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 .
Remarks
The present Office Action is in response to Applicant’s amendment filed on 8/13/2026. Claims 1-20 remain pending in the present application. This Action is made FINAL.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement submitted on 8/13/2026 has been considered by the Examiner and made of record in the application file.
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)(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 1, 4, 5, 10, 13, 17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Liu et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0127883 A1) (hereinafter Liu).
Regarding claim 1, Liu discloses a terminal device (Paragraph 0055 discloses the term “terminal device” refers to any end device that can access a communication network and receive services therefrom. By way of example and not limitation, the terminal device may refer to a mobile terminal, a user equipment (UE), or other suitable devices. The UE may be, for example, a subscriber station, a portable subscriber station, a mobile station (MS) or an access terminal (AT). The terminal device may include, but not limited to, portable computers, image capture terminal devices such as digital cameras, gaming terminal devices, music storage and playback appliances, a mobile phone, a cellular phone, a smart phone, a tablet, a wearable device, a personal digital assistant (PDA), a vehicle, and the like) comprising:
at least one processor; and at least one memory including computer program codes; the at least one memory and the computer program codes are configured to, with the at least one processor, cause the terminal device at least to (Figure 4 and paragraph 0094 disclose a block diagram illustrating an apparatus 400. The apparatus 400 may comprise one or more processors such as processor 401 and one or more memories such as memory 402 storing computer program codes 403. The apparatus 400 may be implemented as an integrated circuit chip or module that can be plugged or installed into a terminal device or a network node. In such case, the apparatus 400 may be implemented as a terminal device or a network node):
determine whether beam failure is detected on each of a plurality of serving cells of the terminal device (Figure 1 and paragraph 0070 disclose the terminal device may detect a beam failure in a serving cell of the terminal device, as shown in block 102. The serving cell may comprise a PCell or an SCell of the terminal device); and
in response to determining that beam failure is detected on one or more serving cells of the plurality of serving cells of the terminal device, transmit a beam failure report to a network device associated with the one or more serving cells of the plurality of serving cells (Figure 1 and paragraphs 0071, 0072, and 0074 disclose in response to the detection of the beam failure, the terminal device can determine whether to transmit a report of the beam failure to a network node provisioning the serving cell to the terminal device, as shown in block 104. The predefined configuration may indicate the terminal device to transmit the report of the beam failure to the network node in response that the beam failure is detected in a SCell of the terminal device. The predefined configuration also may indicate the terminal device to transmit the report of the beam failure to the network node in response to the detection of the beam failure. The terminal device may transmit the report of the beam failure to the network node, in response to determining that the report is to be transmitted to the network node, as shown in block 106. Since the claim only describes transmitting a beam failure report and the contents of the report are not relied upon by any step of the method, the contents of the report are considered as merely non-functional descriptive material and do not carry patentable weight. See MPEP 2111.05 and 2112.01(III)); and
wherein the beam failure report includes:
an indication of the one or more serving cells on which the beam failure is detected (Paragraph 0074 discloses the report may comprise at least one of the following: an index of the serving cell, an indicator of the beam failure, an index of a beam having the beam failure, and one or more candidate beams available for a BFR procedure in the serving cell. Since the claim only describes transmitting a beam failure report and the contents of the report are not relied upon by any step of the method, the contents of the report are considered as merely non-functional descriptive material and do not carry patentable weight. See MPEP 2111.05 and 2112.01(III)); and
an indication of availabilities of at least one candidate beam for each of the one or more serving cells on which the beam failure is detected (Paragraph 0074 discloses the report may comprise at least one of the following: an index of the serving cell, an indicator of the beam failure, an index of a beam having the beam failure, and one or more candidate beams available for a BFR procedure in the serving cell. Since the claim only describes transmitting a beam failure report and the contents of the report are not relied upon by any step of the method, the contents of the report are considered as merely non-functional descriptive material and do not carry patentable weight. See MPEP 2111.05 and 2112.01(III)).
Regarding claim 4, as applied to claim 1 above, Liu further discloses wherein the beam failure report further comprises an indication of at least one candidate beam comprising at least one candidate reference signal, in response to the availability of the at least one candidate beam on a corresponding serving cell of the one or more serving cell is available (Paragraph 0074 discloses the report may comprise at least one of the following: an index of the serving cell, an indicator of the beam failure, an index of a beam having the beam failure, and one or more candidate beams available for a BFR procedure in the serving cell. A candidate beam may comprise a beam of which the measured DL quality (for example, in terms of synchronization signal (SS)/CSI-RS-reference signal received power (RSRP), reference signal received quality (RSRQ), signal to interference plus noise ratio (SINR), etc.) is above a certain threshold).
Regarding claim 5, as applied to claim 1 above, Liu further discloses wherein the one or more serving cells include a serving cell, and wherein the terminal device is caused to generate the beam failure report by: determining signal qualities of a plurality of candidate reference signals configured for the serving cell (Figure 1 and paragraph 0070 disclose the serving cell may comprise a PCell or an SCell of the terminal device. Paragraph 0074 discloses a candidate beam may comprise a beam of which the measured DL quality (for example, in terms of synchronization signal (SS)/CSI-RS-reference signal received power (RSRP), reference signal received quality (RSRQ), signal to interference plus noise ratio (SINR), etc.) is above a certain threshold).
Regarding claim 10, Liu discloses a network device (Paragraph 0053 discloses the term “network node” refers to a network device in a communication network via which a terminal device accesses to the network and receives services therefrom. The network node may refer to a base station (BS), an access point (AP), a multi-cell/multicast coordination entity (MCE), a controller or any other suitable device in a wireless communication network. The BS may be, for example, a node B (NodeB or NB), an evolved NodeB (eNodeB or eNB), a next generation NodeB (gNodeB or gNB), a remote radio unit (RRU), a radio header (RH), a remote radio head (RRH), a relay, a low power node such as a femto, a pico, and so forth), comprising:
at least one processor; and at least one memory including computer program codes; the at least one memory and the computer program codes are configured to, with the at least one processor, cause the network device at least to (Figure 4 and paragraph 0094 disclose a block diagram illustrating an apparatus 400. The apparatus 400 may comprise one or more processors such as processor 401 and one or more memories such as memory 402 storing computer program codes 403. The apparatus 400 may be implemented as an integrated circuit chip or module that can be plugged or installed into a terminal device or a network node. In such case, the apparatus 400 may be implemented as a terminal device or a network node):
receive, from a terminal device, a beam failure report associated with one or more serving cells of a plurality of serving cells (Figure 1 and paragraphs 0071, 0072, and 0074 disclose in response to the detection of the beam failure, the terminal device can determine whether to transmit a report of the beam failure to a network node provisioning the serving cell to the terminal device, as shown in block 104. The predefined configuration may indicate the terminal device to transmit the report of the beam failure to the network node in response that the beam failure is detected in a SCell of the terminal device. The predefined configuration also may indicate the terminal device to transmit the report of the beam failure to the network node in response to the detection of the beam failure. The terminal device may transmit the report of the beam failure to the network node, in response to determining that the report is to be transmitted to the network node, as shown in block 106. Since the claim only describes receiving a beam failure report and the contents of the report are not relied upon by any step of the method, the contents of the report are considered as merely non-functional descriptive material and do not carry patentable weight. See MPEP 2111.05 and 2112.01(III)); and
wherein the beam failure report includes:
an indication of the one or more serving cells on which the beam failure is detected (Paragraph 0074 discloses the report may comprise at least one of the following: an index of the serving cell, an indicator of the beam failure, an index of a beam having the beam failure, and one or more candidate beams available for a BFR procedure in the serving cell. Since the claim only describes receiving a beam failure report and the contents of the report are not relied upon by any step of the method, the contents of the report are considered as merely non-functional descriptive material and do not carry patentable weight. See MPEP 2111.05 and 2112.01(III)); and
an indication of the availabilities of at least one candidate beam for each of the one or more serving cells on which the beam failure is detected (Paragraph 0074 discloses the report may comprise at least one of the following: an index of the serving cell, an indicator of the beam failure, an index of a beam having the beam failure, and one or more candidate beams available for a BFR procedure in the serving cell. Since the claim only describes receiving a beam failure report and the contents of the report are not relied upon by any step of the method, the contents of the report are considered as merely non-functional descriptive material and do not carry patentable weight. See MPEP 2111.05 and 2112.01(III)).
Regarding claim 13, as applied to claim 10 above, Liu further discloses herein an indication of at least one candidate beam comprising at least one candidate reference signal, in response to the availability of the at least one candidate beam on a corresponding serving cell of the one or more serving cell is available (Paragraph 0074 discloses the report may comprise at least one of the following: an index of the serving cell, an indicator of the beam failure, an index of a beam having the beam failure, and one or more candidate beams available for a BFR procedure in the serving cell. A candidate beam may comprise a beam of which the measured DL quality (for example, in terms of synchronization signal (SS)/CSI-RS-reference signal received power (RSRP), reference signal received quality (RSRQ), signal to interference plus noise ratio (SINR), etc.) is above a certain threshold).
Regarding claim 17, Liu discloses a method comprising:
determining, by a terminal device, whether beam failure is detected on each of a plurality of serving cells of the terminal device (Figure 1 and paragraph 0070 disclose the terminal device may detect a beam failure in a serving cell of the terminal device, as shown in block 102. The serving cell may comprise a PCell or an SCell of the terminal device); and
in response to determining that beam failure is detected on one or more serving cells of the plurality of serving cells of the terminal device, transmitting, by the terminal device, a beam failure report to a network device associated with the one or more serving cells of the plurality of serving cells (Figure 1 and paragraphs 0071, 0072, and 0074 disclose in response to the detection of the beam failure, the terminal device can determine whether to transmit a report of the beam failure to a network node provisioning the serving cell to the terminal device, as shown in block 104. The predefined configuration may indicate the terminal device to transmit the report of the beam failure to the network node in response that the beam failure is detected in a SCell of the terminal device. The predefined configuration also may indicate the terminal device to transmit the report of the beam failure to the network node in response to the detection of the beam failure. The terminal device may transmit the report of the beam failure to the network node, in response to determining that the report is to be transmitted to the network node, as shown in block 106. Since the claim only describes transmitting a beam failure report and the contents of the report are not relied upon by any step of the method, the contents of the report are considered as merely non-functional descriptive material and do not carry patentable weight. See MPEP 2111.05 and 2112.01(III)); and
wherein the beam failure report includes:
an indication of the one or more serving cells on which the beam failure is detected (Paragraph 0074 discloses the report may comprise at least one of the following: an index of the serving cell, an indicator of the beam failure, an index of a beam having the beam failure, and one or more candidate beams available for a BFR procedure in the serving cell. Since the claim only describes transmitting a beam failure report and the contents of the report are not relied upon by any step of the method, the contents of the report are considered as merely non-functional descriptive material and do not carry patentable weight. See MPEP 2111.05 and 2112.01(III)); and
an indication of availabilities of at least one candidate beam for each of the one or more serving cells on which the beam failure is detected (Paragraph 0074 discloses the report may comprise at least one of the following: an index of the serving cell, an indicator of the beam failure, an index of a beam having the beam failure, and one or more candidate beams available for a BFR procedure in the serving cell. Since the claim only describes transmitting a beam failure report and the contents of the report are not relied upon by any step of the method, the contents of the report are considered as merely non-functional descriptive material and do not carry patentable weight. See MPEP 2111.05 and 2112.01(III)).
Regarding claim 20, as applied to claim 17 above, Liu further discloses wherein the beam failure report further comprises an indication of at least one candidate beam comprising at least one candidate reference signal, in response to the availability of the at least one candidate beam on a corresponding serving cell of the one or more serving cell is available (Paragraph 0074 discloses the report may comprise at least one of the following: an index of the serving cell, an indicator of the beam failure, an index of a beam having the beam failure, and one or more candidate beams available for a BFR procedure in the serving cell. A candidate beam may comprise a beam of which the measured DL quality (for example, in terms of synchronization signal (SS)/CSI-RS-reference signal received power (RSRP), reference signal received quality (RSRQ), signal to interference plus noise ratio (SINR), etc.) is above a certain threshold).
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 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.
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.
Claims 2, 3, 6-9, 11, 12, 14-16, 18, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Wei et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0267797 A1) (hereinafter Wei).
Regarding claims 2, 11, and 18, as applied to claims 1, 10, and 17 above, Liu discloses the claimed invention except explicitly disclosing wherein the indication of the one or more serving cells on which the beam failure is detected comprises a plurality of bits corresponding to the plurality of serving cells for the terminal device, and wherein a bit of the plurality of bits corresponding to each of the plurality of serving cell indicates whether a beam failure is detected on a corresponding serving cell.
In analogous art, Wei discloses wherein the indication of the one or more serving cells on which the beam failure is detected comprises a plurality of bits corresponding to the plurality of serving cells for the terminal device, and wherein a bit of the plurality of bits corresponding to each of the plurality of serving cell indicates whether a beam failure is detected on a corresponding serving cell (Paragraph 0043 discloses the MAC CE for BFR (e.g., BFRQ MAC CE) may include at least one of a cell information field, a presence indicator field, and an RS Identity (ID) field. The cell information field may indicate information of a serving cell in which the BFR procedure is triggered or a beam failure event is detected, where the serving cell may be referred to as a “failed cell” for short. In some implementations, each cell information field in the MAC CE for BFR may explicitly indicate the cell ID of the failed cell. In other implementations, each cell information field may implicitly indicate the cell ID of the failed cell according to specific mapping rules (e.g., depending on a descending/ascending order of the cell IDs of all configured serving cells). For example, each serving cell configured to the UE may have a corresponding MAC-CE-based BFR configuration, and each cell information field may be, but not limited to, a 3-bit indicator, where “000” indicates an SCell having the smallest/largest cell ID value among all SCells configured with the MAC-CE-based BFR configurations, “001” indicates an SCell having the second smallest/largest cell ID value, and so on).
It 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 to incorporate using a 3-bit indicator to identify serving cells with beam failures, as described in Wei, with identifying beam failures on serving cells, as described in Liu, because doing so is combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. Combining using a 3-bit indicator to identify serving cells with beam failures of Wei with identifying beam failures on serving cells of Liu was within the ordinary ability of one of ordinary skill in the art based on the teachings of Wei.
Therefore, it 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 to combine the teachings of Liu and Wei to obtain the invention as specified in claims 2, 11, and 18.
Regarding claims 3, 12, and 19, as applied to claims 1, 10, and 17 above, Liu discloses the claimed invention except explicitly disclosing wherein the indication of availabilities of the at least one candidate beam for each of the one or more serving cells on which the beam failure is detected comprises a plurality of bits corresponding to the one or more serving cells, and wherein a bit of the plurality of bits corresponding to each of the one or more serving cell indicates whether the at least one candidate beam on a corresponding serving cell of the one or more serving cell is available or not.
In analogous art, Wei discloses wherein the indication of availabilities of the at least one candidate beam for each of the one or more serving cells on which the beam failure is detected comprises a plurality of bits corresponding to the one or more serving cells, and wherein a bit of the plurality of bits corresponding to each of the one or more serving cell indicates whether the at least one candidate beam on a corresponding serving cell of the one or more serving cell is available or not (Paragraphs 0043 and 0045 disclose the MAC CE for BFR (e.g., BFRQ MAC CE) may include at least one of a cell information field, a presence indicator field, and an RS Identity (ID) field. Each RS ID field may include an ID of a preferred RS for BFR, where the preferred RS ID may be associated with a new beam of a serving cell (in which the MAC-CE-based BFR procedure is triggered or a beam failure event is detected), which may be selected by the UE to recover the radio link. Each RS ID field may implicitly indicate the RS ID of the preferred RS for BFR. For example, each RS ID field may be, but is not limited to, a 4-bit indicator, where the 4-bit indicator may be set to “0000” to indicate an RS having the smallest/largest RS ID value among all RSs which are configured for the corresponding MAC-CE-based BFR procedure, and set to “0001” to indicate an RS having the second smallest/largest RS ID value, and so on).
It 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 to incorporate using a 4-bit indicator to identify serving cells with candidate beams, as described in Wei, with identifying serving cells with candidate beams, as described in Liu, because doing so is combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. Combining using a 4-bit indicator to identify serving cells with candidate beams of Wei with identifying serving cells with candidate beams of Liu was within the ordinary ability of one of ordinary skill in the art based on the teachings of Wei.
Therefore, it 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 to combine the teachings of Liu and Wei to obtain the invention as specified in claims 3, 12, and 19.
Regarding claim 6, as applied to claim 1 above, Liu discloses the claimed invention except explicitly disclosing wherein the terminal device is caused to transmit the beam failure report by: determining, based on amount of the beam failure report, whether a resource allocated for transmitting the beam failure report is sufficient; in response to a determination that the resource is sufficient, transmitting a full beam failure report to the network device; and in response to a determination that the resource is insufficient, transmitting a trunked beam failure report to the network device.
In analogous art, Wei discloses wherein the terminal device is caused to transmit the beam failure report by:
determining, based on amount of the beam failure report, whether a resource allocated for transmitting the beam failure report is sufficient (Paragraphs 0072-0074 disclose the UE may apply the Short Truncated BFRQ MAC CE format when the UL resource is limited/insufficient and the entire BFR information cannot be transmitted to the base station in a single BFRQ MAC CE (e.g., only parts of the serving cell IDs/preferred RS IDs/presence indicators are reported in the BFRQ MAC CE). The UE may apply the Long BFRQ MAC CE format to generate the BFRQ MAC CE when the size of the granted UL resource is enough for the UE to transmit the entire BFRQ information in a single BFRQ MAC CE. The UE may apply the Long Truncated BFRQ MAC CE format when the size of the granted UL resource is not enough for the UE to include the entire BFRQ information in a single BFRQ MAC CE);
in response to a determination that the resource is sufficient, transmitting a full beam failure report to the network device (Paragraph 0073 discloses the UE may apply the Long BFRQ MAC CE format to generate the BFRQ MAC CE when the size of the granted UL resource is enough for the UE to transmit the entire BFRQ information in a single BFRQ MAC CE); and
in response to a determination that the resource is insufficient, transmitting a trunked beam failure report to the network device (Figure 1 and paragraph 0042 disclose the UE (e.g., the MAC entity of the UE) may transmit a MAC CE for BFR to the base station (e.g., a serving gNB) during the MAC-CE-based BFR procedure, where the MAC CE for BFR may be transmitted through an Uplink (UL) resource of a Physical Uplink Shared Channel (PUSCH). In some implementations, the MAC CE for BFR may be identified by a header of a MAC sub-Protocol Data Unit (sub-PDU) with a dedicated Logical Channel Identity (LCID). For example, the dedicated LCID may correspond to a MAC CE type of a Beam Failure Recovery Request (BFRQ). In this manner, the MAC CE for BFR may be considered as a BFRQ MAC CE that contains a BFRQ for BFR. Paragraphs 0065, 0068, 0069, 0072, and 0074 disclose for a MAC-CE-based BFR procedure triggered for a corresponding serving cell (e.g., an SCell), the UE may apply one of the following BFRQ MAC CE formats according to certain criteria (e.g., the size of UL resources granted to the UE). Short Truncated BFRQ MAC CE format (fixed size); and Long Truncated BFRQ MAC CE format (variable size). The UE may apply the Short Truncated BFRQ MAC CE format when the UL resource is limited/insufficient and the entire BFR information cannot be transmitted to the base station in a single BFRQ MAC CE (e.g., only parts of the serving cell IDs/preferred RS IDs/presence indicators are reported in the BFRQ MAC CE). The UE may apply the Long Truncated BFRQ MAC CE format when the size of the granted UL resource is not enough for the UE to include the entire BFRQ information in a single BFRQ MAC CE).
It 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 to incorporate transmitting a long or truncated CE indicating a beam failure depending on the available resources, as described in Wei, with transmitting a CE indicating a beam failure, as described in Liu, because doing so is combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. Combining transmitting a long or truncated CE indicating a beam failure depending on the available resources of Wei with transmitting a CE indicating a beam failure of Liu was within the ordinary ability of one of ordinary skill in the art based on the teachings of Wei.
Therefore, it 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 to combine the teachings of Liu and Wei to obtain the invention as specified in claim 6.
Regarding claim 7, as applied to claim 6 above, Liu, as modified by Wei, further discloses wherein the terminal device is caused to transmit the trunked beam failure report by:
selecting at least one candidate beam of the one or more candidate beams (Paragraph 0074 discloses the report may comprise at least one of the following: an index of the serving cell, an indicator of the beam failure, an index of a beam having the beam failure, and one or more candidate beams available for a BFR procedure in the serving cell); and
transmitting an indication of the selected at least one candidate beam to the network device (Figure 1 and paragraphs 0071, 0072, and 0074 disclose in response to the detection of the beam failure, the terminal device can determine whether to transmit a report of the beam failure to a network node provisioning the serving cell to the terminal device, as shown in block 104. The predefined configuration may indicate the terminal device to transmit the report of the beam failure to the network node in response that the beam failure is detected in a SCell of the terminal device. The predefined configuration also may indicate the terminal device to transmit the report of the beam failure to the network node in response to the detection of the beam failure. The terminal device may transmit the report of the beam failure to the network node, in response to determining that the report is to be transmitted to the network node, as shown in block 106).
Regarding claim 8, as applied to claim 7 above, Liu, as modified by Wei, further discloses wherein a first candidate beam of the one or more candidate beams is associated with a secondary cell of the one or more serving cells (Paragraph 0070 discloses the serving cell may comprise a PCell or a SCell of the terminal device. Paragraph 0074 discloses the report may comprise at least one of the following: an index of the serving cell, an indicator of the beam failure, an index of a beam having the beam failure, and one or more candidate beams available for a BFR procedure in the serving cell), and
the terminal device is configured to select the first candidate beam as one of the at least one candidate beam if: a signal quality of the first candidate beam exceeds a threshold quality, the secondary cell has the lowest index in the one or more serving cells, the secondary cell has the highest index in the one or more serving cells, the secondary cell belongs to a same group with a primary cell for the terminal device, the secondary cell is associated with a plurality of further secondary cells, the secondary cell is configured with intra-band carriers, or a transmission has been scheduled on the secondary cell (Paragraph 0074 discloses the report may comprise at least one of the following: an index of the serving cell, an indicator of the beam failure, an index of a beam having the beam failure, and one or more candidate beams available for a BFR procedure in the serving cell. A candidate beam may comprise a beam of which the measured DL quality (for example, in terms of synchronization signal (SS)/CSI-RS-reference signal received power (RSRP), reference signal received quality (RSRQ), signal to interference plus noise ratio (SINR), etc.) is above a certain threshold).
Regarding claims 9 and 16, as applied to claims 6 and 10 above, Liu further discloses wherein the beam failure report is transmitted in one of the following: a radio resource control message, a medium access control, MAC, control element, CE, a physical uplink shared channel, or a physical uplink control channel (Figure 1 and paragraph 0074 disclose the report may be carried in a MAC CE or a RRC signaling message).
Liu does not explicitly disclose the beam failure report is trunked.
In analogous art, Wei discloses the beam failure report is trunked (Figure 1 and paragraph 0042 disclose the UE (e.g., the MAC entity of the UE) may transmit a MAC CE for BFR to the base station (e.g., a serving gNB) during the MAC-CE-based BFR procedure, where the MAC CE for BFR may be transmitted through an Uplink (UL) resource of a Physical Uplink Shared Channel (PUSCH). In some implementations, the MAC CE for BFR may be identified by a header of a MAC sub-Protocol Data Unit (sub-PDU) with a dedicated Logical Channel Identity (LCID). For example, the dedicated LCID may correspond to a MAC CE type of a Beam Failure Recovery Request (BFRQ). In this manner, the MAC CE for BFR may be considered as a BFRQ MAC CE that contains a BFRQ for BFR. Paragraphs 0065, 0068, 0069, 0072, and 0074 disclose for a MAC-CE-based BFR procedure triggered for a corresponding serving cell (e.g., an SCell), the UE may apply one of the following BFRQ MAC CE formats according to certain criteria (e.g., the size of UL resources granted to the UE). Short Truncated BFRQ MAC CE format (fixed size); and Long Truncated BFRQ MAC CE format (variable size). The UE may apply the Short Truncated BFRQ MAC CE format when the UL resource is limited/insufficient and the entire BFR information cannot be transmitted to the base station in a single BFRQ MAC CE (e.g., only parts of the serving cell IDs/preferred RS IDs/presence indicators are reported in the BFRQ MAC CE). the UE may apply the Long Truncated BFRQ MAC CE format when the size of the granted UL resource is not enough for the UE to include the entire BFRQ information in a single BFRQ MAC CE).
It 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 to incorporate transmitting a long or truncated CE indicating a beam failure depending on the available resources, as described in Wei, with transmitting a CE indicating a beam failure, as described in Liu, because doing so is combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. Combining transmitting a long or truncated CE indicating a beam failure depending on the available resources of Wei with transmitting a CE indicating a beam failure of Liu was within the ordinary ability of one of ordinary skill in the art based on the teachings of Wei.
Therefore, it 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 to combine the teachings of Liu and Wei to obtain the invention as specified in claims 9 and 16.
Regarding claim 14, as applied to claim 10 above, Liu discloses the claimed invention except explicitly disclosing wherein the beam failure report is a full beam failure report if the resource allocated for transmission of the beam failure report is sufficient for transmission of the full beam failure report; and wherein the beam failure report is a trunked beam failure report if the resource allocated for transmission of the beam failure report is insufficient for transmission of the full beam failure report.
In analogous art, Wei discloses wherein the beam failure report is a full beam failure report if the resource allocated for transmission of the beam failure report is sufficient for transmission of the full beam failure report (Paragraph 0073 discloses the UE may apply the Long BFRQ MAC CE format to generate the BFRQ MAC CE when the size of the granted UL resource is enough for the UE to transmit the entire BFRQ information in a single BFRQ MAC CE); and
wherein the beam failure report is a trunked beam failure report if the resource allocated for transmission of the beam failure report is insufficient for transmission of the full beam failure report (Figure 1 and paragraph 0042 disclose the UE (e.g., the MAC entity of the UE) may transmit a MAC CE for BFR to the base station (e.g., a serving gNB) during the MAC-CE-based BFR procedure, where the MAC CE for BFR may be transmitted through an Uplink (UL) resource of a Physical Uplink Shared Channel (PUSCH). In some implementations, the MAC CE for BFR may be identified by a header of a MAC sub-Protocol Data Unit (sub-PDU) with a dedicated Logical Channel Identity (LCID). For example, the dedicated LCID may correspond to a MAC CE type of a Beam Failure Recovery Request (BFRQ). In this manner, the MAC CE for BFR may be considered as a BFRQ MAC CE that contains a BFRQ for BFR. Paragraphs 0065, 0068, 0069, 0072, and 0074 disclose for a MAC-CE-based BFR procedure triggered for a corresponding serving cell (e.g., an SCell), the UE may apply one of the following BFRQ MAC CE formats according to certain criteria (e.g., the size of UL resources granted to the UE). Short Truncated BFRQ MAC CE format (fixed size); and Long Truncated BFRQ MAC CE format (variable size). The UE may apply the Short Truncated BFRQ MAC CE format when the UL resource is limited/insufficient and the entire BFR information cannot be transmitted to the base station in a single BFRQ MAC CE (e.g., only parts of the serving cell IDs/preferred RS IDs/presence indicators are reported in the BFRQ MAC CE). The UE may apply the Long Truncated BFRQ MAC CE format when the size of the granted UL resource is not enough for the UE to include the entire BFRQ information in a single BFRQ MAC CE).
It 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 to incorporate transmitting a long or truncated CE indicating a beam failure depending on the available resources, as described in Wei, with transmitting a CE indicating a beam failure, as described in Liu, because doing so is combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. Combining transmitting a long or truncated CE indicating a beam failure depending on the available resources of Wei with transmitting a CE indicating a beam failure of Liu was within the ordinary ability of one of ordinary skill in the art based on the teachings of Wei.
Therefore, it 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 to combine the teachings of Liu and Wei to obtain the invention as specified in claim 14.
Regarding claim 15, as applied to claim 14 above, Liu, as modified by Wei, further discloses wherein a first candidate beam of the at least one candidate beam is associated with a secondary cell of the one or more serving cells (Paragraph 0070 discloses the serving cell may comprise a PCell or a SCell of the terminal device. Paragraph 0074 discloses the report may comprise at least one of the following: an index of the serving cell, an indicator of the beam failure, an index of a beam having the beam failure, and one or more candidate beams available for a BFR procedure in the serving cell), and
the secondary cell is determined as one of the at least one serving cell if: the secondary cell has the lowest index in the one or more serving cells, the secondary cell has the highest index in the one or more serving cells, the secondary cell belongs to a same group with a primary cell for the terminal device, the secondary cell is associated with a plurality of further secondary cells, the secondary cell is configured with intra-band carriers, or a transmission has been scheduled on the secondary cell (Paragraph 0074 discloses the report may comprise at least one of the following: an index of the serving cell, an indicator of the beam failure, an index of a beam having the beam failure, and one or more candidate beams available for a BFR procedure in the serving cell. A candidate beam may comprise a beam of which the measured DL quality (for example, in terms of synchronization signal (SS)/CSI-RS-reference signal received power (RSRP), reference signal received quality (RSRQ), signal to interference plus noise ratio (SINR), etc.) is above a certain threshold).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 8/5/3036 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On pages 9 and 10 in the Remarks, Applicant argues that Liu does not disclose, "determine whether beam failure is detected on each of a plurality of serving cells of the terminal device", as recited in one form or another by each of the independent claims. In this regard, Lui discloses detecting a beam failure in a single serving cell of the UE with no teaching or suggestion of detecting beam failures of a plurality of serving cells of the terminal device, as recited by the independent claims.
In response to Applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which Applicant relies (i.e., detecting beam failures of a plurality of serving cells of the terminal device) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Applicant’s claims recite determining whether beam failure is detected on each of a plurality of serving cells rather than detecting beam failures of a plurality of serving cells. The wording of Applicant’s claims does not require detecting multiple beam failures, as Applicant’s arguments suggest. A detection of a failure on a single one of the serving cells is sufficient for Applicant’s claims as currently worded. As such, Liu discloses determine whether beam failure is detected on each of a plurality of serving cells of the terminal device (Figure 1 and paragraph 0070 disclose the terminal device may detect a beam failure in a serving cell of the terminal device, as shown in block 102. The serving cell may comprise a PCell or an SCell of the terminal device). Since Liu discloses detecting a beam failure on a serving cell of the terminal device and the terminal device has multiple serving cells (PCell and SCell) Liu discloses detecting failure of a serving cell of a device. Paragraphs 0005 and 0069 of Liu further supports the terminal device having multiple serving cells.
On pages 10 and 11 in the Remarks, Applicant argues that Liu does not disclose "in response to determining that beam failure is detected on one or more serving cells of the plurality of serving cells of the terminal device, transmit a beam failure report to a network device associated with the one or more serving cells of the plurality of serving cells." Liu fails to provide any teaching or suggestion that the beam failure report can include information on beam failures on multiple cells. Liu fails to teach or suggest that one aggregated beam failure report is determined and provided, in which the UE determines beam failure across each serving cell, and if beam failure is detected on one or more cells, sends one report that indicates all such cells.
In response to Applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which Applicant relies (i.e., that the beam failure report can include information on beam failures on multiple cells and that one aggregated beam failure report is determined and provided, in which the UE determines beam failure across each serving cell, and if beam failure is detected on one or more cells, sends one report that indicates all such cells) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Applicant’s claim wording recites that a beam failure report is transmitted to a network device in response to a beam failure detecting on a serving cell. There is no requirement in Applicant’s claim wording that multiple failures must be detected and reported in the same failure report. As such, Liu disclose in response to determining that beam failure is detected on one or more serving cells of the plurality of serving cells of the terminal device, transmit a beam failure report to a network device associated with the one or more serving cells of the plurality of serving cells (Figure 1 and paragraphs 0071, 0072, and 0074 disclose in response to the detection of the beam failure, the terminal device can determine whether to transmit a report of the beam failure to a network node provisioning the serving cell to the terminal device, as shown in block 104. The predefined configuration may indicate the terminal device to transmit the report of the beam failure to the network node in response that the beam failure is detected in a SCell of the terminal device. The predefined configuration also may indicate the terminal device to transmit the report of the beam failure to the network node in response to the detection of the beam failure. The terminal device may transmit the report of the beam failure to the network node, in response to determining that the report is to be transmitted to the network node, as shown in block 106). It is further noted that since the claim only describes transmitting a beam failure report and the contents of the report are not relied upon by any step of the method, the contents of the report are considered as merely non-functional descriptive material and do not carry patentable weight. See MPEP 2111.05 and 2112.01(III).
Consequently, in view of the above reasons and having addressed each of Applicant’s arguments, the previous rejection is maintained and made FINAL by the Examiner.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to MARK G. PANNELL whose telephone number is (303) 297-4245. The Examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 8:00 am to 3:00 pm (Mountain Time).
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, Rafael Perez-Gutierrez can be reached on (571) 272-7915. 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.
/Mark G. Pannell/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2642
Prosecution Insights