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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC §102(a)2
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1,3,5,7,9,17,35,37,40-43,45-48, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being clearly anticipated by Fan et al (US 20230345570 A1) hereinafter as Fan.
Regarding claim(s) 1,35 and 37, Fan discloses a method for beam recovery of a physical uplink control channel (PUCCH), performed by a terminal device (See Fig(s). 2, with beam failures to terminal, See ¶ 302, the beam failure recovery response information or after receiving the beam failure recovery response information in Y time units, the terminal device uses the first beam as a common beam of the TRP corresponding to the first CORESET group) comprising:
detecting, by the terminal device, that a first transmission and reception point (TRP) is in a beam failure state (See Fig(s). 2, See ¶ 400, the terminal device detects that a beam failure occurs on the first TRP and beam failure recovery is performed); and
wherein determining the recovery beam for the PUCCH further comprises: See ¶ 10, the terminal device sends first indication information to the network device, where the first indication information indicates a first beam corresponding to a first candidate beam resource,..also See ¶ 100 a resource index uniquely identifies a beam);
and determining that the recovery beam for the PUCCH associated with the first TRP or second TRP is a first beam corresponding to the first beam identity (See ¶ 302).
Further with respect to claims 35 and 37, Fan discloses a processor and memory for performing the method of claim 1 (See Fig(s). 5, block 40 with processor 401 and memory 402).
Regarding claim(s) 3, Fan discloses further comprising: determining that a TRP corresponding to a PRACH resource used by the terminal device is the first TRP according to a mapping relationship between PRACH resources and TRPs (See ¶ 100, 104).
Regarding claim(s) 5, Fan discloses wherein transmitting the first indication information comprises: transmitting the first indication information based on a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) medium access control (MAC) control element (CE) (See ¶ 278, 303).
Regarding claim(s) 7,41,46 Fan discloses wherein, in a case that a second TRP is in the beam failure state, using the PUCCH associated with the first TRP to transmit a beam failure recovery scheduling request, wherein the second TRP is different from the first TRP (See ¶ 282, When a beam failure occurs on the first TRP, the terminal device sends the SR to the network device over a first transmit beam in the N transmit beams of the first PUCCH, where the first transmit beam is a transmit beam associated with a second TRP, and the second TRP is a TRP other than the first TRP in the cell.).
Regarding claim(s) 9,42,47, Fan discloses wherein it is determined that the recovery beam for the PUCCH associated with the second TRP is the first beam corresponding to the first beam identity, in a case that the second TRP is in the beam failure state, using the PUCCH associated with the second TRP to transmit a beam failure recovery scheduling request wherein the second TRP is different from first TRP (See Fig(s). 2 with TRP1 and TRP2, See ¶ 278, terminal device may first send a scheduling request (scheduling request, SR) to the network device over a first PUCCH. ..also See ¶ 334).
Regarding claim(s) 17,43,48, Fan discloses wherein the PUCCH comprises at least one of: a PUCCH configured to transmit a scheduling request (See ¶ 278, the terminal device may first send a scheduling request (scheduling request, SR) to the network device over a first PUCCH.);
Regarding claim(s) 40,45, Fan discloses wherein the processor is further configured to: transmit the first indication information based on a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) medium access control (MAC) control element (CE) (See ¶ 17,29).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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) 39,44, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fan et al (US 20230345570 A1) hereinafter as Fan in view of Alfarhan et al (US 12425890 B2) hereinafter as Alfarhan.
Regarding claim(s) 39,44, Alfarhan discloses wherein the processor is further configured to: determine that a TRP corresponding to a PRACH resource used by the terminal device is the first TRP according to a mapping relationship between PRACH resources and TRPs (See ¶ 119, the WTRU may consider an association between SSBs and PRACH resources as applicable to a subset of TRPs. The WTRU may be configured with an SSB to PRACH resource mapping that is specific to a subset of TRPs.).
Mapping of TRPs with PRACH resource ensures adequate resources are available between WTRU so as to prevent communications disruption.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the teachings of Alfarhan within Fan, so as to enhance overall user experience.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-10,14-17,35,37-38 have been considered but are moot based on new grounds of rejection necessitated by Applicant's amendments.
Conclusion
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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAJ JAIN whose telephone number is (571)-272-3145. The examiner can normally be reached on M-Th 8-5.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Derrick Ferris can be reached 571-272-2123. 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 Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/RAJ JAIN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2411
Prosecution Insights