CTFR 18/560,001 CTFR 86046 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Response to Arguments 07-37 Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant has amended the claims and argued those amendments. Examiner disagrees that the amendments are allowable. Please see the rejections below. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 42, and 44 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (2022/0295530; Support in Provisional KR 10-2021-0030052; 8 March 2021) and further in view of 3GPP TS 38.214 (ETSI 138 214 v16.7.0 “5G; NR; Physical layer procedures for data (3GPP TS 38.214 version 16.7.0 Release 16”; October 2021)) and further in view of Yang (2023/0049739; Provisional 63/233317; 15 Aug 2021) Regarding claim 42, Lee discloses an apparatus for use in a user equipment (UE), wherein the apparatus comprises: (See Lee fig. 16, para. 37; UE with processor executing an algorithm stored in memory and transmitter and receiver) memory to store a received downlink control information (DCI) that schedules a plurality of physical downlink shared channels (PDSCHs); and (See Lee para. 302; memory storing programs and data necessary for operation of UE including signaling acquired by UE, etc.; para. 242-243; UE receives a single DCI schedules multiple PDSCHs) one or more processors configured to: (See Lee fig. 16, para. 37; UE with processor executing an algorithm stored in memory and transmitter and receiver) determine a transmission configuration indicator (TCI) state related to the plurality of PDSCHs based on the DCI; and (See Lee para. 255; TCI state set in DCI (e.g. based on DCI) for PDSCHs; see also para. 263; TCI state may be designated for multiple PDSCHs) identify the plurality of PDSCHs based on the determined TCI state. (See Lee para. 253; UE receives the plurality of PDSCHs using determined TCI (e.g. it has been identified if it is received; see also para. 261, 278) Lee does not explicitly disclose wherein the one or more activated TCI states are the same across slots on which the plurality of PDSCHs are transmitted. However, 3GPP TS 38.214 section 5.1.5 does disclose wherein the one or more activated TCI states are the same across slots on which the plurality of PDSCHs are transmitted. However, 3GPP TS 38.214 section 5.1.5 does disclose wherein the one or more activated TCI states are the same across slots on which the plurality of PDSCHs are transmitted. (See 3GPP TS 38.214 section 5.1.5, pg. 36; indicated TCI state should be based on the activated TCI state in the first slot and UE shall expect the activated TCI state is the same across all slots) Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the apparatus of Lee to include the teaching of wherein the one or more activated TCI states are the same across slots on which the plurality of PDSCHs are transmitted of 3GPP TS 38.214 with the motivation being to save control signaling and further to utilize limited bandwidth more efficiently by reducing control signaling and further to reduce delay by decoding slots not specifically designated with a TCI state based upon a known reported TCI and further to conform to the 3GPP suite of standards which saves time and money (as opposed to creating a new standard and replacing all devices on the network). Lee does not explicitly disclose receiving a configuration for multi-PDSCH scheduling and using this configuration. However, Yang does disclose receiving a configuration for multi-PDSCH scheduling and using this configuration. (See Yang fig. 10, para. 333-334) Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the apparatus of Lee to include the teaching of receiving a configuration for multi-PDSCH scheduling and using this configuration of Yang with the motivation being to allow the UE to prepare for multi-PDSCH and understand the network’s capabilities and further to improve reliability by implementing a multi-PDSCH scenario and further to reduce control channel overhead, improve spectral efficiency with low latency and further for flexible beam management and further to allow for flexible design of resources to maximize end goals of the user and network. Regarding claim 44, Lee in view of 3GPP TS 38.214 in view of Yang discloses the apparatus of claim 42, wherein the PDSCH is an earliest PDSCH of the plurality of PDSCHs. (See 3GPP TS 38.214 section 5.1.5, pg. 36; indicated TCI state should be based on the activated TCI state in the first slot (e.g. earliest PDSCH) and UE shall expect the activated TCI state is the same across all slots) The motivation being to save control signaling and further to utilize limited bandwidth more efficiently by reducing control signaling and further to reduce delay by decoding slots not specifically designated with a TCI state based upon a known reported TCI and further to conform to the 3GPP suite of standards which saves time and money (as opposed to creating a new standard and replacing all devices on the network) 07-21-aia AIA Claim 48 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (2022/0295530; Support in Provisional KR 10-2021-0030052; 8 March 2021) and further in view of 3GPP TS 38.214 (ETSI 138 214 v16.7.0 “5G; NR; Physical layer procedures for data (3GPP TS 38.214 version 16.7.0 Release 16”; October 2021) and further in view of Yang (2023/0049739; Provisional 63/233317; 15 Aug 2021) and further in view of Li (2023/0412347; support in CN 202110262602.4; 10 March 2021) Regarding claim 48, Lee in view of 3GPP TS 38.214 in view of Yang discloses the apparatus of claim 42, wherein the one or more processors are further to identify, based on the DCI, one or more valid PDSCHs (See Lee para. 253; UE receives the plurality of PDSCHs using determined TCI (e.g. it is valid if the UE receives it)) Lee in view of 3GPP TS 38.214 do not explicitly disclose determining one or more invalid PDSCHs from among the plurality of PDSCHs. However, Li does disclose determining one or more invalid PDSCHs from among the plurality of PDSCHs. (See Li para. 92; PDSCH that overlaps with uplink symbol is excluded (e.g. not valid); see also para. 97-99; (support in CN 202110262602.4 at pg. 11) Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the apparatus of Lee in view of 3GPP TS 38.214 to include the teaching of determining one or more invalid PDSCHs from among the plurality of PDSCHs of Li with the motivation being to utilize limited resources efficiently by not attempting to decode channels that have conflicts and may make them unusable and further to reduce battery usage and further to prevent interference Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 49, and 51 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (2022/0295530; Support in Provisional KR 10-2021-0030052; 8 March 2021) and further in view of 3GPP TS 38.214 (ETSI 138 214 v16.7.0 “5G; NR; Physical layer procedures for data (3GPP TS 38.214 version 16.7.0 Release 16”; October 2021) and further in view of Yang (2023/0049739; Provisional 63/233317; 15 Aug 2021) Regarding claim 49, Lee discloses one or more non-transitory computer-readable media (NTCRM) comprising instructions that, upon execution of the instructions by the one or more processors, are to cause a user equipment (UE) to: (See Lee para. 302; memory storing programs and data (in forms such as RAM, ROM, hard disk, CD-ROM, DVD, etc.) necessary for operation of UE including signaling acquired by UE, etc.) identify a received downlink control information (DCI) that schedules a plurality of physical downlink shared channels (PDSCHs); (See Lee para. 242-243; UE receives a single DCI schedules multiple PDSCHs) determine a transmission configuration indicator (TCI) state related to the plurality of PDSCHs based on the DCI; and (See Lee para. 255; TCI state set in DCI (e.g. based on DCI) for PDSCHs; see also para. 263; TCI state may be designated for multiple PDSCHs) identify the plurality of PDSCHs based on the determined TCI state. (See Lee para. 253; UE receives the plurality of PDSCHs using determined TCI (e.g. it has been identified if it is received; see also para. 261, 278) Lee does not explicitly disclose wherein the one or more activated TCI states are the same across slots on which the plurality of PDSCHs are transmitted. However, 3GPP TS 38.214 section 5.1.5 does disclose wherein the one or more activated TCI states are the same across slots on which the plurality of PDSCHs are transmitted. However, 3GPP TS 38.214 section 5.1.5 does disclose wherein the one or more activated TCI states are the same across slots on which the plurality of PDSCHs are transmitted. (See 3GPP TS 38.214 section 5.1.5, pg. 36; indicated TCI state should be based on the activated TCI state in the first slot and UE shall expect the activated TCI state is the same across all slots) Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the apparatus of Lee to include the teaching of wherein the one or more activated TCI states are the same across slots on which the plurality of PDSCHs are transmitted of 3GPP TS 38.214 with the motivation being to save control signaling and further to utilize limited bandwidth more efficiently by reducing control signaling and further to reduce delay by decoding slots not specifically designated with a TCI state based upon a known reported TCI and further to conform to the 3GPP suite of standards which saves time and money (as opposed to creating a new standard and replacing all devices on the network). Lee does not explicitly disclose receiving a configuration for multi-PDSCH scheduling and using this configuration. However, Yang does disclose receiving a configuration for multi-PDSCH scheduling and using this configuration. (See Yang fig. 10, para. 333-334) Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the apparatus of Lee to include the teaching of receiving a configuration for multi-PDSCH scheduling and using this configuration of Yang with the motivation being to allow the UE to prepare for multi-PDSCH and understand the network’s capabilities and further to improve reliability by implementing a multi-PDSCH scenario and further to reduce control channel overhead, improve spectral efficiency with low latency and further for flexible beam management and further to allow for flexible design of resources to maximize end goals of the user and network. Regarding claim 51, Lee in view of 3GPP TS 38.214 in view of Yang discloses the one or more NTCRM of claim 49, wherein the PDSCH is an earliest PDSCH of the plurality of PDSCHs. (See 3GPP TS 38.214 section 5.1.5, pg. 36; indicated TCI state should be based on the activated TCI state in the first slot (e.g. earliest PDSCH) and UE shall expect the activated TCI state is the same across all slots) The motivation being to save control signaling and further to utilize limited bandwidth more efficiently by reducing control signaling and further to reduce delay by decoding slots not specifically designated with a TCI state based upon a known reported TCI and further to conform to the 3GPP suite of standards which saves time and money (as opposed to creating a new standard and replacing all devices on the network) 07-21-aia AIA Claim 55 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (2022/0295530; Support in Provisional KR 10-2021-0030052; 8 March 2021) and further in view of 3GPP TS 38.214 (ETSI 138 214 v16.7.0 “5G; NR; Physical layer procedures for data (3GPP TS 38.214 version 16.7.0 Release 16”; October 2021) and further in view of Yang (2023/0049739; Provisional 63/233317; 15 Aug 2021) and further in view of Li (2023/0412347; support in CN 202110262602.4; 10 March 2021) Regarding claim 55, Lee in view of 3GPP TS 38.214 in view of Yang discloses the one or more NTCRM of claim 49, wherein the instructions are further to cause the UE to identify, based on the DCI, one or more valid PDSCHs (See Lee para. 253; UE receives the plurality of PDSCHs using determined TCI (e.g. it is valid if the UE receives it)) Lee in view of 3GPP TS 38.214 do not explicitly disclose determining one or more invalid PDSCHs from among the plurality of PDSCHs. However, Li does disclose determining one or more invalid PDSCHs from among the plurality of PDSCHs. (See Li para. 92; PDSCH that overlaps with uplink symbol is excluded (e.g. not valid); see also para. 97-99; (support in CN 202110262602.4 at pg. 11) Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the apparatus of Lee in view of 3GPP TS 38.214 to include the teaching of determining one or more invalid PDSCHs from among the plurality of PDSCHs of Li with the motivation being to utilize limited resources efficiently by not attempting to decode channels that have conflicts and may make them unusable and further to reduce battery usage and further to prevent interference Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 56, and 58 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (2022/0295530; Support in Provisional KR 10-2021-0030052; 8 March 2021) and further in view of 3GPP TS 38.214 (ETSI 138 214 v16.7.0 “5G; NR; Physical layer procedures for data (3GPP TS 38.214 version 16.7.0 Release 16”; October 2021) and further in view of Yang (2023/0049739; Provisional 63/233317; 15 Aug 2021) Regarding claim 56, Lee discloses one or more non-transitory computer-readable media (NTCRM) comprising instructions that, upon execution of the instructions by the one or more processors, are to cause a base station to: (See Lee fig. 17, para. 38; base station with processor executing an algorithm stored in memory) transmit, to a user equipment (UE), a downlink control information (DCI) that schedules a plurality of physical downlink shared channels (PDSCHs); (See Lee para. 242-243; UE receives (transmitted by base station) a single DCI schedules multiple PDSCHs) determine a transmission configuration indicator (TCI) state related to the plurality of PDSCHs based on the DCI; and (See Lee para. 255; TCI state set in DCI (e.g. based on DCI) for PDSCHs; see also para. 263; TCI state may be designated for multiple PDSCHs) transmit the plurality of PDSCHs based on the determined TCI state. (See Lee para. 253; UE receives (base station transmits) the plurality of PDSCHs using determined TCI (e.g. it has been identified if it is received; see also para. 261, 278) Lee does not explicitly disclose wherein the one or more activated TCI states are the same across slots on which the plurality of PDSCHs are transmitted. However, 3GPP TS 38.214 section 5.1.5 does disclose wherein the one or more activated TCI states are the same across slots on which the plurality of PDSCHs are transmitted. However, 3GPP TS 38.214 section 5.1.5 does disclose wherein the one or more activated TCI states are the same across slots on which the plurality of PDSCHs are transmitted. (See 3GPP TS 38.214 section 5.1.5, pg. 36; indicated TCI state should be based on the activated TCI state in the first slot and UE shall expect the activated TCI state is the same across all slots) Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the apparatus of Lee to include the teaching of wherein the one or more activated TCI states are the same across slots on which the plurality of PDSCHs are transmitted of 3GPP TS 38.214 with the motivation being to save control signaling and further to utilize limited bandwidth more efficiently by reducing control signaling and further to reduce delay by decoding slots not specifically designated with a TCI state based upon a known reported TCI and further to conform to the 3GPP suite of standards which saves time and money (as opposed to creating a new standard and replacing all devices on the network). Lee does not explicitly disclose receiving a configuration for multi-PDSCH scheduling and using this configuration. However, Yang does disclose receiving a configuration for multi-PDSCH scheduling and using this configuration. (See Yang fig. 10, para. 333-334) Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the apparatus of Lee to include the teaching of receiving a configuration for multi-PDSCH scheduling and using this configuration of Yang with the motivation being to allow the UE to prepare for multi-PDSCH and understand the network’s capabilities and further to improve reliability by implementing a multi-PDSCH scenario and further to reduce control channel overhead, improve spectral efficiency with low latency and further for flexible beam management and further to allow for flexible design of resources to maximize end goals of the user and network. Regarding claim 58, Lee in view of 3GPP TS 38.214 in view of Yang discloses the one or more NTCRM of claim 56, wherein the PDSCH is an earliest PDSCH of the plurality of PDSCHs. (See 3GPP TS 38.214 section 5.1.5, pg. 36; indicated TCI state should be based on the activated TCI state in the first slot (e.g. earliest PDSCH) and UE shall expect the activated TCI state is the same across all slots) The motivation being to save control signaling and further to utilize limited bandwidth more efficiently by reducing control signaling and further to reduce delay by decoding slots not specifically designated with a TCI state based upon a known reported TCI and further to conform to the 3GPP suite of standards which saves time and money (as opposed to creating a new standard and replacing all devices on the network) 07-21-aia AIA Claim 61 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (2022/0295530; Support in Provisional KR 10-2021-0030052; 8 March 2021) and further in view of 3GPP TS 38.214 (ETSI 138 214 v16.7.0 “5G; NR; Physical layer procedures for data (3GPP TS 38.214 version 16.7.0 Release 16”; October 2021) and further in view of Yang (2023/0049739; Provisional 63/233317; 15 Aug 2021) and further in view of Li (2023/0412347; support in CN 202110262602.4; 10 March 2021) Regarding claim 61, Lee in view of 3GPP TS 38.214 in view of Yang discloses the one or more NTCRM of claim 56, wherein the instructions are further to cause the UE to identify, based on the DCI, one or more valid PDSCHs (See Lee para. 253; UE receives the plurality of PDSCHs using determined TCI (e.g. it is valid if the UE receives it)) Lee in view of 3GPP TS 38.214 do not explicitly disclose determining one or more invalid PDSCHs from among the plurality of PDSCHs. However, Li does disclose determining one or more invalid PDSCHs from among the plurality of PDSCHs. (See Li para. 92; PDSCH that overlaps with uplink symbol is excluded (e.g. not valid); see also para. 97-99; (support in CN 202110262602.4 at pg. 11) Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the apparatus of Lee in view of 3GPP TS 38.214 to include the teaching of determining one or more invalid PDSCHs from among the plurality of PDSCHs of Li with the motivation being to utilize limited resources efficiently by not attempting to decode channels that have conflicts and may make them unusable and further to reduce battery usage and further to prevent interference Allowable Subject Matter 12-151-08 AIA 07-43 12-51-08 Claim s 45-47, 52-54, and 59-60 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion 07-40 AIA Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL . See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHEN J CLAWSON whose telephone number is (571)270-7498. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5:00 pm est. 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, Huy D Vu can be reached at (571) 272-3155. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /Stephen J Clawson/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2461 Application/Control Number: 18/560,001 Page 2 Art Unit: 2461 Application/Control Number: 18/560,001 Page 3 Art Unit: 2461 Application/Control Number: 18/560,001 Page 4 Art Unit: 2461 Application/Control Number: 18/560,001 Page 5 Art Unit: 2461 Application/Control Number: 18/560,001 Page 7 Art Unit: 2461 Application/Control Number: 18/560,001 Page 8 Art Unit: 2461 Application/Control Number: 18/560,001 Page 9 Art Unit: 2461 Application/Control Number: 18/560,001 Page 10 Art Unit: 2461 Application/Control Number: 18/560,001 Page 11 Art Unit: 2461 Application/Control Number: 18/560,001 Page 12 Art Unit: 2461 Application/Control Number: 18/560,001 Page 13 Art Unit: 2461 Application/Control Number: 18/560,001 Page 14 Art Unit: 2461 Application/Control Number: 18/560,001 Page 15 Art Unit: 2461
Prosecution Insights