DETAILED ACTION
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 29-31, 37-44 and 47 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Matsumura et al. (US-PGPUB 2023/0209569, herein as ‘569).
Regarding claim 29, ‘569 teaches a method comprising: processing information that indicates a transmission configuration indicator (TCI) state switch command of a serving cell to which a user equipment (UE) is connected [Para 51, receives information to update the TCI state]; determining whether a TCI state is known or unknown to the UE [Para 51, determination is made regarding whether TCI state is known or not known]; and causing completion of a switch to the TCI state within a first time delay or a second time delay based on at least whether the TCI state is known or unknown [Para 51, TCI state transition is done withing given time if the time delay is known otherwise the transition is done once TCI delay time is determined which is the unknown state].
Regarding claim 30, ‘569 teaches the first time delay corresponds to the TCI state being known, wherein the second time delay corresponds to the TCI state being unknown and is longer than the first time delay [Para 52-58 and 62-64, timing for unknown TCI state is longer as shown in para 64].
Regarding claim 31, ‘569 teaches a downlink control information (DCI) or a media access control (MAC) control element (CE) requesting the switch to the TCI state [Para 30-31 and 51, DCI or MAC CE can be used for TCI state switching].
Regarding claim 37, ‘569 teaches determining whether the TCI state is in an active TCI state list [Para 61].
Regarding claim 38, ‘569 teaches at least one of the first time delay or the second time delay is based on whether the TCI state is in the active TCI state list [Para 61].
Regarding claim 39, ‘569 teaches a total delay time is shorter when the TCI state is in the active TCI state list relative to when the TCI state is not in the active TCI state list [Para 61].
Regarding claim 40, ‘569 teaches an apparatus comprising: processing circuitry configured to: process information that indicates a transmission configuration indicator (TCI) state switch command of a serving cell to which apparatus is connected [Para 51, receives information to update the TCI state]; determine whether a TCI state is known or unknown to the apparatus [Para 51, determination is made regarding whether TCI state is known or not known]; and cause completion of a switch to the TCI state within a first time delay or a second time delay based on at least whether the TCI state is known or unknown [Para 51, TCI state transition is done withing given time if the time delay is known otherwise the transition is done once TCI delay time is determined which is the unknown state].
Regarding claim 41, ‘569 teaches the first time delay is based on THARQ and a predefined time value, wherein THARQ represents a time needed to send acknowledgement/negative acknowledgement (ACK/NACK) [Para 60-61].
Regarding claim 42, ‘569 teaches the first time delay is based on Tfirst-SSB and TSSB-proc, wherein Tfirst-SSB represents a first time needed to receive a synchronization signal block (SSB), and wherein TSSB-proc represents a second time needed for processing the SSB [Para 60-63].
Regarding claim 43, ‘569 teaches the first time delay is based on TL1-RSRP, wherein TL1-RSRP represents a measurement period for performing a layer 1 (L1) reference signal received power (RSRP) measurement [Para 39].
Regarding claim 44, ‘569 teaches the first time delay corresponds to the TCI state being known and is based on THARQ, Tfirst-SSB, and TSSB-proc, wherein THARQ represents a time needed to send acknowledgement/negative acknowledgement (ACK/NACK), wherein Tfirst-SSB represents a first time needed to receive a synchronization signal block (SSB), and wherein TSSB-proc represents a second time needed for processing the SSB [Para 60-62].
Regarding claim 47, ‘569 teaches one or more non-transitory computer readable-storage media storing instructions that, upon execution by a processor, cause operations comprising: processing information that indicates a transmission configuration indicator (TCI) state switch command of a serving cell to which a user equipment (UE) is connected [Para 51, receives information to update the TCI state]; determining whether a TCI state is known or unknown to the UE [Para 51, determination is made regarding whether TCI state is known or not known]; and causing completion of a switch to the TCI state within a first time delay or a second time delay based on at least whether the TCI state is known or unknown to the UE [Para 51, TCI state transition is done withing given time if the time delay is known otherwise the transition is done once TCI delay time is determined which is the unknown state].
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 32-36, 45, 46 and 48 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsumura et al. (US-PGPUB 2023/0209569, herein as ‘569) in view of Matsumura et al. (US-PGPUB 2024/0107619, herein as ‘619).
Regarding claim 32, ‘569 teaches a method as discussed in rejection of claim 31.
However, ‘569 does not teach the DCI or the MAC CE triggers a handover from the serving cell based on the switch to the TCI state.
‘619 teaches the DCI or the MAC CE triggers a handover from the serving cell based on the switch to the TCI state [Para 86].
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to trigger handover based on TCI state switch so that inter-cell mobility can be provided.
Regarding claim 33, ‘569 teaches a method as discussed in rejection of claim 29.
However, ‘569 does not teach the TCI state is associated with a cell other than the serving cell and is determined to be known based on a detection of the cell.
‘619 teaches the TCI state is associated with a cell other than the serving cell and is determined to be known based on a detection of the cell [Para 85].
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention associate TCI state with a non-serving cell so that inter-cell mobility can be provided.
Regarding claim 34, ‘569 teaches a method as discussed in rejection of claim 29.
However, ‘569 does not teach determining, from a radio resource control (RRC) configuration of a cell other than the serving cell, an identifier of the cell, wherein the TCI state is associated with the cell; and detecting a synchronization signal block (SSB) associated with the identifier of the cell, wherein the TCI state of the cell is determined to be known based on the SSB being detected.
‘619 teaches determining, from a radio resource control (RRC) configuration of a cell other than the serving cell, an identifier of the cell, wherein the TCI state is associated with the cell [Para 77-84]; and detecting a synchronization signal block (SSB) associated with the identifier of the cell, wherein the TCI state of the cell is determined to be known based on the SSB being detected [Para 77-84].
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention determine state of the cell based on SSB so that reference signal for inter-cell mobility can be provided.
Regarding claim 35, ‘569 teaches a method as discussed in rejection of claim 29.
However, ‘569 does not teach the TCI state is associated with a cell other than the serving cell and is determined to be known based on a determination that a receive (RX) beam from the cell is known.
‘619 teaches the TCI state is associated with a cell other than the serving cell and is determined to be known based on a determination that a receive (RX) beam from the cell is known [Para 88-89].
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to determine state based on RX beam of non-serving cell so that inter-mobility beam change can be done.
Regarding claim 36, ‘569 teaches a method as discussed in rejection of claim 29.
However, ‘569 does not teach determining that the RX beam is known by at least determining a layer 1 (L1) measurement report for the TCI state was sent prior to receiving the TCI state switch command.
‘619 teaches determining that the RX beam is known by at least determining a layer 1 (L1) measurement report for the TCI state was sent prior to receiving the TCI state switch command [Para 242-245].
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention determine L1 measurement report before receiving TCI state switch command so that determination regarding switch can be made based on signal conditions.
Regarding claim 45, ‘569 teaches an apparatus as discussed in rejection of claim 40.
However, ‘569 does not teach the TCI state switch is associated with a cell other than the serving cell.
‘619 teaches the TCI state switch is associated with a cell other than the serving cell [Para 85].
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention associate TCI state with a non-serving cell so that inter-cell mobility can be provided.
Regarding claim 46, ‘569 teaches an apparatus as discussed in rejection of claim 40.
However, ‘569 does not teach the TCI state switch corresponds to a cell that is associated with an identity that is different from an identity of the serving cell.
‘619 teaches the TCI state switch corresponds to a cell that is associated with an identity that is different from an identity of the serving cell [Para 63-67].
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to associate with identity of non-serving cell so that inter-cell mobility can be achieved.
Regarding claim 48, ‘569 teaches one or more non-transitory computer readable-storage media as discussed in rejection of claim 47.
However, ‘569 does not teach causing, prior to receiving the TCI state switch command, a transmission of UE capability information indicating a capability of the UE for neighbor cell TCI state switching in support of handovers that are triggered by TCI state switch commands.
‘619 teaches causing, prior to receiving the TCI state switch command, a transmission of UE capability information indicating a capability of the UE for neighbor cell TCI state switching in support of handovers that are triggered by TCI state switch commands [Para 10].
It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to transmit capability information so that it can be determined which parameters are supported by the non-serving cell.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Nishio et al. (USPN 12,542,571) teaches determining a polarized wave using first wireless communication and second wireless communication after the first wireless communication. A communication circuit performs wireless communication using the determined polarized wave.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHANDRAHAS PATEL whose telephone number is (571)270-1211. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 7:30 - 17:30.
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, Ricky Ngo can be reached at 571-272-3139. 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.
/Chandrahas B Patel/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2464