invention defined by the claims."). See In re Smith, 458 F.2d 1389, 1395, 173 USPQ 679, 683 (CCPA 1972) In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d at 262,191 USPQ at 96 (emphasis added). "The use of a confusing variety of terms for the same thing should not be permitted.
New claims and amendments to the claims already in the application should be scrutinized not only for new matter but also for new terminology. While an applicant is not limited to the nomenclature used in the application as filed, he or she should make appropriate amendment of the specification whenever this nomenclature is departed from by amendment of the claims so as to have clear support or antecedent basis in the specification for the new terms appearing in the claims. This is necessary in order to insure certainty in construing the claims in the light of the specification." Ex parte Kotler, 1901 C.D. 62, 95 O.G. 2684 (Comm'r Pat. 1901). See 37 CFR 1.75, MPEP § 608.01 (i) and § 1302.01.
Note that examiners should ensure that the terms and phrases used in claims presented late in prosecution of the application (including claims amended via an examiner's amendment) find clear support or antecedent basis in the description so that the meaning of the terms in the claims may be ascertainable by reference to the description, see 37 CFR 1,75(d)(1 ). If the examiner determines that the claims presented late in prosecution do not comply with 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1), applicant will be required to make appropriate amendment to the description to provide clear support or antecedent basis for the terms appearing in the claims provided no new matter is introduced."
"USPTO personnel are to give claims their broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the supporting disclosure." In re Morris, 127 F.3d 1048, 1054-55, 44 USPQ2d 1023,1027-28 (Fed. Cir. 1997). MPEP § 2106. "
10. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to M. Phan whose telephone number is (571) 272-3149. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon - Fri from 6:00 to 3:00.
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, Chirag Shah, can be reached on (571) 272-3144. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300.
Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or proceeding should be directed to the receptionist whose telephone number is (571) 272-2600.
11. 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 any questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at toll free 1-866-217-9197.
Mphan
02/12/2026
/MAN U PHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2477