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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 03/20/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s Amendments and Arguments filed 03/20/2026 have been considered for examination.
With regard to the claim objections, Applicant’s arguments filed 03/20/2026 in view of the amendments have been fully considered and are persuasive. Thus, the claim objections have been withdrawn.
With regard to the 103 rejections, Applicant’s arguments filed 03/20/2026 in view of the amendments have been fully considered but are moot because the arguments are not applied to any of the references being used in the current rejection.
Claims 1-4, 13-14, 25-31, 34-35, 37-43 and 46-47 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over “Enhancements on Multi-TRP for PDCCH, PUCCH and PUSCH”, 3GPP TSG-RAN WG1 Meeting #104-e e-Meeting, January 25th - February 5th, 2021 (Todc R1-2101093) (hereinafter, “3GPP1”)1 in view of Matsumura et al (US Publication No. 2024/0306015) and further in view of Lyu et al (US Publication No. 2021/0036822).
Regarding claim 1, 3GPP1 discloses, a method of wireless communication performed by a user equipment (UE) [see sections 2.1 and 2.2, UE and actions performed by the UE], comprising:
receiving a single medium access control control element (MAC-CE) specifies: a first indicator . . . indicating whether to activate or deactivate [section 2.2.1, the MAC CE indicates one TCI state of one of two beams associated with a respective one of the two CORESET (IDs); see the Remarks set forth above for details] one or more transmission control indicator (TCI) states for a first control resource set (CORESET) identifier (ID) . . ; and a second indicator, different from the first indicator, indicating whether to activate or deactivate [section 2.2.1, the MAC CE indicates the other TCI state of the other one of two beams associated with a respective one of the two CORESET (IDs); see the Remarks set forth above for details] one or more TCI states for a second CORESET ID . . . [see section 2.2.1, beam indication for two CORESETs; 1st way: by MAC CE, one way is to activate at most two beams and each beam for one of two CORESETs respectively. The MAC CE can indicate two CORESET IDs and two TCI states. In addition, for each TCI state, there is 1 bit to indicate the present or not. Thus with this MAC CE signaling, gNB can indicate the TCI state of one CORESET or two CORESETs dynamically; further see section 2.1; proposal 1];
updating spatial relation information for the UE based at least in part on the single MAC-CE [see section 2.2.1 with respect to the above-mentioned citations, in order to support Option 2+ Case 1, Alt 3 was supported as a working assumption. Since two CORESETs are necessary for Alt 3, two separately MAC CEs are needed to activate the beam for these two CORESETs if reusing beam indication mechanism for CORESET in Rel-15/16. In order to save the signaling overhead and to make the synchronization between beams updating of these two CORESETs, it is better to indicate these two beams by one signaling. As for the signaling with enhancement, there are two ways to achieve; further see section 2.1, the second way, if the CORESET is a UE-specific CORESET which can be configured with a common TCI state, dynamical TCI state update signaling with MAC CE and DCI can be used for TCI state indication; note that the beams are updated based on the MAC CE signaling]; and
receiving signals from the first or second TRP using the updated spatial relation information [see section 2.2.1 with respect to the above-mentioned citations, multi-TRP based PDCCH transmission; note that receiving PDCCHs from at least one TRP using the beams or the TCI states updated via the MAC CE, which is also implicit].
Although 3GPP1 discloses, “receiving a first medium access control control element (MAC-CE) that, alone or with a second MAC-CE, specifies one or more transmission control indicator (TCI) states for a first control resource set (CORESET) identifier (ID) . . . and one or more TCI states for a second CORESET ID . . .” as set forth above, 3GPP1 does not explicitly disclose (see, italicized and bold limitations), a first control resource set (CORESET) identifier (ID) that corresponds to a first transmit receive point (TRP) and one or more TCI states for a second CORESET ID that corresponds to a second TRP.
However, Matsumura discloses, a first control resource set (CORESET) identifier (ID) that corresponds to a first transmit receive point (TRP) and one or more TCI states for a second CORESET ID that corresponds to a second TRP [FIG. 4; its related descriptions; ¶0236, CORESET #1 is configured for TRP #1, CORESET #2 is configured for TRP #2, TCI state #A is indicated for CORESET #1, and TCI state #B and TCI state #C are indicated for CORESET #2. TRP #2 may be associated with a new ID or a CORESET pool index=1].
It is noted that the above-mentioned feature is a known technique in the field Applicant's endeavor, e.g., telecommunication art.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the system of 3GPP1 with "the above-mentioned known feature(s)" taught by Matsumura to reach the claimed invention as set forth above. Since one having ordinary skill in the art could have recognized that applying the known technique taught by Matsumura into the system of 3GPP1 would have yield predictable results and/or resulted in the improved system, such as e.g., allowing flexible beam control to support multi-TRP operation where distinct spatial domains are managed independently, such a modification (or application) would have involved the mere application of a known technique to a piece of prior art ready for improvement," the claim is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a). Ex Parte Smith, 83 USPQ.2d 1509, 1518-19 (BPAI, 2007) (citing KSR v. Teleflex, 127 S.Ct. 1727, 1740, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007)).
Although 3GPP1 in view of Matsumura discloses, “receiving a single medium access control control element (MAC-CE) specifies: a first indicator indicating whether to activate or deactivate one or more transmission control indicator (TCI) states for a first control resource set (CORESET) identifier (ID) that corresponds to a first transmit receive point (TRP), and a second indicator, different from the first indicator, indicating whether to activate or deactivate one or more TCI states for a second CORESET ID that corresponds to a second TRP” as set forth above, 3GPP1 in view of Matsumura does not explicitly disclose (see, italicized and bold limitations), a first indicator explicitly indicating . . ., and a second indicator, different from the first indicator, explicitly indicating . . .
However, Lyu discloses, receiving a single medium access control control element (MAC-CE) specifies [FIG. 4; its related descriptions; ¶0161, a MAC CE]: a first indicator explicitly indicating whether to activate or deactivate one or more transmission control indicator (TCI) states [FIG. 4; its related descriptions; ¶0161, second bit of “1” indicating to activate TCI state 2], and a second indicator, different from the first indicator, explicitly indicating whether to activate or deactivate one or more TCI states [FIG. 4; its related descriptions; ¶0161, fifth bit of “1” indicating to activate TCI state 5].
It is noted that the above-mentioned feature is a known technique in the field Applicant's endeavor, e.g., telecommunication art.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the system of 3GPP1 in view of Matsumura with "the above-mentioned known feature(s)" taught by Lyu to reach the claimed invention as set forth above. Since one having ordinary skill in the art could have recognized that applying the known technique taught by Lyu into the system of 3GPP1 in view of Matsumura would have yield predictable results and/or resulted in the improved system, such as e.g., enabling more accurate and independent controlling of activation on TCI states, such a modification (or application) would have involved the mere application of a known technique to a piece of prior art ready for improvement," the claim is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a). Ex Parte Smith, 83 USPQ.2d 1509, 1518-19 (BPAI, 2007) (citing KSR v. Teleflex, 127 S.Ct. 1727, 1740, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007)).
Regarding claim 2, 3GPP1 in view of Matsumura and Lyu discloses, the method of claim 1 as set forth above.
3GPP1 discloses, wherein the single MAC-CE specifies the one or more TCI states for the first CORESET ID and the one or more TCI states for the second CORESET ID [see section 2.2.1, beam indication for two CORESETs; 1st way: by MAC CE, one way is to activate at most two beams and each beam for one of two CORESETs respectively. The MAC CE can indicate two CORESET IDs and two TCI states. In addition, for each TCI state, there is 1 bit to indicate the present or not. Thus with this MAC CE signaling, gNB can indicate the TCI state of one CORESET or two CORESETs dynamically; further see section 2.1; proposal 1; note that the MAC CE indicates two TCI states of two beams each associated with a respective one of the two CORESET (IDs); see the Remarks and claim 1 set forth above for details].
Regarding claim 3, 3GPP1 in view of Matsumura and Lyu discloses, the method of claim 2 as set forth above.
3GPP1 discloses, wherein the single MAC-CE specifies at least two TCI states for the first CORESET ID [see section 2.1, while for the CORESET in Alt 1-1, in order to active more than one TCI state for each CORESET, it is necessary to enhance the TCI state indication signaling. There are two ways for the enhancement. The first way is to enhance MAC CE to activate at most two TCI states for the CORESET; further see, proposal 1: Enhance MAC CE to activate one or two TCI states, or use DCI for common beam indication to indicate one or two TCI states for each CORESET. With Alt 1-1, One PDCCH candidate (in a given SS set) is associated with both TCI states of the CORESET. The CORESET should be configured with two TCI states with each TCI state associated to each TRP respectively].
Regarding claim 4, 3GPP1 in view of Matsumura and Lyu discloses, the method of claim 3 as set forth above.
3GPP1 does not explicitly disclose (see, italicized limitations), but Matsumura discloses, wherein the single MAC-CE specifies at least two TCI states for the second CORESET ID [FIG. 4; its related descriptions; ¶0238, when one or more TCI states out of a plurality of TCI states for CORESET i are updated by the MAC CE, the one or more updated TCI states and the one or more original TCI states (before the update) may belong to the same TRP (may be associated with the same new ID, the same CORESET pool index, or the same TRP-related ID)].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the above-mentioned feature(s) as taught by Matsumura in the system of 3GPP1 for similar rationales set forth above in claim 1.
Regarding claim 13, claim 13 is merely different from claim 1 in that it recites claimed features from the perspective of a network node, but recites similar features to claim 1 without further additional features. Thus, claim 13 is rejected at least based on a similar rationale applied to claim 1.
Regarding claim 14, claim 14 is rejected at least based on a similar rationale applied to claim 2.
Regarding claim 25, 3GPP1 discloses, a user equipment (UE) for wireless communication [see sections 2.1 and 2.2, UE and actions performed by the UE], comprising:
one or more memories [see sections 2.1 and 2.2, UE; note that every UE has at least one memory]; and
one or more processors, coupled to the memory, configured to [see sections 2.1 and 2.2, UE; note that every UE has at least processor coupled to the memory].
Since claim 25 recites similar features to claim 1 without further additional features, claim 25 is rejected at least based on a similar rationale applied to claim 1.
Regarding claim 26, claim 26 is rejected at least based on a similar rationale applied to claim 2.
Regarding claim 27, claim 27 is rejected at least based on a similar rationale applied to claim 3.
Regarding claim 28, claim 28 is rejected at least based on a similar rationale applied to claim 4.
Regarding claim 29, 3GPP1 in view of Matsumura and Lyu discloses, the UE of claim 26 as set forth above.
3GPP1 discloses, wherein the single MAC-CE includes an indicator bit that specifies whether a second TCI state of the one or more TCI states for the first CORESET ID is to be updated [see section 2.2.1, beam indication for two CORESETs; 1st way: by MAC CE, one way is to activate at most two beams and each beam for one of two CORESETs respectively. The MAC CE can indicate two CORESET IDs and two TCI states. In addition, for each TCI state, there is 1 bit to indicate the present or not. Thus with this MAC CE signaling, gNB can indicate the TCI state of one CORESET or two CORESETs dynamically; further see section 2.1; proposal 1; note that the MAC CE indicates using a 1 bit that specifies whether one TCI state of one of two beams each associated with a respective one of the two CORESET (IDs) is activated; see the Remarks and claim 1 set forth above for details].
Regarding claim 30, 3GPP1 in view of Matsumura and Lyu discloses, the UE of claim 26 as set forth above.
3GPP1 discloses, wherein the single MAC-CE includes . . .the one or more TCI states for the first CORESET ID and the one or more TCI states for the second CORESET ID, as set forth above in claim 1. 3GPP1 further discloses, the single MAC-CE includes an activation bit that specifies whether to activate or deactivate one or more TCI state for a CORESET ID [see section 2.2.1, beam indication for two CORESETs; 1st way: by MAC CE, one way is to activate at most two beams and each beam for one of two CORESETs respectively. The MAC CE can indicate two CORESET IDs and two TCI states. In addition, for each TCI state, there is 1 bit to indicate the present or not. Thus with this MAC CE signaling, gNB can indicate the TCI state of one CORESET or two CORESETs dynamically; further see section 2.1; proposal 1; note that the MAC CE indicates using a 1 bit that specifies whether one TCI state of one of two beams each associated with a respective one of the two CORESET (IDs) is activated; see the Remarks and claim 1 set forth above for details].
Regarding claim 31, 3GPP1 in view of Matsumura and Lyu discloses, the UE of claim 25 as set forth above.
3GPP1 does not explicitly disclose (see, italicized limitations), but Matsumura discloses, wherein the first CORESET ID is part of a first CORESET pool index associated with the first TRP, and the second CORESET ID is part of a second CORESET pool index associated with the second TRP [¶0212, TRP #1 (first TRP) may correspond to a CORESET pool index=0, or may correspond to the first TCI state out of two TCI states corresponding to one code point of a TCI field. TRP #2 (second TRP) TRP #1 (first TRP) may correspond to a CORESET pool index=1, or may correspond to the second TCI state out of the two TCI states corresponding to one code point of the TCI field].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the above-mentioned feature(s) as taught by Matsumura in the system of 3GPP1 for similar rationales set forth above in claim 1.
Regarding claim 34, 3GPP1 in view of Matsumura and Lyu discloses, the UE of claim 25 as set forth above.
3GPP1 discloses, wherein the single MAC-CE indicates a single frequency network physical downlink control channel mode if the single MAC-CE specifies at least two TCI states for each CORESET ID [see section 2 Multi-TRP based PDCCH transmission; section 2.1 SFN (single frequency network); note that section 2.1 describes a case where the MAC CE indicates more than one (i.e., at least two TCI states) TCI for each CORESET].
Regarding claim 35, 3GPP1 in view of Matsumura and Lyu discloses, the UE of claim 25 as set forth above.
3GPP1 discloses, wherein the single MAC-CE indicates a non-single frequency network physical downlink control channel mode if the single MAC-CE specifies only one TCI state for each CORESET ID [see section 2 Multi-TRP based PDCCH transmission; section 2.2 Non-SFN (non-single frequency network); note that section 2.2 describes a case where the MAC CE indicates only one TCI for each CORESET].
Regarding claim 37, 3GPP1 discloses, a network node for wireless communication [see sections 2.1 and 2.2, gNB and actions performed by gNB], comprising:
one or more memories [see sections 2.1 and 2.2, gNB; note that every gNB has at least one memory]; and
one or more processors, coupled to the one or more memories, configured to [see sections 2.1 and 2.2, gNB; note that every gNB has at least processor coupled to the memory].
Since claim 37 is merely different from claim 1 in that it recites claimed features from the perspective of a base station, but recites similar features to claim 1 without further additional features, claim 37 is rejected at least based on a similar rationale applied to claim 1.
Regarding claim 38, claim 38 is rejected at least based on a similar rationale applied to claim 2.
Regarding claim 39, claim 39 is rejected at least based on a similar rationale applied to claim
3.
Regarding claim 40, claim 40 is rejected at least based on a similar rationale applied to claim 4.
Regarding claim 41, claim 41 is rejected at least based on a similar rationale applied to claim 29.
Regarding claim 42, claim 42 is rejected at least based on a similar rationale applied to claim 30.
Regarding claim 43, claim 43 is rejected at least based on a similar rationale applied to claim 31.
Regarding claim 46, claim 46 is rejected at least based on a similar rationale applied to claim 34.
Regarding claim 47, claim 47 is rejected at least based on a similar rationale applied to claim 35.
Regarding claim 53, 3GPP1 in view of Matsumura and Lyu discloses, the method of claim 1 as set forth above.
Although 3GPP1 in view of Matsumura discloses, “the single MAC-CE further includes . . . associated with a first TCI state identifier field corresponding to the first CORESET ID and . . . associated with a second TCI state identifier field corresponding to the second CORESET ID, wherein . . . the respective TCI state identifier fields are present in the single MAC-CE and are to be updated” as set forth above, 3GPP1 in view of Matsumura does not explicitly disclose (see, italicized limitations), but Lyu discloses, the single MAC-CE [FIG. 4; its related descriptions; ¶0161, a MAC CE] further includes a first bit associated with a first TCI state identifier field [FIG. 4; its related descriptions; ¶0161, second bit of “1” indicating to activate TCI state 2] and a second bit associated with a second TCI state identifier field [FIG. 4; its related descriptions; ¶0161, fifth bit of “1” indicating to activate TCI state 5], wherein the first bit and the second bit independently specify whether the respective TCI state identifier fields are present in the single MAC-CE and are to be updated [FIG. 4; its related descriptions; ¶0161, the second bit and the fifth bit independent specific whether the respective TCI states 2 and 5 are activated/present in the single MAC-CE; note that activating TCI states implicitly means updating the TCI states].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the above-mentioned feature(s) as taught by Lyu in the system of 3GPP1 in view of Matsumura for similar rationales set forth above in claim 1.
Claims 32 and 44 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over “Enhancements on Multi-TRP for PDCCH, PUCCH and PUSCH”, 3GPP TSG-RAN WG1 Meeting #104-e e-Meeting, January 25th - February 5th, 2021 (Todc R1-2101093) (hereinafter, “3GPP1”) in view of Matsumura et al (US Publication No. 2024/0306015) and further in view of Lyu et al (US Publication No. 2021/0036822) and further in view of Shi et al (US Publication No. 2022/0116177).
Regarding claim 32, 3GPP1 in view of Matsumura and Lyu discloses, the UE of claim 25 as set forth above.
3GPP1 in view of Matsumura and Lyu does not explicitly disclose (see, italicized limitations), but Shi discloses, wherein the one or more TCI states for the first CORESET ID correspond to a first downlink control information (DCI) and the one or more TCI states for the second CORESET ID correspond to a second DCI [¶0102, the TCI state groups may correspond to CORESET groups. For example, the first TCI state group corresponds to the first CORESET group bearing the first DCI; further see ¶0241, the first DCI corresponds to a first TCI state group, and the second DCI corresponds to a second TCI state group].
It is noted that the above-mentioned feature is a known technique in the field Applicant's endeavor, e.g., telecommunication art.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the system of 3GPP1 in view of Matsumura and Lyu with "the above-mentioned known feature(s)" taught by Shi to reach the claimed invention as set forth above. Since one having ordinary skill in the art could have recognized that applying the known technique taught by Shi into the system of 3GPP1 in view of Matsumura and Lyu would have yield predictable results and/or resulted in the improved system, such as e.g., allowing flexible beam control to support multi-TRP operation where distinct spatial domains are managed independently, such a modification (or application) would have involved the mere application of a known technique to a piece of prior art ready for improvement," the claim is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a). Ex Parte Smith, 83 USPQ.2d 1509, 1518-19 (BPAI, 2007) (citing KSR v. Teleflex, 127 S.Ct. 1727, 1740, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007)).
Regarding claim 44, claim 44 is rejected at least based on a similar rationale applied to claim 32.
Claims 33 and 45 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over “Enhancements on Multi-TRP for PDCCH, PUCCH and PUSCH”, 3GPP TSG-RAN WG1 Meeting #104-e e-Meeting, January 25th - February 5th, 2021 (Todc R1-2101093) (hereinafter, “3GPP1”) in view of Matsumura et al (US Publication No. 2024/0306015) and further in view of Lyu et al (US Publication No. 2021/0036822) and further in view of Zhou’741 et al (US Publication No. 2021/0119741).
Regarding claim 33, 3GPP1 in view of Matsumura and Lyu discloses, the UE of claim 25 as set forth above.
Although 3GPP1 in view of Matsumura and Lyu discloses, wherein the single MAC-CE indicates a serving cell [see Matsumura, FIG. 6A; its related descriptions; ¶0250, serving cell ID], 3GPP1 in view of Matsumura and Lyu does not explicitly disclose (see, italicized limitations), but Zhou’741 discloses, wherein the one or more processors are configured to update TCI states for CORESET IDs of other serving cells that are included in a serving cell list with the serving cell, based at least in part on TCI states for CORESET IDs that are indicated in the sinlge MAC-CE [FIG. 7; its related descriptions; ¶0124, the UE may also determine whether a component carrier identified by the MAC-CE is a member of the list of component carriers; further see ¶0126, the UE applies the same set of TCI State IDs and/or spatial relation information indicated by the single MAC-CE to all component carriers (e.g., and associated BWPs) from the list; note that a TCI state of one cell is updated based on a TCI state of another cell].
It is noted that the above-mentioned feature is a known technique in the field Applicant's endeavor, e.g., telecommunication art.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the system of 3GPP1 in view of Matsumura and Lyu with "the above-mentioned known feature(s)" taught by Zhou’741 to reach the claimed invention as set forth above. Since one having ordinary skill in the art could have recognized that applying the known technique taught by Zhou’741 into the system of 3GPP1 in view of Matsumura and Lyu would have yield predictable results and/or resulted in the improved system, such as e.g., ensuring consistent beam management across multiple cells including a serving cell and neighboring cells and reducing control overhead, such a modification (or application) would have involved the mere application of a known technique to a piece of prior art ready for improvement," the claim is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a). Ex Parte Smith, 83 USPQ.2d 1509, 1518-19 (BPAI, 2007) (citing KSR v. Teleflex, 127 S.Ct. 1727, 1740, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007)).
Regarding claim 45, claim 45 is rejected at least based on a similar rationale applied to claim 33.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon are considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Jin et al (US Publication No. 2021/0105780) [¶0393, as shown in FIG. 2I-1E, the existing LCID is used as it is, and the MAC CE is composed of a simultaneous beam updating indication (D) of 2h-125, a serving cell ID 2h-130, and a BWP ID 2h-135, and is composed of a TCI state bitmap “T” field 2h-140 in which activation is indicated.]
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SUN JONG KIM whose telephone number is (571)270-3216. The examiner can normally be reached on 7:30am-5:30pm (M-T).
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.f attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ian Moore can be reached on (571) 272-3085. 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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.
/SUN JONG KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2469
1 3GPP1 was filed in an IDS by the applicant.
Prosecution Insights