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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-2, 4, 6-7, 9-11, 13, 15-17, 19 and 21 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 9, 10, 11, 13, 17 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiao et al. (WO 2021/108817 A2, Xiao hereafter) in view of Non-Patent Literature (Cited and submitted with IDS filed March 22, 2024, "Channel access mechanism for 60 GHz unlicensed spectrum," Proceedings of the 3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #104bis-e, Sony, R1-2103299, April 12, 2021, NPL hereafter), in view of Zhang et al. (US 2024/0121797) and further in view of Li et al. (US 2023/0231637, Li hereafter).
RE claims 1, 9 and 10, Xiao discloses a method, apparatus and non-transitory computer-readable storage medium for using an unlicensed channel (Lines 29-30 on page 11 discloses Listen Before Talk (LBT) is performed by a communicating device transmitting in unlicensed spectrum), performed by a base station device or user equipment; comprising a processor and a memory (Figures 25-26); the memory being configured to store a computer program; and the processor being configured to execute the computer program so as to implement performing a listen before talk (LBT) detection on at least one sensing beam (Lines 29-30 on page 11 discloses Listen Before Talk (LBT) is performed by a communicating device transmitting in unlicensed spectrum. Page 23 lines 30-35 further discloses directional sensing. Figure 22 step 2202, sensing the channel for a set of transmit beams with a sensing beam.) and using, after an idle unlicensed channel is detected on any sensing beam, the unlicensed channel according to the channel occupy time corresponding to the sensing beam (Steps 2204-2208, if the channel is determined clear, a COT associated with the sensing beam is started and transmissions are performed with a subset of beams associated with the sensing beam), wherein the method further comprises using, after the idle unlicensed channel is detected on any sensing beam, at least two transmission beams to transmit data on the unlicensed channel (Figure 22, steps 2204-2208, if the channel is determined clear, a COT associated with the sensing beam is started and transmissions are performed with a subset of beams associated with the sensing beam. Page 39 lines 8-17 further discloses “The sensing beam corresponds to a set of transmit beams, the set of transmit beams providing coverage of the sensing beam. The coverage of the set of transmit beams may be about equal to the coverage of the sensing beam or the coverage of the set of transmit beams may be greater than that of the sensing beam.“ Both figure 22 and 12 disclose the use of multiple beams, and thus at least 2, for transmission upon determining via LBT with the sensing beam that the channel in that direction is clear ).
Xiao does not explicitly disclose wherein each sensing beam corresponds to a channel occupy time; wherein the at least two transmission beams being associated with the sensing beam comprises: a quasi co-location of each transmission beam in the at least two transmission beams and a quasi co-location of the sensing beam meeting a second set relationship, wherein the second set relationship comprises: a spatial relationship between each of the at least two transmission beams and the sensing beam being associated with a same reference signal.
However, NPL teaches wherein each sensing beam corresponds to a channel occupy time (End of section 2.6 on page 5 “If per-beam LBT sensing is introduced, per-beam COT would be defined”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the method, apparatus and medium of Xiao with the teachings of NPL since such a modification would have involved the mere application of a known technique to a piece of prior art ready for improvement.
Where a claimed improvement on a device or apparatus is no more than "the simple substitution of one known element for another or the mere application of a known technique to a piece of prior art ready for improvement," the claim is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a). Ex Parte Smith, 83 USPQ.2d 1509, 1518-19 (BPAI, 2007) (citing KSR v. Teleflex, 127 S.Ct. 1727, 1740, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007)).
Xiao in view of NPL does not explicitly disclose wherein the at least two transmission beams being associated with the sensing beam comprises: a quasi co-location of each transmission beam in the at least two transmission beams and a quasi co-location of the sensing beam meeting a second set relationship, wherein the second set relationship comprises: a spatial relationship between each of the at least two transmission beams and the sensing beam being associated with a same reference signal.
However, Zhang teaches wherein the at least two transmission beams being associated with the sensing beam comprises: a quasi co-location of each transmission beam in the at least two transmission beams and a quasi co-location of the sensing beam meeting a second set relationship (Paragraphs 49-51 teaches a base station builds a table for directional LBT. “For example, each row of the table may include: (1) a transmission configuration indicator (TCI) state which indicates quasi co-location (QCL) information corresponding to the sensing beam; and (2) one or more TCI states which indicate QCL information corresponding to the one or more DL transmission beams which are within the spatial region of the CO initiated by the BS 102 after completing a directional LBT procedure with the sensing beam. It should be noted that according to the QCL information corresponding to a beam, the UE can identify the beam.” Paragraph 52 further teaches the BS may further transmit this table to the UE to inform it of the beam relationships.)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the method, apparatus and medium of Xiao in view of NPL with the teachings of Zhang since such a modification would have involved the mere application of a known technique to a piece of prior art ready for improvement.
Where a claimed improvement on a device or apparatus is no more than "the simple substitution of one known element for another or the mere application of a known technique to a piece of prior art ready for improvement," the claim is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a). Ex Parte Smith, 83 USPQ.2d 1509, 1518-19 (BPAI, 2007) (citing KSR v. Teleflex, 127 S.Ct. 1727, 1740, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007)).
Xiao in view of NPL and further in view of Zhang does not explicitly disclose wherein the second set relationship comprises: a spatial relationship between each of the at least two transmission beams and the sensing beam being associated with a same reference signal.
However, Li teaches wherein the second set relationship comprises: a spatial relationship between each of the at least two transmission beams and the sensing beam being associated with a same reference signal (Paragraph 85).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the method, apparatus and medium of Xiao in view of NPL and further in view of Zhang with the teachings of NPL since such a modification would have involved the mere application of a known technique to a piece of prior art ready for improvement. In this case, Zhang already provides for a teaching of a spatial relationship between the sensing beam and plural downlink transmission beams. Li further teaches that the UE may further receives at least one reference signal that is associated with the sensing signal/beam.
Where a claimed improvement on a device or apparatus is no more than "the simple substitution of one known element for another or the mere application of a known technique to a piece of prior art ready for improvement," the claim is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103(a). Ex Parte Smith, 83 USPQ.2d 1509, 1518-19 (BPAI, 2007) (citing KSR v. Teleflex, 127 S.Ct. 1727, 1740, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007)).
RE claims 2, 11 and 17, Xiao in view of NPL, in view of Zhang and further in view of Li discloses the method according to claim 1, the communication apparatus according to claim 9 and non-transitory computer-readable storage medium according to claim 10 as set forth above. Note that Xiao further discloses using, after the idle unlicensed channel is detected on any sensing beam, the sensing beam as a transmission beam to transmit data on the unlicensed channel (The disclosure of page 24, lines 31-33, indicates that it is at least known in the art that the sensing beam and the transmission beam used may be the same, and thus a threshold for sensing can be set accordingly. Xiao does not explicitly disqualify this possibility when disclosing directional sensing. Xiao only contemplates how to set respective sensing thresholds).
RE claims 4, 13 and 19, Xiao in view of NPL, in view of Zhang and further in view of Li discloses the method according to claim 3, the communication apparatus according to claim 12 and non-transitory computer-readable storage medium according to claim 18 as set forth above. Note that Xiao further discloses wherein the at least two transmission beams being associated with the sensing beam comprises: a beam direction of each transmission beam in the at least two transmission beams and a beam direction of the sensing beam meeting a first set relationship (Figure 22 step 2202, sensing the channel for a set of transmit beams with a sensing beam. Page 39 lines 8-17 further discloses “The sensing beam corresponds to a set of transmit beams, the set of transmit beams providing coverage of the sensing beam. The coverage of the set of transmit beams may be about equal to the coverage of the sensing beam or the coverage of the set of transmit beams may be greater than that of the sensing beam.“).
Claims 6, 7, 15, 16 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiao in view of NPL , in view of Zhang, in view of Li and further in view of Hakola et al. US 2022/0232546, Hakola hereafter).
RE claims 6, 15 and 21, Xiao in view of NPL, in view of Zhang and further in view of Li discloses the method according to claim 1, the communication apparatus according to claim 9 and non-transitory computer-readable storage medium according to claim 10 as set forth above.
Xiao in view of NPL, in view of Zhang and further in view of Li does not explicitly disclose sharing the channel occupy time corresponding to the sensing beam by a plurality of transmission beams for transmitting data during switching of the transmission beams in a process of transmitting the data.
However, Hakola teaches sharing the channel occupy time corresponding to the sensing beam by a plurality of transmission beams for transmitting data during switching of the transmission beams in a process of transmitting the data (Paragraphs 277 309-314 teaches a gNB may request a UE to switch to a new beam pair. If the new beam is one of the at least one DL beam used for transmission within the COT, the apparatus switches to the new beam within the COT.)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the method, apparatus and medium of Xiao in view of NPL, in view of Zhang and further in view of Li with the teachings of Hakola in order to improve beam management.
RE claims 7 and 16, Xiao in view of NPL, in view of Zhang, in view of Li and further in view of Hakola discloses the method according to claim 6 and the communication apparatus according to claim 15 as set forth above. Note that Hakola further teaches wherein sharing the channel occupy time corresponding to the sensing beam by the plurality of transmission beams for transmitting the data during switching of the transmission beams in the process of transmitting the data comprises: consuming the channel occupy time corresponding to the sensing beam by data transmission duration on each transmission beam for transmitting the data (Paragraphs 277 and 309-314 teaches a gNB may request a UE to switch to a new beam pair. If the new beam is one of the at least one DL beam used for transmission within the COT, the apparatus switches to the new beam within the COT. If the switch occurs within the COT, then the current COT uses the new beam pair and then uses the same in the next COT)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the method, apparatus and medium of Xiao in view of NPL, in view of Zhang and further in view of Li with the teachings of Hakola in order to improve beam management.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to James P Duffy whose telephone number is (571)270-7516. The examiner can normally be reached Tuesday-Friday, 9am-6pm EST.
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, Huy D Vu can be reached at 571-272-3155. 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.
/James P Duffy/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2461
Prosecution Insights