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 § 102
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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, 2, 7, 11, 12 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) or (a)(2) as being anticipated by Ghanbarinejad et al. (U.S. 2025/0331005), hereinafter Ghanbarinejad.
With respect to Claim 1, Ghanbarinejad teaches a wireless communication method comprising:
receiving, by a network node, a beam indication for a network for one or more links comprising (¶ 0260, “Node0 1202 sends an information element (IE) containing information of a reference signal, such as a synchronization signal, a CSI-RS, an SRS, a reference signal for measuring cross-link interference, or a like, and an indication that associates the reference signal with availability or conditional availability of soft resources” and ¶ 0264, “Alternatively, the measured signal strength may be reported to another node, such as a parent node, such that it can perform scheduling, power control, beam management, link adaptation, and so on. The node performing the measurement or receiving the measurement report may be a gNB 1204 or an IAB node/donor.”) at least one of:
a first communication link from a wireless communication node to the network node (¶ 0125, “In general, an IAB system is connected to a core network 602 through one or multiple IAB donors 604. Each IAB node 606 may be connected to an IAB donor 604 and/or other IAB nodes 606 through wireless backhaul links 608. Each IAB donor/node 604 may also serve UEs 610. Consider the example IAB system illustrated in FIG. 6.”)
a second communication link from the network node to the wireless communication node (¶ 0125, “In general, an IAB system is connected to a core network 602 through one or multiple IAB donors 604. Each IAB node 606 may be connected to an IAB donor 604 and/or other IAB nodes 606 through wireless backhaul links 608. Each IAB donor/node 604 may also serve UEs 610. Consider the example IAB system illustrated in FIG. 6.”):
a first forwarding link from the wireless communication node to the network node (¶ 0125, “In general, an IAB system is connected to a core network 602 through one or multiple IAB donors 604. Each IAB node 606 may be connected to an IAB donor 604 and/or other IAB nodes 606 through wireless backhaul links 608. Each IAB donor/node 604 may also serve UEs 610. Consider the example IAB system illustrated in FIG. 6.”):
a second forwarding link from the network node to the wireless communication node (¶ 0125, “In general, an IAB system is connected to a core network 602 through one or multiple IAB donors 604. Each IAB node 606 may be connected to an IAB donor 604 and/or other IAB nodes 606 through wireless backhaul links 608. Each IAB donor/node 604 may also serve UEs 610. Consider the example IAB system illustrated in FIG. 6.”);
a third forwarding link from the network node to a user equipment (UE) (¶ 0125, “In general, an IAB system is connected to a core network 602 through one or multiple IAB donors 604. Each IAB node 606 may be connected to an IAB donor 604 and/or other IAB nodes 606 through wireless backhaul links 608. Each IAB donor/node 604 may also serve UEs 610. Consider the example IAB system illustrated in FIG. 6.”): or
a fourth forwarding link from the user equipment to the network node (¶ 0125, “In general, an IAB system is connected to a core network 602 through one or multiple IAB donors 604. Each IAB node 606 may be connected to an IAB donor 604 and/or other IAB nodes 606 through wireless backhaul links 608. Each IAB donor/node 604 may also serve UEs 610. Consider the example IAB system illustrated in FIG. 6.”).
With respect to Claim 2, Ghanbarinejad teaches the wireless communication method of claim 1, wherein the beam indication for the links are determined by a Transmission Configuration Indicator (TCI) (¶ 0346, “In some of the embodiments described, a TCI-state (Transmission Configuration Indication) associated with a target transmission can indicate parameters for configuring a quasi-collocation relationship between the target transmission (e.g., target RS of DM-RS ports of the target transmission during a transmission occasion) and a source reference signal(s) (e.g., SSB/CSI-RS/SRS) with respect to quasi co-location type parameter(s) indicated in the corresponding TCI state.”)
With respect to Claim 7, Ghanbarinejad teaches the wireless communication method of claim 2, wherein multiple sets of first type of TCI states are configured by Radio Resource Control (RRC) signaling for different links (¶ 0300, “Semi-static RRC signaling”)
Regarding Claims 11 and 12, the claims are the method that corresponds to the method of claims 1 and 2 and are rejected accordingly.
Regarding Claim 20, the claim is the node that corresponds to the method of Claim 1 and is rejected accordingly.
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.
The factual inquiries 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 5 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ghanbarinejad et al. (U.S. 2025/0331005), hereinafter Ghanbarinejad, in view of Huang et al. (U.S. 2022/0322106), hereinafter Huang.
With respect to Claim 5, Ghanbarinejad teaches the wireless communication method of claim 2, however Ghanbarinejad fails to explicitly teach wherein all or partially signal of beam indication is transmitted by an Operations Administration and Maintenance (OAM) from network to the network node; and wherein the indicated TCI state via DCI is configured by the OAM.
Huang teaches wherein all or partially signal of beam indication is transmitted by an Operations Administration and Maintenance (OAM) from network to the network node; and wherein the indicated TCI state via DCI is configured by the OAM (¶ 0073, “For example, an upstream node (e.g., OAM node, donor node, parent node, grandparent node, etc.) may have preconfigured the UL parent and child links for the parent and child time-domain resources as being primary or secondary links.”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the application to combine the invention of combine the invention of Huang with the teaching of Ghanbarinejad to build the device into a OAM controller in the system of Ghanbarinejad in order to allow better control of multiple base station or relay devices in the system.
Regarding Claim 15, the claim is the method that corresponds to the method of claim 5 and is rejected accordingly.
Claim(s) 8 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ghanbarinejad et al. (U.S. 2025/0331005), hereinafter Ghanbarinejad, in view of Damnjanovic et al. (U.S. 2022/0278891), hereinafter Damnjanovic.
With respect to Claim 8, Ghanbarinejad teaches the wireless communication method of claim 1, wherein the beam indication is determined by spatial relations (¶ 0347, “a spatial relation information associated with a target transmission can indicate parameters for configuring a spatial setting between the target transmission and a reference RS (e.g., SSB/CSI-RS/SRS).”);
wherein the spatial relations are configured by Radio Resource Control (RRC) signaling; links (¶ 0300, “Semi-static RRC signaling”)
Ghanbarinejad fails to explicitly teach wherein one of the spatial relations is selected by a medium access control control element (MAC CE) command;
and a higher layer parameter is used to indicate that the one of the spatial relations is selected by a MAC CE command.
Damnjanovic teaches wherein one of the spatial relations is selected by a medium access control control element (MAC CE) command (¶ 0059, “The relay communication sidelink may then be activated via L1 and/or L2 signaling. For example, the relay communication sidelink may be activated via physical layer signaling (e.g., L1 signaling), a MAC or MAC-CE message (e.g., L2 signaling), or any combination thereof.”)
and a higher layer parameter is used to indicate that the one of the spatial relations is selected by a MAC CE command (¶ 0059, “The relay communication sidelink may then be activated via L1 and/or L2 signaling. For example, the relay communication sidelink may be activated via physical layer signaling (e.g., L1 signaling), a MAC or MAC-CE message (e.g., L2 signaling), or any combination thereof.”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the application to combine the invention of Damnjanovic with the invention of Ghanbarinejad in order to use layer 2 signaling such as a MAC CE to activate and deactivate beamforming as it is faster than higher layer signaling in the 3GPP system.
Regarding Claim 17, the claim is the method that corresponds to the method of claim 5 and is rejected accordingly.
Claim(s) 9 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ghanbarinejad et al. (U.S. 2025/0331005), hereinafter Ghanbarinejad, in view of Fakoorian et al. (U.S. 2024/0098517), hereinafter Fakoorian, in view of Damnjanovic et al. (U.S. 2022/0278891), hereinafter Damnjanovic.
With respect to Claim 9, Ghanbarinejad teaches the wireless communication method of claim 8, Ghanbarinejad fails to explicitly teach wherein the spatial relations are activated by a MAC CE command, and
one of the activated spatial relations is selected by a DCI;
wherein the DCI for selecting the activated spatial relations comprises at least one of a time-frequency resource indication or a beam spatial parameter;
wherein a higher layer parameter is used to indicate that the one of the activated spatial relations is selected by a sounding reference signal resource indicator (SRI) field in the DCI; and
wherein the one of the activated spatial relations is selected by a field in the DCI (¶ 0059, “The relay communication sidelink may then be activated via L1 and/or L2 signaling. For example, the relay communication sidelink may be activated via physical layer signaling (e.g., L1 signaling), a MAC or MAC-CE message (e.g., L2 signaling), or any combination thereof.”).
Damnjanovic teaches wherein the spatial relations are activated by a MAC CE command, and one of the activated spatial relations is selected by a DCI (¶ 0059, “The relay communication sidelink may then be activated via L1 and/or L2 signaling. For example, the relay communication sidelink may be activated via physical layer signaling (e.g., L1 signaling), a MAC or MAC-CE message (e.g., L2 signaling), or any combination thereof.”);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the application to combine the invention of Damnjanovic with the invention of Ghanbarinejad in order to use layer 2 signaling such as a MAC CE to activate and deactivate beamforming as it is faster than higher layer signaling in the 3GPP system.
Fakoorian teaches wherein the DCI for selecting the activated spatial relations comprises at least one of a time-frequency resource indication or a beam spatial parameter (¶ 0051, “In further exemplary embodiments, the parent IAB-DU may indicate the reception beam/panel at the IAB-node, e.g., through a TCI index, and the IAB-DU will consequently indicate to the child IAB-MT and/or access UE the SRI index for PUSCH transmission from child IAB-MT and/or access UE.”);
wherein a higher layer parameter is used to indicate that the one of the activated spatial relations is selected by a sounding reference signal resource indicator (SRI) field in the DCI (¶ 0051, “In further exemplary embodiments, the parent IAB-DU may indicate the reception beam/panel at the IAB-node, e.g., through a TCI index, and the IAB-DU will consequently indicate to the child IAB-MT and/or access UE the SRI index for PUSCH transmission from child IAB-MT and/or access UE.”); and
wherein the one of the activated spatial relations is selected by a field in the DCI (¶ 0051, “In further exemplary embodiments, the parent IAB-DU may indicate the reception beam/panel at the IAB-node, e.g., through a TCI index, and the IAB-DU will consequently indicate to the child IAB-MT and/or access UE the SRI index for PUSCH transmission from child IAB-MT and/or access UE.”);.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the application to combine the invention of Fakoorian with the system of Ghanbarinejad to use an available index such as SRI in in the DCI to convey downlink information.
Regarding Claim 18, the claim is the method that corresponds to the method of claim 9 and is rejected accordingly.
Claim(s) 10 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ghanbarinejad et al. (U.S. 2025/0331005), hereinafter Ghanbarinejad, further in view of Yu et al. (U.S. 2023/0300637), hereinafter Yu.
With respect to Claim 10, Ghanbarinejad teaches the wireless communication method of claim 1, however fails to explicitly teach wherein the beam indication of one or more of the first, second, third, and fourth forwarding links is identical to the beam indication of one or more of the first and second communication links.
Yu teaches the beam indication of one or more of the first, second, third, and fourth forwarding links is identical to the beam indication of one or more of the first and second communication links (¶ 0625, “In one embodiment, the first connection and the second connection have a same TCI.”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing of the application to combine the invention of to use the same TCI for multiple links that are similar in the system of Ghanbarinejad as taught by Yu.
Regarding Claim 19, the claim is the method that corresponds to the method of claim 10 and is rejected accordingly.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 4, 6, 13, 14, 16 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
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANGELA NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-5660. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9AM - 5PM.
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, Brian Gillis can be reached at 571-272-7952. 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.
/ANGELA NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2446
Prosecution Insights