DETAILED ACTION
Claims status
In response to the application filed on 04/22/2026, claims 7-11 are currently pending for the examination. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
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.
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 7, 9, 10, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Muruganathan et al. (US 2023/0300835 A1) in view of ZHOU et al. (US 2024/0015717 A1).
Regarding claim 7; Muruganathan teaches a terminal comprising:
a receiver that receives a medium access control control element (MAC CE) indicating activation (See Fig. 5: receiving a single MAC CE to activate TCI states. See Abstract and ¶ [0025]) of one transmission configuration indication (TCI) state applicable to a plurality of types of channels (See Fig. 5: mapping activated TCI states to the TCI field codepoints of the DCI formats. See Abstract) and downlink control information (DCI) including a TCI field corresponding to a TCI state activated by using the MAC CE (See Fig. 5: receiving separate MAC CEs to activate TCI states and map activated TCI states to the TCI field codepoints of each of the plurality of DCI format. See Abstract and ¶ [0025]); and
a processor that determines, based on a first field value and a second field value included in the MAC CE (See Fig. 15 and Table 6.2 1-1: TCI States Activation/Deactivation for UE-specific PDSCH MAC CE is identified by a MAC PDU subheader with LCID as specified in Table 6.2.1-1. It has a variable size consisting of following fields: Serving Cell ID: This field indicates the identity of the Serving Cell for which the MAC CE applies. The length of the field is 5 bits; BWP ID: This field indicates a DL BWP for which the MAC CE applies as the codepoint of the DCI bandwidth part indicator field as specified in TS 38.212 [9]. The length of the BWP ID field is 2 bits; See ¶ [0172]-[¶ [0175]), a number of downlink (DL) TCI states and a number of uplink (UL) TCI states mapped to a codepoint of the TCI field. (See Table 6.21-1: The TCI codepoint to which the TCI States are mapped is determined by its ordinal position among all the TCI codepoints with sets of TCI state IDi,j fields. For DCI format 1_1, the sth (0≤s≤7) TCI codepoint with TCI state IDs,1 and TCI state IDs,2 shall be mapped to the codepoint value s of the DCI Transmission configuration indication field. ¶ [0176]).
[Office’s Note: Because of the alternative claim language such as “at least one of”, only one of the alternative limitations has been analyzed by the examiner].
Muruganathan teaches the terminal wherein a maximum number of DL TCI states (See Fig. 15: The maximum number of activated TCI codepoint is S if UE is configured only with DCI format 1_2, 8 if UE is configured only with DCI format 1_1, and 8+S if UE is configured with both DCI formats 1_1 and 1_2, where S is the number of codepoints configured for DCI format 1_2. The maximum number of TCI states mapped to a TCI codepoint is 2. ¶ [0176]) and mapping the number of activated TCI states to the codepoints (See Abstract).
Muruganathan doesn’t explicitly teach a maximum number of UL TCI states mapped to the codepoint are equal to or greater than 2.
However, Zhou discloses a maximum number of UL TCI states mapped to the codepoint are equal to or greater than 2 (Zhou: the maximum number of TCI states mapped to a TCI codepoint may greater than 2. See Fig. 4 and ¶ [0061]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide that a maximum number of UL TCI states mapped to the codepoint are equal to or greater than 2 as taught by Zhou to have incorporated in the system of Muruganathan, so that it would provide that a unified TCI framework for DL and UL beam indication, or enhancement on signaling mechanisms to improve latency and efficiency with more usage of dynamic control signaling. Zhou: ¶ [0059].
[Office’s Note: Because of the alternative claim language such as “…or…”, only one of the alternative limitations has been considered by the examiner].
Regarding claim 9: Muruganathan teaches a radio communication method for a terminal, comprising:
receiving a medium access control control element (MAC CE) indicating activation (See Fig. 5: receiving a single MAC CE to activate TCI states. See Abstract and ¶ [0025]) of at least one of a plurality of transmission configuration indication (TCI) states applicable to a plurality of types of channels (See Fig. 5: mapping activated TCI states to the TCI field codepoints of the DCI formats. See Abstract) and downlink control information (DCI) including a TCI field corresponding to a part of at least one TCI state activated by using the MAC CE (See Fig. 5: receiving separate MAC CEs to activate TCI states and map activated TCI states to the TCI field codepoints of each of the plurality of DCI format. See Abstract and ¶ [0025]); and
determining, based on a first field value and a second field value included in the MAC CE (See Fig. 15 and Table 6.2 1-1: TCI States Activation/Deactivation for UE-specific PDSCH MAC CE is identified by a MAC PDU subheader with LCID as specified in Table 6.2.1-1. It has a variable size consisting of following fields: Serving Cell ID: This field indicates the identity of the Serving Cell for which the MAC CE applies. The length of the field is 5 bits; BWP ID: This field indicates a DL BWP for which the MAC CE applies as the codepoint of the DCI bandwidth part indicator field as specified in TS 38.212 [9]. The length of the BWP ID field is 2 bits; See ¶ [0172]-[¶ [0175]), a number of downlink (DL) TCI states and a number of uplink (UL) TCI states mapped to a codepoint of the TCI field. (See Table 6.21-1: The TCI codepoint to which the TCI States are mapped is determined by its ordinal position among all the TCI codepoints with sets of TCI state IDi,j fields. For DCI format 1_1, the sth (0≤s≤7) TCI codepoint with TCI state IDs,1 and TCI state IDs,2 shall be mapped to the codepoint value s of the DCI Transmission configuration indication field. ¶ [0176]).
Muruganathan doesn’t explicitly teach a maximum number of UL TCI states mapped to the codepoint are equal to or greater than 2.
However, Zhou discloses a maximum number of UL TCI states mapped to the codepoint are equal to or greater than 2 (Zhou: the maximum number of TCI states mapped to a TCI codepoint may greater than 2. See Fig. 4 and ¶ [0061]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide that a maximum number of UL TCI states mapped to the codepoint are equal to or greater than 2 as taught by Zhou to have incorporated in the system of Muruganathan, so that it would provide that a unified TCI framework for DL and UL beam indication, or enhancement on signaling mechanisms to improve latency and efficiency with more usage of dynamic control signaling. Zhou: ¶ [0059].
[Office’s Note: Because of the alternative claim language such as “…or…”, only one of the alternative limitations has been analyzed by the examiner].
Regarding claim 10; Muruganathan teaches a base station comprising:
a transmitter that transmits a medium access control control element (MAC CE) indicating activation (See Fig. 5: receiving a single MAC CE to activate TCI states. See Abstract and ¶ [0025]) of at least one of a plurality of transmission configuration indication (TCI) states applicable to a plurality of types of channels (See Fig. 5: mapping activated TCI states to the TCI field codepoints of the DCI formats. See Abstract) and downlink control information (DCI) including a TCI field corresponding to a part of at least one TCI state activated by using the MAC CE (See Fig. 5: receiving separate MAC CEs to activate TCI states and map activated TCI states to the TCI field codepoints of each of the plurality of DCI format. See Abstract and ¶ [0025]); and
a processor that determines, based on a first field value and a second field value included in the MAC CE (See Fig. 15 and Table 6.2 1-1: TCI States Activation/Deactivation for UE-specific PDSCH MAC CE is identified by a MAC PDU subheader with LCID as specified in Table 6.2.1-1. It has a variable size consisting of following fields: Serving Cell ID: This field indicates the identity of the Serving Cell for which the MAC CE applies. The length of the field is 5 bits; BWP ID: This field indicates a DL BWP for which the MAC CE applies as the codepoint of the DCI bandwidth part indicator field as specified in TS 38.212 [9]. The length of the BWP ID field is 2 bits; See ¶ [0172]-[¶ [0175]), a number of downlink (DL) TCI states and a number of uplink (UL) TCI states mapped to a codepoint of the TCI field. (See Table 6.21-1: The TCI codepoint to which the TCI States are mapped is determined by its ordinal position among all the TCI codepoints with sets of TCI state IDi,j fields. For DCI format 1_1, the sth (0≤s≤7) TCI codepoint with TCI state IDs,1 and TCI state IDs,2 shall be mapped to the codepoint value s of the DCI Transmission configuration indication field. ¶ [0176]).
[Office’s Note: Because of the alternative claim language such as “at least one of”, only one of the alternative limitations has been analyzed by the examiner].
Muruganathan doesn’t explicitly teach a maximum number of UL TCI states mapped to the codepoint are equal to or greater than 2.
However, Zhou discloses a maximum number of UL TCI states mapped to the codepoint are equal to or greater than 2 (Zhou: the maximum number of TCI states mapped to a TCI codepoint may greater than 2. See Fig. 4 and ¶ [0061]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide that a maximum number of UL TCI states mapped to the codepoint are equal to or greater than 2 as taught by Zhou to have incorporated in the system of Muruganathan, so that it would provide that a unified TCI framework for DL and UL beam indication, or enhancement on signaling mechanisms to improve latency and efficiency with more usage of dynamic control signaling. Zhou: ¶ [0059].
[Office’s Note: Because of the alternative claim language such as “…or…”, only one of the alternative limitations has been analyzed by the examiner].
Regarding claim 11; Muruganathan teaches a system comprising a terminal and a base station, wherein the terminal comprises:
a receiver that receives a medium access control control element (MAC CE) indicating activation (See Fig. 5: receiving a single MAC CE to activate TCI states. See Abstract and ¶ [0025]) of one transmission configuration indication (TCI) state applicable to a plurality of types of channels (See Fig. 5: mapping activated TCI states to the TCI field codepoints of the DCI formats. See Abstract) and downlink control information (DCI) including a TCI field corresponding to a part of at least one TCI state activated by using the MAC CE (See Fig. 5: receiving separate MAC CEs to activate TCI states and map activated TCI states to the TCI field codepoints of each of the plurality of DCI format. See Abstract and ¶ [0025]); and
a processor that determines, based on a first field value and a second field value included in the MAC CE (See Fig. 15 and Table 6.2 1-1: TCI States Activation/Deactivation for UE-specific PDSCH MAC CE is identified by a MAC PDU subheader with LCID as specified in Table 6.2.1-1. It has a variable size consisting of following fields: Serving Cell ID: This field indicates the identity of the Serving Cell for which the MAC CE applies. The length of the field is 5 bits; BWP ID: This field indicates a DL BWP for which the MAC CE applies as the codepoint of the DCI bandwidth part indicator field as specified in TS 38.212 [9]. The length of the BWP ID field is 2 bits; See ¶ [0172]-[¶ [0175]), a number of downlink (DL) TCI states and a number of uplink (UL) TCI states mapped to a codepoint of the TCI field. (See Table 6.21-1: The TCI codepoint to which the TCI States are mapped is determined by its ordinal position among all the TCI codepoints with sets of TCI state IDi,j fields. For DCI format 1_1, the sth (0≤s≤7) TCI codepoint with TCI state IDs,1 and TCI state IDs,2 shall be mapped to the codepoint value s of the DCI Transmission configuration indication field. ¶ [0176]).
a base station comprising: a transmitter that transmits a medium access control control element (MAC CE) and the DCI (Muruganathan: Abstract).
Muruganathan doesn’t explicitly teach a maximum number of UL TCI states mapped to the codepoint are equal to or greater than 2.
However, Zhou discloses a maximum number of UL TCI states mapped to the codepoint are equal to or greater than 2 (Zhou: the maximum number of TCI states mapped to a TCI codepoint may greater than 2. See Fig. 4 and ¶ [0061]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide that a maximum number of UL TCI states mapped to the codepoint are equal to or greater than 2 as taught by Zhou to have incorporated in the system of Muruganathan, so that it would provide that a unified TCI framework for DL and UL beam indication, or enhancement on signaling mechanisms to improve latency and efficiency with more usage of dynamic control signaling. Zhou: ¶ [0059].
Response to Arguments
In response to the amendment as filed on 04/22/2026, Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Arguments:
Applicant argues that Muruganathan neither discloses nor suggests the amended limitations that:
“a maximum number of DL TCI states and a maximum number of UL TCI states mapped to the codepoint are equal to or greater than 2.”
Examiner’s response:
Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Muruganathan et al. (US 2023/0300835 A1) teaches receiving a Medium Access Control - control element (MAC CE) indicating activation of one transmission configuration indication (TCI) state applicable to a plurality of types of channels (see Abstract, Fig. 5, and ¶ [0025]) and receiving downlink control information (DCI) including a TCI field corresponding to a TCI state activated by using the MAC CE. Muruganathan further teaches that a processor determines, based on fields included in the MAC CE, a number of downlink (DL) TCI states and a number of uplink (UL) TCI states mapped to a codepoint of the TCI field. Specifically, Muruganathan discloses that the MAC CE includes fields such as a Serving Cell ID field and a BWP ID field (see Fig. 15, Table 6.2.1-1, and ¶¶ [0172]-[0175]). Muruganathan further teaches:
“For DCI format 1_1,…TCI state IDs,s,2 shall be mapped to the codepoint value s of the DCI Transmission Configuration Indication field.” (¶ [0176]). Thus, Muruganathan expressly teaches mapping multiple TCI states to a single TCI codepoint.
Moreover, Muruganathan explicitly states that “The maximum number of TCI states mapped to a TCI codepoint is 2.” (¶ [0176]). Accordingly, Muruganathan expressly teaches that the maximum number of DL TCI states mapped to a TCI codepoint is equal to 2.
While Muruganathan does not explicitly state that the maximum number of UL TCI states mapped to a codepoint is equal to or greater than 2, Zhou teaches this feature. Specifically, Zhou discloses a unified TCI framework for beam indication and teaches that: “the maximum number of TCI states mapped to a TCI codepoint may be greater than 2.” See Zhou, Fig. 4 and ¶ [0061].
Applicant's argument is also unpersuasive because the claim recites that the maximum number of UL TCI states mapped to the codepoint is “equal to or greater than 2.” The claim language is written in the alternative and encompasses both a value equal to 2 and a value greater than 2. Under the broadest reasonable interpretation, the Examiner need only show that the cited prior art teaches at least one of the claimed alternatives. In the present rejection, Zhou expressly teaches that the maximum number of TCI states mapped to a TCI codepoint may be greater than 2 (Fig. 4; ¶ [0061]). Therefore, Zhou teaches the claimed feature.
Furthermore, Muruganathan expressly teaches that the maximum number of TCI states mapped to a TCI codepoint is 2 (¶ [0176]), while Zhou teaches that the maximum number of TCI states mapped to a TCI codepoint may be greater than 2 (¶ [0061]). Thus, the cited references collectively teach both alternatives recited by the claim. Even if only one alternative were required, Zhou's disclosure of a value greater than 2 is sufficient to satisfy the claim language “equal to or greater than 2.”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Muruganathan and Zhou to provide a unified TCI framework for both downlink and uplink beam indication and to improve signaling flexibility, latency, and efficiency through enhanced dynamic control signaling. Zhou expressly teaches such benefits. See Zhou ¶ [0059].
Accordingly, Muruganathan in view of Zhou teaches or at least renders obvious the limitation that: “a maximum number of DL TCI states and a maximum number of UL TCI states mapped to the codepoint are equal to or greater than 2.” Therefore, Applicant’s argument is not persuasive, and the rejection is maintained.
Conclusion
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 extension fee 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 SAI AUNG whose telephone number is (571)272-3507. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday, Alt Fridays, 7:30 AM- 5:00 PM (EST).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Noel Beharry can be reached on 571-270-5630. 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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.
/SAI AUNG/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2416
Prosecution Insights