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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 6-7, 13-14, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claims 6-7, claim 6 recites ‘wherein the PDSCH configuration comprises two new fields that provide the pointer to the reference cell and/or the reference BWP where the wireless device can find the TCI states…’ This limitation is unclear. That is, it is unclear what ‘new field’ means in context of the claim. The specification does not provide any clarity as to what new field means. That is, new is a relative term. New to who or what? New based upon a time frame? In other words, what is new to one device is not new to another. Therefore, the metes and bounds of the claim are unclear. Claim 7 does not cure the deficiencies of claim 6 and is rejected for similar reasons.
Regarding claims 13-14, claim 13 recites ‘wherein the PDSCH configuration comprises two new fields that provide the pointer to the reference cell and/or the reference BWP where the wireless device can find the TCI states…’ This limitation is unclear. That is, it is unclear what ‘new field’ means in context of the claim. The specification does not provide any clarity as to what new field means. That is, new is a relative term. New to who or what? New based upon a time frame? In other words, what is new to one device is not new to another. Therefore, the metes and bounds of the claim are unclear. Claim 14 does not cure the deficiencies of claim 13 and is rejected for similar reasons.
Regarding claim 15, claim 15 is missing an ‘and’ or an ‘or’ after the first receive step. Therefore, it is unclear if these limitations are ‘and’ or ‘or’. It is assumed there should be an ‘and’. Appropriate action is required.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 3, and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yi (2021/0051650), and further in view of Matsumura (2023/0010532; filed 9 Dec 2019).
Regarding claim 1, Yi discloses a method performed by a wireless device for determining Transmission Configuration Indicator, TCI, states, the method comprising: (See Yi para. 292; wireless device is configured by base station; para. 293; TCI states)
receiving a TCI state list configuration from a reference Bandwidth Part, BWP/cell; and (See Yi para. 292; wireless device is configured by base station (e.g. receiving); para. 293; first serving cell (e.g. a reference BWP/cell) configured with TCI states (e.g. a list); see also para. 276; BWPs)
receiving, in a BWP/cell other than the reference BWP/cell, a configuration comprising a pointer to the reference BWP/cell. (See Yi para. 292; wireless device is configured by base station (e.g. receiving); para. 293; second serving cell config references (e.g. a pointer to reference BWP/cell) the first configuration with TCI states; see also para. 276; BWPs)
Yi does not explicitly disclose wherein the configurations are a Physical Downlink Shared Channel, PDSCH configuration. However, Matsumura does disclose wherein the configurations are a Physical Downlink Shared Channel, PDSCH configuration. (See Matsumura para. 85; UE receives PDSCH-Config including a list of TCI state information) Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the method of Yi to include the teaching of wherein the configurations are a Physical Downlink Shared Channel, PDSCH configuration of Matsumura with the motivation being to conform to the 3GPP suite of standards which utilize configurations to properly communicate using the PDSCH and further to optimize parameters of the PDSCH including tailored reliability and latency, optimal spectral efficiency , dynamic adaptation to radio conditions, flexible resource allocations, and efficient reference signal management.
Regarding claim 2, Yi in view of Matsumura discloses the method of claim 1 wherein the TCI state list is received in the PDSCH configuration in only one of the cells/BWPs. (See Yi para. 293; TCI states received in first serving cell and not the second serving cell which only receives a reference-servingcell-index)
Regarding claim 3, Yi in view of Matsumura discloses the method of claim 1 wherein the TCI state list is received in the PDSCH configuration in only a subset of the cells/BWPs. (See Yi para. 292; wireless device is configured by base station (e.g. receiving); para. 293; first serving cell (e.g. a reference BWP/cell) configured with TCI states (e.g. a list); subset is first serving cell but not second serving cell)
Regarding claim 5, Yi in view of Matsumura discloses the method of claim 1 wherein the only a subset of the cells/BWPs comprises a set of reference cells/BWPs. (See Yi para. 292; wireless device is configured by base station (e.g. receiving); para. 293; first serving cell (e.g. a reference BWP/cell) configured with TCI states (e.g. a list); subset is first serving cell but not second serving cell; set can have one element)
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yi (2021/0051650), and further in view of Matsumura (2023/0010532; filed 9 Dec 2019) and further in view of Yao (2023/0208597; continuation 23 Oct 2020).
Regarding claim 4, Yi in view of Matsumura discloses the method of claim 1. Yi in view of Matsumura do not explicitly disclose wherein the TCI state list comprises a TCI state pool. However, Yao does disclose wherein the TCI state list comprises a TCI state pool. (See Yao para. 84; configure TCI state pool (list) for UE) Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the method of Yi in view of Matsumura to include the teaching of wherein the TCI state list comprises a TCI state pool of Yao with the motivation being to allow for all potential beamforming configurations and can support efficient beam management across directions and cells and further to provide compatibility and save money by using the 3GPP suite of standards.
Claims 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yi (2021/0051650), and further in view of Matsumura (2023/0010532; filed 9 Dec 2019) and further in view of Yao (2023/0208597; continuation 23 Oct 2020) and further in view of Jiang (2018/0192445).
Regarding claim 6, Yi in view of Matsumura in view of Yao discloses the method of claim 4. Yi discloses wherein the PDSCH configuration comprises a parameter that that provide the pointer to the reference cell and/or the reference BWP where the wireless device can find the TCI states. (See Yi para. 292; wireless device is configured by base station (e.g. receiving); para. 293; second serving cell config. references (e.g. a pointer to reference BWP/cell) using a reference-servingcell-index the first configuration with TCI states; see also para. 276; BWPs) Yi in view of Matsumura does not explicitly disclose that the serving cell is identified by two fields. However, Jiang does disclose that the serving cell is identified by two fields. (See Jiang para. 69; serving cell has ID and index) Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the method of Yi in view of Matsumura in view of Yao to include the teaching of that the serving cell is identified by two fields of Jiang with the motivation being to provide a short local identity to the UE and provide a unique identifier for a cell for more accurate management and further to allow identification of which of the configured cells positively is the reference cell and further to prevent misidentification and further to allow the UE to be sure of primary vs secondary cell status.
Regarding claim 7, Yi in view of Matsumura in view of Yao in view of Jiang discloses the method of claim 6 wherein when using the parameter, no TCI states are added using the field tci-StatesToAddModList. (See Yi para. 292; wireless device is configured by base station (e.g. receiving); para. 293; second serving cell config. references (e.g. a pointer to reference BWP/cell) using a reference-servingcell-index the first configuration with TCI states; see also para. 276; BWPs; Yi does not state tci-StatesToAddModList is used (e.g. not used))
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.
Claims 8, 9, 10, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yi (2021/0051650), and further in view of Matsumura (2023/0010532; filed 9 Dec 2019).
Regarding claim 8, Yi discloses a method performed by a base station for indicating Transmission Configuration Indicator, TCI, states, the method comprising: (See Yi para. 292; wireless device is configured by base station; para. 293; TCI states)
sending a TCI state list in, configuration from a reference Bandwidth Part, BWP/cell; and(See Yi para. 292; wireless device is configured by base station (e.g. sending); para. 293; first serving cell (e.g. a reference BWP/cell) configured with TCI states (e.g. a list); see also para. 276; BWPs)
sending, in a BWP/cell other than the reference BWP/cell, a configuration comprising a pointer to the reference BWP/cell. (See Yi para. 292; wireless device is configured by base station (e.g. receiving); para. 293; second serving cell config references (e.g. a pointer to reference BWP/cell) the first configuration with TCI states; see also para. 276; BWPs)
Yi does not explicitly disclose wherein the configurations are a Physical Downlink Shared Channel, PDSCH configuration. However, Matsumura does disclose wherein the configurations are a Physical Downlink Shared Channel, PDSCH configuration. (See Matsumura para. 85; UE receives PDSCH-Config including a list of TCI state information) Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the method of Yi to include the teaching of wherein the configurations are a Physical Downlink Shared Channel, PDSCH configuration of Matsumura with the motivation being to conform to the 3GPP suite of standards which utilize configurations to properly communicate using the PDSCH and further to optimize parameters of the PDSCH including tailored reliability and latency, optimal spectral efficiency , dynamic adaptation to radio conditions, flexible resource allocations, and efficient reference signal management.
Regarding claim 9, Yi in view of Matsumura discloses the method of claim 8 wherein the TCI state list is sent in the PDSCH configuration in only one of the cells/BWPs. (See Yi para. 293; TCI states received in first serving cell and not the second serving cell which only receives a reference-servingcell-index; sent by base station)
Regarding claim 10, Yi in view of Matsumura discloses the method of claim 8 wherein the TCI state list is sent in the PDSCH configuration in only a subset of the cells/BWPs. (See Yi para. 292; wireless device is configured by base station (e.g. sent); para. 293; first serving cell (e.g. a reference BWP/cell) configured with TCI states (e.g. a list); subset is first serving cell but not second serving cell)
Regarding claim 12, Yi in view of Matsumura discloses the method of claim 8 wherein the only a subset of the cells/BWPs comprises a set of reference cells/BWPs. (See Yi para. 292; wireless device is configured by base station; para. 293; first serving cell (e.g. a reference BWP/cell) configured with TCI states (e.g. a list); subset is first serving cell but not second serving cell; set can have one element)
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yi (2021/0051650), and further in view of Matsumura (2023/0010532; filed 9 Dec 2019) and further in view of Yao (2023/0208597; continuation 23 Oct 2020).
Regarding claim 11, Yi in view of Matsumura discloses the method of claim 8. Yi in view of Matsumura do not explicitly disclose wherein the TCI state list comprises a TCI state pool. However, Yao does disclose wherein the TCI state list comprises a TCI state pool. (See Yao para. 84; configure TCI state pool (list) for UE) Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the method of Yi in view of Matsumura to include the teaching of wherein the TCI state list comprises a TCI state pool of Yao with the motivation being to allow for all potential beamforming configurations and can support efficient beam management across directions and cells and further to provide compatibility and save money by using the 3GPP suite of standards.
Claims 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yi (2021/0051650), and further in view of Matsumura (2023/0010532; filed 9 Dec 2019) and further in view of Jiang (2018/0192445).
Regarding claim 13, Yi in view of Matsumura discloses the method of claim 8. Yi discloses wherein the PDSCH configuration comprises a parameter that that provide the pointer to the reference cell and/or the reference BWP where the wireless device can find the TCI states. (See Yi para. 292; wireless device is configured by base station (e.g. receiving); para. 293; second serving cell config. references (e.g. a pointer to reference BWP/cell) using a reference-servingcell-index the first configuration with TCI states; see also para. 276; BWPs) Yi in view of Matsumura does not explicitly disclose that the serving cell is identified by two fields. However, Jiang does disclose that the serving cell is identified by two fields. (See Jiang para. 69; serving cell has ID and index) Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the method of Yi in view of Matsumura to include the teaching of that the serving cell is identified by two fields of Jiang with the motivation being to provide a short local identity to the UE and provide a unique identifier for a cell for more accurate management and further to allow identification of which of the configured cells positively is the reference cell and further to prevent misidentification and further to allow the UE to be sure of primary vs secondary cell status.
Regarding claim 14, Yi in view of Matsumura in view of Jiang discloses the method of claim 13 wherein when using the two fields, no TCI states are added using the field tci-StatesToAddModList. (See Yi para. 292; wireless device is configured by base station (e.g. sending); para. 293; second serving cell config. references (e.g. a pointer to reference BWP/cell) using a reference-servingcell-index the first configuration with TCI states; see also para. 276; BWPs; Yi does not state tci-StatesToAddModList is used (e.g. not used))
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 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yi (2021/0051650), and further in view of Matsumura (2023/0010532; filed 9 Dec 2019).
Regarding claim 15, Yi discloses a wireless device for determining Transmission Configuration Indicator, TCI, states, comprising one or more processors configured to cause the wireless device to: (See Yi para. 292; wireless device is configured by base station; para. 293; TCI states; para. 212, fig. 15; processing system including a processor executing an algorithm stored in memory)
receiving a TCI state list configuration from a reference Bandwidth Part, BWP/cell; (See Yi para. 292; wireless device is configured by base station (e.g. receiving); para. 293; first serving cell (e.g. a reference BWP/cell) configured with TCI states (e.g. a list); see also para. 276; BWPs)
receiving, in a BWP/cell other than the reference BWP/cell, a configuration comprising a pointer to the reference BWP/cell. (See Yi para. 292; wireless device is configured by base station (e.g. receiving); para. 293; second serving cell config references (e.g. a pointer to reference BWP/cell) the first configuration with TCI states; see also para. 276; BWPs)
Yi does not explicitly disclose wherein the configurations are a Physical Downlink Shared Channel, PDSCH configuration. However, Matsumura does disclose wherein the configurations are a Physical Downlink Shared Channel, PDSCH configuration. (See Matsumura para. 85; UE receives PDSCH-Config including a list of TCI state information) Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the method of Yi to include the teaching of wherein the configurations are a Physical Downlink Shared Channel, PDSCH configuration of Matsumura with the motivation being to conform to the 3GPP suite of standards which utilize configurations to properly communicate using the PDSCH and further to optimize parameters of the PDSCH including tailored reliability and latency, optimal spectral efficiency , dynamic adaptation to radio conditions, flexible resource allocations, and efficient reference signal management.
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 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yi (2021/0051650), and further in view of Matsumura (2023/0010532; filed 9 Dec 2019).
Regarding claim 17, Yi discloses a base station for indicating Transmission Configuration Indicator, TCI, states comprising one or more processors configured to cause the base station to: (See Yi para. 292; wireless device is configured by base station; para. 293; TCI states; para. 212, fig. 15; processing system including a processor executing an algorithm stored in memory)
send a TCI state list in, configuration from a reference Bandwidth Part, BWP/cell; and(See Yi para. 292; wireless device is configured by base station (e.g. sending); para. 293; first serving cell (e.g. a reference BWP/cell) configured with TCI states (e.g. a list); see also para. 276; BWPs)
send, in a BWP/cell other than the reference BWP/cell, a configuration comprising a pointer to the reference BWP/cell. (See Yi para. 292; wireless device is configured by base station (e.g. receiving); para. 293; second serving cell config references (e.g. a pointer to reference BWP/cell) the first configuration with TCI states; see also para. 276; BWPs)
Yi does not explicitly disclose wherein the configurations are a Physical Downlink Shared Channel, PDSCH configuration. However, Matsumura does disclose wherein the configurations are a Physical Downlink Shared Channel, PDSCH configuration. (See Matsumura para. 85; UE receives PDSCH-Config including a list of TCI state information) Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the method of Yi to include the teaching of wherein the configurations are a Physical Downlink Shared Channel, PDSCH configuration of Matsumura with the motivation being to conform to the 3GPP suite of standards which utilize configurations to properly communicate using the PDSCH and further to optimize parameters of the PDSCH including tailored reliability and latency, optimal spectral efficiency, dynamic adaptation to radio conditions, flexible resource allocations, and efficient reference signal management.
Conclusion
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