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 .
Continued Examination under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 05/26/2026 has been entered.
Authorization for Internet Communication
To expedite prosecution, filing a written authorization for internet communication is recommended. Doing so permits USPTO to communicate using email to schedule interviews and/or discuss other aspects of the application. Without the written authorization in place, USPTO cannot respond to email communications. The preferred method of providing authorization is by filing form PTO/SB/439, available at https://www.uspto.gov/patent/forms/forms. See MPEP 502.03.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to independent claims filed on 02/10/2026 have been considered but are moot because the arguments are related solely to newly added limitations addressed in the instant Office Action with newly identified prior art, thus rendering the applicant’s arguments moot.
The applicant also presented other arguments drawn to the various dependent claims. However, said other arguments are all dependency based, depending from the arguments drawn to the independent claims’ limitations discussed 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.
Claim(s) 1, 4, 6-9, 12-13, 20, 27, 30, 33-34 and 43-45 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwak et al. (US 2024/0372673, “Kwak”) in view of Zhang et al. (US 2024/0073918, “Zhang”).
Examiner’s note: in what follows, references are drawn to Kwak unless otherwise mentioned.
Kwak comprises the following features:
With respect to independent claims:
Regarding claim 1, a user equipment (UE) for wireless communication, comprising:
one or more memories; and one or more processors, coupled to the one or more memories, the one or more processors individually or collectively (See Fig. 1B for 130 and 132, and 118 “Processor”), configured to:
receive a radio resource control message that indicates a control resource set (CORESET) is associated with a single frequency network (SFN) (This will be discussed in view of Zhang.);
determine, based at least in part on a beam failure detection reference signal configuration ([0144] “One or more of the following configurations (“BFR configurations”) may be used for BFR:”, [0145] “A WTRU may be configured with one or more sets of beam failure detection (BFD) RSs (each a “BFD-RS set”). For example, the WTRU may be configured with one or more RS-indexes sets q.sub.0,i corresponding to the one or more BFD-RS sets.”), a beam failure detection reference signal resource set associated with a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) monitoring operation ([0148] “The WTRU may determine (e.g., process one or more (pre)configured rules for determining) some or the entire BFR configuration based on and/or using the other information. As an example, the WTRU might not receive explicit configuration information for one or more BFD-RS sets (e.g., due to signaling of explicit BFD configuration not being supported) and may receive information for configuring one or more TCI states for PDCCH reception. The WTRU may configure the BFD-RS sets based on or using one or more RSs of the (configured) TCI states having QCL Type-D configuration.”) on the CORESET in the SFN, the PDCCH monitoring operation corresponding to at least two transmission configuration indicator (TCI) states associated with the SFN (This will be discussed in view of Zhang.); and
monitor the beam failure detection reference signal resource set to identify a beam failure ([0174] “The WTRU may support monitoring a group of RSs (e.g., the first and second BFD-RS sets) when the WTRU supports setting the multiple RSs of the TCI state as RSs of multiple BFD-RS sets.”, and [0184] “a number of RSs of the multiple RSs having an acceptable quality satisfying a threshold (e.g., the WTRU may report beam failure if the number of RSs having an acceptable quality is less than (or equal to) the threshold and might not determine and/or report beam failure if the number of RSs having an acceptable quality greater than (or equal to) the threshold”).
It is noted that while disclosing BFD RSs for PDCCH monitoring, Kwak does not specifically teach about monitoring/receiving PDCCH in a SFN. It, however, had been known in the art before the effective date of the instant application as shown by Zhang as follows;
receive a radio resource control message that indicates a control resource set (CORESET) is associated with a single frequency network (SFN) ([Zhang, 0032] “PDCCH enhancements are introduced for multiple TRPs use case. Two scenarios for the PDCCH reception, namely a SFN scheme and a non-SFN scheme, are introduced. In the SFN scheme, the BS can transmit PDCCH repetitions with fully overlapped resources with different beams and the BS can configure 2 TCI states for a CORESET.”, [Zhang, claim 1] “determining a DCI transmission scheme for the received DCI, wherein the DCI transmission scheme is configured by an upper layer signaling, and wherein the DCI transmission scheme is one of a Single Frequency Network (SFN) scheme”, and [Zhang, 0050] ““upper layer signaling” may be referred to higher layer signaling such as a Radio Resource Control (RRC) signal”)
a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) monitoring operation on the CORESET in the SFN, the PDCCH monitoring operation corresponding to at least two transmission configuration indicator (TCI) states associated with the SFN ([Zhang, 0032] “In the SFN scheme, the BS can transmit PDCCH repetitions with fully overlapped resources with different beams and the BS can configure 2 TCI states for a CORESET.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of instant application to modify Kwak by using the features of Zhang in order to enhance PDCCH reliability such that “in accordance with a determination that the received DCI fails to indicate the TCI and based on the determined DCI transmission scheme, selecting at least one TCI for the PDSCH reception from candidate TCIs configured for one or more Control Resource Sets (CORESETs) associated with the DCI.” [Zhang, 0004].
Regarding claim 27, a base station for wireless communication, comprising:
one or more memories; and one or more processors, coupled to the one or more memories, the one or more processors individually or collectively (See Fig. 1B for 130 and 132, and 118 “Processor”), configured to:
transmit a radio resource control message that indicates a control resource set (CORESET) is associated with a single frequency network (SFN) (This will be discussed in view of Zhang.);
transmit a beam failure detection reference signal based at least in part on a beam failure detection reference signal configuration ([0148] “A WTRU may receive information for configuring a BFR configuration via signaling (e.g., any of L1, L2, L3 and other layer signaling).”, [0145] “A WTRU may be configured with one or more sets of beam failure detection (BFD) RSs (each a “BFD-RS set”). For example, the WTRU may be configured with one or more RS-indexes sets q.sub.0,i corresponding to the one or more BFD-RS sets.”),
wherein the beam failure detection reference signal corresponds to a beam failure detection reference signal resource set (See aforesaid [0145].) associated with a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) monitoring operation on the CORESET in the SNF, the PDCCH monitoring operation corresponding to at least two transmission configuration indicator (TCI) states associated with the SFN (This will be discussed in view of Zhang.); and
receive an indicator that indicates at least one new beam indication reference signal based at least in part on an identification of a beam failure ([0136] “beam reporting may be interchangeably used with beam indication, new candidate beam reporting, and/or new candidate beam indication for beam failure recovery.”, and [0137] “A WTRU may make measurements for evaluating beam quality of a beam based on an RS associated with the beam.”).
It is noted that while disclosing BFD RSs for PDCCH monitoring, Kwak does not specifically teach about monitoring/receiving PDCCH in a SFN. It, however, had been known in the art before the effective date of the instant application as shown by Zhang as follows;
transmit a radio resource control message that indicates a control resource set (CORESET) is associated with a single frequency network (SFN) ([Zhang, 0032] “PDCCH enhancements are introduced for multiple TRPs use case. Two scenarios for the PDCCH reception, namely a SFN scheme and a non-SFN scheme, are introduced. In the SFN scheme, the BS can transmit PDCCH repetitions with fully overlapped resources with different beams and the BS can configure 2 TCI states for a CORESET.”, [Zhang, claim 1] “determining a DCI transmission scheme for the received DCI, wherein the DCI transmission scheme is configured by an upper layer signaling, and wherein the DCI transmission scheme is one of a Single Frequency Network (SFN) scheme”, and [Zhang, 0050] ““upper layer signaling” may be referred to higher layer signaling such as a Radio Resource Control (RRC) signal”)
a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) monitoring operation on the CORESET in the SFN, the PDCCH monitoring operation corresponding to at least two transmission configuration indicator (TCI) states associated with the SFN ([Zhang, 0032] “In the SFN scheme, the BS can transmit PDCCH repetitions with fully overlapped resources with different beams and the BS can configure 2 TCI states for a CORESET.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of instant application to modify Kwak by using the features of Zhang in order to enhance PDCCH reliability such that “in accordance with a determination that the received DCI fails to indicate the TCI and based on the determined DCI transmission scheme, selecting at least one TCI for the PDSCH reception from candidate TCIs configured for one or more Control Resource Sets (CORESETs) associated with the DCI.” [Zhang, 0004].
Regarding claim 43, it is a terminal claim corresponding to the UE claim 1, and is therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of claim 1.
Regarding claim 44, it is a method claim corresponding to the base station claim 27, and is therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of claim 27.
Regarding claim 45, it is a CRM claim corresponding to the method claim 1, except the limitations, “a computer-readable medium storing a set of instructions for wireless communication” ([0480] “the methods provided herein may be implemented in a computer program, software, or firmware incorporated in a computer-readable medium for execution by a computer or processor”), and is therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of claim 1.
With respect to dependent claims:
Regarding claims 4 and 30, the UE of claim 1 and the base station of claim 27, respectively,
wherein the beam failure detection reference signal configuration comprises an explicit configuration (See below [0148].),
wherein the one or more processors are further configured to receive the explicit configuration ([0148] “A WTRU may receive information for configuring a BFR configuration via signaling (e.g., any of L1, L2, L3 and other layer signaling). The information may specify/indicate some or the entire BFR configuration explicitly (“explicit BFR-configuration information”).”), and
wherein the explicit configuration is carried in at least one of the radio resource control message or a medium access control control element ([0151] “The WTRU may determine the CORESET groups based on any of an explicit CORESET group configuration, an explicit CORESET grouping indication (e.g., signaling, such as MAC CE and/or DCI)”).
Regarding claim 6, the UE of claim 1,
wherein the beam failure detection reference signal configuration comprises an explicit configuration ([0148] “explicit BFR-configuration information”),
wherein the explicit configuration includes an index set indication ([0144] “One or more of the following configurations (“BFR configurations”) may be used for BFR:”, and [0145] “A WTRU may be configured with one or more sets of beam failure detection (BFD) RSs (each a “BFD-RS set”). For example, the WTRU may be configured with one or more RS-indexes sets q.sub.0,i corresponding to the one or more BFD-RS sets.”) that indicates at least one of a set of periodic channel state information reference signal configuration indexes or a set of synchronization signal block configuration indexes ([0103] “The RSs corresponding to the RS-indexes sets q.sub.1 may be periodic RSs and/or WTRU-specific RSs, and may be, for example, any of an SSB and/or a CSI-RS.”), and
wherein the one or more processors, to determine the beam failure detection reference signal resource set, are individually or collectively configured to determine the beam failure detection reference signal resource set based at least in part on the index set indication (See aforesaid [0144-0145]).
Regarding claim 7, the UE of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to perform the PDCCH monitoring operation by monitoring a PDCCH transmission using the at least two TCI states ([0088] “the RS-indexes set q.sub.0 may include (e.g., periodic) CSI-RS resource indexes indicated by configured transmission configuration indicator (TCI) states (or by signaled TCI states IEs) for respective control resource sets (CORESETs) that the WTRU may use for monitoring physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) transmissions.”).
Regarding claim 8, the UE of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to perform a beam failure instance evaluation associated with the beam failure detection reference signal resource set ([0095] “The WTRU may be configured with a counter (e.g., a BFI_COUNTER) to use for counting beam failures (“beam-failure counter”). The beam-failure counter may be configured during an RRC configuration (e.g., via an RRC configuration message).”).
Regarding claim 9, the UE of claim 8, wherein the one or more processors, to perform the beam failure instance evaluation, are individually or collectively configured to determine at least one hypothetical block error rate calculation associated with the PDCCH transmission ([0104] “The WTRU may be provided a hypothetical BLER threshold and a RSRP threshold during an RRC configuration (e.g., in an RRC configuration message). The WTRU may use the hypothetical BLER threshold and/or the RSRP threshold to monitor and/or measure the RSs corresponding to the RS-indexes sets q.sub.1 and/or select the new candidate Tx beam.”).
Regarding claim 12, the UE of claim 9,
wherein the at least two TCI states correspond to at least one pair of beam failure detection reference signals ([0088] “the RS-indexes set q.sub.0 may include (e.g., periodic) CSI-RS resource indexes indicated by configured transmission configuration indicator (TCI) states (or by signaled TCI states IEs) for respective control resource sets (CORESETs) that the WTRU may use for monitoring physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) transmissions. For any of the TCI states in which two RS indexes are specified and/or indicated, the CSI-RS resource indexes indicated by such TCI states (or TCI states IEs) may correspond to the RS indexes having a quasi-colocation (QCL) type D (QCL-Type D) configuration.”),
wherein the first TCI state corresponds to a first beam failure detection reference signal of a pair of beam failure detection reference signals of the at least one pair of beam failure detection reference signals and the second TCI state corresponds to a second beam failure detection reference signal of the pair of beam failure detection reference signals (See above [0088] for “correspond to the RS indexes” for any of the TCI states in which two RS indexes are indicated.), and
wherein the one or more processors, to determine the at least one hypothetical block error rate calculation, are individually or collectively configured to determine one hypothetical block error rate calculation for the pair of beam failure detection reference signals ([0089] “The WTRU may evaluate beam qualities based on measurements of the RSs corresponding to the RS-indexes set q.sub.0.”, and [0092] “The WTRU may use the hypothetical BLER threshold and/or the RSRP threshold to monitor and/or measure the RSs corresponding to the RS-indexes sets q.sub.1 and/or select the new candidate Tx beam.”).
Regarding claim 13, the UE of claim 12, wherein the one or more processors, to determine the one hypothetical block error rate calculation for the pair of beam failure detection reference signals, are individually or collectively configured to determine an average block error rate ([0179] “The WTRU may measure qualities of the multiple RSs as a group. The measurement may be based on one or more of following:”, and [0180] “any of an average hypothetical BLER of the multiple RSs”).
Regarding claim 20, the UE of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to:
identify the beam failure ([0098 and Fig. 3] “The WTRU may determine whether the beam-failure counter has reached or otherwise satisfies the beam-failure-counter threshold (306) (e.g., the beamFailureInstanceMaxCount threshold). If the beam-failure-counter threshold is satisfied, the WTRU may move on to identifying and/or selecting a new candidate Tx beam (308).”); and determine, during a beam failure recovery procedure, at least one new beam indication reference signal based at least in part on identifying the beam failure (See above [0098 and Fig. 3]).
Regarding claim 33, the base station of claim 27, wherein the beam failure detection reference signal configuration comprises an explicit configuration ([0148] “A WTRU may receive information for configuring a BFR configuration via signaling (e.g., any of L1, L2, L3 and other layer signaling). The information may specify/indicate some or the entire BFR configuration explicitly (“explicit BFR-configuration information”).”), and wherein a beam failure instance evaluation is associated with the beam failure detection reference signal resource set ([0095] “The WTRU may be configured with a counter (e.g., a BFI_COUNTER) to use for counting beam failures (“beam-failure counter”). The beam-failure counter may be configured during an RRC configuration (e.g., via an RRC configuration message).”).
Regarding claim 34, the base station of claim 27, wherein the PDCCH monitoring operation corresponds to a PDCCH transmission, and wherein the beam failure instance evaluation comprises at least one hypothetical block error rate calculation associated with the PDCCH transmission ([0104] “The WTRU may be provided a hypothetical BLER threshold and a RSRP threshold during an RRC configuration (e.g., in an RRC configuration message). The WTRU may use the hypothetical BLER threshold and/or the RSRP threshold to monitor and/or measure the RSs corresponding to the RS-indexes sets q.sub.1 and/or select the new candidate Tx beam.”).
Claim(s) 2-3, 23-24 and 28-29 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwak et al. (US 2024/0372673, “Kwak”) in view of Zhang et al. (US 2024/0073918, “Zhang”) and further in view of Cirik et al. (US 2025/0070942, “Cirik”).
Examiner’s note: in what follows, references are drawn to Kwak unless otherwise mentioned.
Regarding claims 2 and 28, the UE of claim 1 and the base station of claim 27, respectively,
wherein the one or more processors, to determine the beam failure detection reference signal resource set, are individually or collectively configured to determine the beam failure detection reference signal resource set based at least in part on at least one quasi co-located reference signal of the CORESET ([0088] “the RS-indexes set q.sub.0 may include (e.g., periodic) CSI-RS resource indexes indicated by configured transmission configuration indicator (TCI) states (or by signaled TCI states IEs) for respective control resource sets (CORESETs) that the WTRU may use for monitoring physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) transmissions…. the CSI-RS resource indexes indicated by such TCI states (or TCI states IEs) may correspond to the RS indexes having a quasi-colocation (QCL) type D (QCL-Type D) configuration.”).
It is noted that while disclosing BFD RSs for PDCCH monitoring, Kwak does not specifically teach about a single TCI included in a CORESET. It, however, had been known in the art before the effective date of the instant application as shown by Cirik as follows;
the CORESET includes only a single active TCI state ([Cirik, 0376] “the wireless device may activate/use each TCI state of the one or more activated TCI states for a (single, only one) coreset of the one or more coresets.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of instant application to modify Kwak by using the features of Cirik in order to effectively utilize resources that “The wireless device determines, based on a parameter associated with an SRS resource set, a TCI state among the first TCI state and the second TCI state.” [Cirik, Abstract].
Regarding claims 3 and 29, the UE of claim 1 and the base station of claim 27, respectively,
wherein the one or more processors, to determine the beam failure detection reference signal resource set, are individually or collectively configured to determine the beam failure detection reference signal resource set based at least in part on at least one quasi co-located reference signal of the CORESET ([0088] “the RS-indexes set q.sub.0 may include (e.g., periodic) CSI-RS resource indexes indicated by configured transmission configuration indicator (TCI) states (or by signaled TCI states IEs) for respective control resource sets (CORESETs) that the WTRU may use for monitoring physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) transmissions…. the CSI-RS resource indexes indicated by such TCI states (or TCI states IEs) may correspond to the RS indexes having a quasi-colocation (QCL) type D (QCL-Type D) configuration.”), and
wherein the CORESET includes two active TCI states ([Cirik, 0237] “the wireless device may receive a MAC CE activation command for at least one of the at least two TCI states for the coreset.”).
The rational and motivation for adding this teaching of Cirik are the same as for claim 2.
Regarding claim 23, the UE of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to perform the PDCCH monitoring operation, and wherein the one or more processors, to perform the PDCCH monitoring operation, are individually or collectively configured to monitor a PDCCH transmission ([0088] “the RS-indexes set q.sub.0 may include (e.g., periodic) CSI-RS resource indexes indicated by configured transmission configuration indicator (TCI) states (or by signaled TCI states IEs) for respective control resource sets (CORESETs) that the WTRU may use for monitoring physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) transmissions.”) associated with the CORESET having two active TCI states ([Cirik, 0237] “the wireless device may receive a MAC CE activation command for at least one of the at least two TCI states for the coreset.”).
The rational and motivation for adding this teaching of Cirik are the same as for claim 2.
Regarding claim 24, the UE of claim 23, wherein the PDCCH transmission comprises an SFN transmission ([Zhang, 0039] “the PDCCH repetitions can be transmitted by BS with fully overlapped resources with different beams in SFN scheme”).
Claim(s) 5 and 22 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwak et al. (US 2024/0372673, “Kwak”) in view of Zhang et al. (US 2024/0073918, “Zhang”) and further in view of Sun et al. (US 2025/0071750, “Sun”).
Examiner’s note: in what follows, references are drawn to Kwak unless otherwise mentioned.
Regarding claim 5, the UE of claim 1,
wherein the beam failure detection reference signal configuration comprises an explicit configuration ([0148] “explicit BFR-configuration information”).
It is noted that while disclosing BFD RSs for PDCCH monitoring, Kwak does not specifically teach about an indication for a pair of CSI. It, however, had been known in the art before the effective date of the instant application as shown by Sun as follows;
wherein the explicit configuration includes a pairing indication that indicates at least one of a pair of channel state information reference signal resources ([Sun, 0095] “the CSI configuration information includes information configuring one or more pairs of CSI-RS resources”) or a pair of synchronization signal block resources (This alternative is not examined.), and
wherein the one or more processors, to determine the beam failure detection reference signal resource set, are individually or collectively configured to determine the beam failure detection reference signal resource set based at least in part on the pairing indication ([Sun, 0095] “at least as one possibility, if different sets of resources for channel measurement that are associated with different TRPs are individually or collectively configured, each configured pair of CSI-RS resources could include one CSI-RS resource from one set of channel measurement resources and one CSI-RS resource from another set of channel measurement resources.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of instant application to modify Kwak by using the features of Sun in order to efficiently operate terminal devices to save batter power such that “channel state information configuration information may be provided to a wireless device that configures channel measurement resources associated with different transmission-reception-points” [Sun, 0006].
Regarding claim 22, the UE of claim 20, wherein the one or more processors, to determine the at least one new beam indication reference signal, are individually or collectively configured to determine a reference signal pair of a plurality of reference signal pairs ([Sun, 0095] “the CSI configuration information includes information configuring one or more pairs of CSI-RS resources”).
The rational and motivation for adding this teaching of Sun are the same as for claim 5.
Claim(s) 10-11 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwak et al. (US 2024/0372673, “Kwak”) in view of Zhang et al. (US 2024/0073918, “Zhang”) and further in view of Davydov et al. (US 2020/0403683, “Davydov”).
Examiner’s note: in what follows, references are drawn to Kwak unless otherwise mentioned.
Regarding claim 10, the UE of claim 9,
wherein the beam failure detection reference signal resource set comprises at least one quasi co-located reference signal of the CORESET ([0101] “For any of the TCI states in which two RS indexes are specified and/or indicated, the CSI-RS resource indexes indicated by such TCI states (or TCI states IEs) may correspond to the RS indexes having a QCL-Type D configuration.”).
It is noted that while disclosing BFD RSs for PDCCH monitoring, Kwak does not specifically teach about two BLERs. It, however, had been known in the art before the effective date of the instant application as shown by Davydov as follows;
the one or more processors, to determine the at least one hypothetical block error rate calculation, are individually or collectively configured to determine two hypothetical block error rates for each reference signal of the at least one quasi co-located reference signal ([Davydov, 0072] “the UE may calculate BLER per each antenna port of the CSI-RS. For example, if two antenna port CSI-RS is used, the UE may calculate two BLERs, e.g., respectively using channel measurement from each of the two CSI-RS antenna ports.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of instant application to modify Kwak by using the features of Davydov in order to effectively identify a new candidate beam such that “to monitor for Physical Downlink Control Channel (PDCCH) in a search space configured by the gNB, subsequent to a transmission of the beam failure recovery request” [Davydov, Abstract].
Regarding claim 11, the UE of claim 9,
wherein the beam failure detection reference signal resource set comprises at least one of a pair of channel state information reference signal (CSI-RS) resources ([0101] “For any of the TCI states in which two RS indexes are specified and/or indicated, the CSI-RS resource indexes indicated by such TCI states (or TCI states IEs) may correspond to the RS indexes having a QCL-Type D configuration.”) or a pair of synchronization signal block (SSB) resources (This alternative is not examined.), and
wherein the one or more processors, to determine the at least one hypothetical block error rate calculation, are individually or collectively configured to determine two hypothetical block error rates for each pair of the at least one of the pair of CSI-RS resources ([Davydov, 0072] “the UE may calculate BLER per each antenna port of the CSI-RS. For example, if two antenna port CSI-RS is used, the UE may calculate two BLERs, e.g., respectively using channel measurement from each of the two CSI-RS antenna ports.”) or the pair of SSB resources (This alternative is not examined.).
The rational and motivation for adding this teaching of Davydov are the same as for claim 10.
Claim(s) 14 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwak et al. (US 2024/0372673, “Kwak”) in view of Zhang et al. (US 2024/0073918, “Zhang”) and further in view of Deenoo et al. (US 2024/0215071, “Deenoo”).
Examiner’s note: in what follows, references are drawn to Kwak unless otherwise mentioned.
Regarding claim 14, it is noted that while disclosing BFD RSs for PDCCH monitoring, Kwak does not specifically teach about a weighted average of BLER. It, however, had been known in the art before the effective date of the instant application as shown by Deenoo as follows;
the UE of claim 13, wherein the one or more processors, to determine the average block error rate, are individually or collectively configured to determine a weighted average of a first hypothetical block error rate ([Deenoo, 0126] “the WTRU may compute (e.g., calculate) the BLER based on a weighted average of the previous n BLER values of the channel.”) corresponding to the first beam failure detection reference signal of the pair of beam failure detection reference signals and a second hypothetical block error rate corresponding to the second beam failure detection reference signal of the pair of beam failure detection reference signals (See aforesaid [0089, 0091 and 0179].).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of instant application to modify Kwak by using the features of Deenoo in order to effectively monitor shared spectrum such that “The WTRU may evaluate the channel and identify a level of uncertainty and/or ambiguity when processing measurement samples” [Deenoo, 0004].
Claim(s) 21 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwak et al. (US 2024/0372673, “Kwak”) in view of Zhang et al. (US 2024/0073918, “Zhang”) and further in view of Fan et al. (US 2023/0345570, “Fan”).
Examiner’s note: in what follows, references are drawn to Kwak unless otherwise mentioned.
Regarding claim 21, it is noted that while disclosing BFD RSs for PDCCH monitoring, Kwak does not specifically teach about a first candidate beam and a second candidate beam. It, however, had been known in the art before the effective date of the instant application as shown by Fan as follows;
the UE of claim 20, wherein the one or more processors, to determine the at least one new beam indication reference signal, are individually or collectively configured to: determine a first reference signal from a first new beam indication resource set ([Fan, 0036] “The network device receives first indication information from the terminal device, where the first indication information indicates a first beam corresponding to a first candidate beam resource, and the first candidate beam resource is a candidate beam resource whose quality is greater than a second threshold in a first set of candidate beam resources”); and determine a second reference signal from a second new beam indication resource set ([Fan, 0036] “the set of candidate beam resources is a set of candidate beam resources that is associated with the first set of beam failure detection resources in the N sets of candidate beam resources, and the first set of beam failure detection resources is one of the N sets of beam failure detection resources.”, and [Fan, 0041] “the second beam is a beam corresponding to one or more beam failure detection resources in the second set of beam failure detection resources.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of instant application to modify Kwak by using the features of Fan in order to effectively improve beam failure recovery procedures such that “the first configuration information is used to configure N sets of beam failure detection resources and N sets of candidate beam resources” [Fan, 0008].
Claim(s) 25-26 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwak et al. (US 2024/0372673, “Kwak”) in view of Zhang et al. (US 2024/0073918, “Zhang”) and further in view of Cirik et al. (US 2025/0070942, “Cirik”) and Gao et al. (US 2024/0023101, “Gao”).
Examiner’s note: in what follows, references are drawn to Kwak unless otherwise mentioned.
Regarding claim 25, the UE of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to perform the PDCCH monitoring operation,
wherein the one or more processors, to perform the PDCCH monitoring operation, are individually or collectively configured to monitor a PDCCH transmission ([0094] “the base station may transmit the recovery response via the PDCCH transmission through a CORESET and/or a search space set. The WTRU may be informed of the CORESET through a link to a search space set (e.g., provided by a recoverySearchSpaceId IE during an RRC configuration (e.g., in an RRC configuration message)). The WTRU may monitor the search space set, where monitor may imply decoding of one or more PDCCH transmissions in the CORESET.”) corresponding to one search space set associated with two different control resource sets (CORESETs) (This will be discussed in view of Gao.),
wherein each CORESET of the two different CORESETs has an active TCI state ([Cirik, 0376] “the wireless device may activate/use each TCI state of the one or more activated TCI states for a (single, only one) coreset of the one or more coresets.”), and wherein the two different CORESETs comprises the CORESET associated with the SFN (See aforesaid [Zhang, 0032]).
The rational and motivation for adding this teaching of Cirik are the same as for claim 2.
It is noted that while disclosing BFD RSs for PDCCH monitoring, Kwak does not specifically teach about one search space associated with two CORESETs. It, however, had been known in the art before the effective date of the instant application as shown by Gao as follows;
corresponding to one search space set associated with two different control resource sets (CORESETs) ([Gao, 0059] “the search space may be associated with two CORESETs.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of instant application to modify Kwak by using the features of Gao in order to increase reliability and robustness such that “downlink control information (DCI) can be repeatedly transmitted from a network device to a terminal device more than once” [Gao, 0003].
Regarding claim 26, the UE of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to perform the PDCCH monitoring operation,
wherein the one or more processors, to perform the PDCCH monitoring operation, are individually or collectively configured to monitor a PDCCH transmission ([0094] “the base station may transmit the recovery response via the PDCCH transmission through a CORESET and/or a search space set. The WTRU may be informed of the CORESET through a link to a search space set (e.g., provided by a recoverySearchSpaceId IE during an RRC configuration (e.g., in an RRC configuration message)). The WTRU may monitor the search space set, where monitor may imply decoding of one or more PDCCH transmissions in the CORESET.”) corresponding to two search space sets associated with two corresponding control resource sets (CORESETs) ([Gao, 0060] “two search space sets are associated with respective CORESETs.”), and wherein each CORESET of the two corresponding CORESETs has an active TCI state ([Cirik, 0376] “the wireless device may activate/use each TCI state of the one or more activated TCI states for a (single, only one) coreset of the one or more coresets.”), and wherein the two different CORESETs comprises the CORESET associated with the SFN (See aforesaid [Zhang, 0032]).
The rational and motivation for adding this teaching of Cirik are the same as for claim 2.
The rational and motivation for adding this teaching of Gao are the same as for claim 25.
Claim(s) 49 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwak et al. (US 2024/0372673, “Kwak”) in view of Zhang et al. (US 2024/0073918, “Zhang”) and further in view of Gao et al. (US 2023/0284235, “Gao235”).
Examiner’s note: in what follows, references are drawn to Kwak unless otherwise mentioned.
Regarding claim 49, it is noted that while disclosing BFD RSs for PDCCH monitoring, Kwak does not specifically teach about explicit indication in RRC for PDCCH in SFN. It, however, had been known in the art before the effective date of the instant application as shown by Gao235 as follows;
the UE of claim 1,
wherein the beam failure detection reference signal configuration comprises an implicit configuration ([0148] “the WTRU might not receive explicit configuration information for one or more BFD-RS sets (e.g., due to signaling of explicit BFD configuration not being supported) and may receive information for configuring one or more TCI states for PDCCH reception. The WTRU may configure the BFD-RS sets based on or using one or more RSs of the (configured) TCI states having QCL Type-D configuration.”),
wherein the at least two TCI states are included in the CORESET ([0150] “the WTRU may determine one or more RSs in one or more TCI states associated to a first CORESET group (of the CORESET groups)”), and
wherein the one or more processors are further individually or collectively configured to:
obtain an explicit indication, via a higher layer parameter in the radio resource control message, that a PDCCH transmission received in the CORESET is associated with the SFN ([Gao, 0159] “When a CORESET is activated with two or more TCI states, a UE may be configured explicitly by RRC (e.g., steps 500-3, 600-3) to use the SFN based PDCCH transmission.”); and
determine the beam failure detection reference signal resource set based at least in part on quasi co-located reference signals in the at least two TCI states of the CORESET according to the explicit indication (See aforesaid [0148] “the WTRU might not receive explicit configuration information for one or more BFD-RS sets (e.g., due to signaling of explicit BFD configuration not being supported) and may receive information for configuring one or more TCI states for PDCCH reception. The WTRU may configure the BFD-RS sets based on or using one or more RSs of the (configured) TCI states having QCL Type-D configuration.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of instant application to modify Kwak by using the features of Gao235 in order to provide PDCCH reception diversity such that “The methods disclosed herein make it possible for the wireless device(s) to receive PDCCH transmission from another one of the multiple TRPs” [Gao235, Abstract].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 15-19 were objected with allowable subject matter in the previous office action dated 11/10/2025 with reasons for allowance given then, and said claims remain objected now.
Regarding claim 15, the claim contains the following underlined features which, when combined with other features of the claim, prior art of record failed to anticipate or render obvious before the effective filing date of the instant application was filed:
15. The UE of claim 14, wherein the one or more processors, to determine the weighted average, are individually or collectively configured to determine a weighted power mean of the first hypothetical block error rate and the second hypothetical block error rate.
Claims 16-19 depend from one of the objected claims above, and thus are objected.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Harry H. Kim whose telephone number and email address are as follows; 571-272-5009, harry.kim2@uspto.gov.
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, Derrick Ferris can be reached at 571-272-3123.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from www.uspto.gov. For questions or assistance, 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.
/HARRY H KIM/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2411
Prosecution Insights