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 Amendment
Applicant’s amendment filed on July 29, 2026 has been entered. Claims 1-6 have been amended. No claims are canceled. No claims have been added. Claims 1-6 are still pending in this application, with claims 1 and 6 being independent.
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 (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 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 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Yerramalli et al. (U.S. PGPub 2023/0078537), hereinafter referred to as Yerramalli.
Regarding claim 1, Yerramalli discloses a terminal (UE; See Fig. 3, #115-d) comprising:
a receiver (receiver; See Fig. 6, #610) configured to receive a first signal to which a beam from a first wireless relay device (RIS #1; See Fig. 3, #310-a) is applied and a second signal to which a beam from a second wireless relay device (RIS #2; See Fig. 3, #310-b) is applied, the beam from the second wireless relay device being different from that for the first signal (base station 105-b may explicitly indicate grouping of CSI-RS resources within the CSI-RS resource set that may be concurrently used. For example, base station 105-b may configure eight CSI-RS resources divided between RIS 310-a and RIS 310-b. Base station 105-b may dedicate (e.g., configure) CSI-RS resources one through four (or any quantity or configuration of the CSI-RS resources) for RIS 310-a and CSI-RS resources five through eight for RIS 310-b. In some examples, base station 105-b may indicate (e.g., in control signaling configuring the CSI-RS resource set) that CSI-RS resources one through four (e.g., resources configured for reflecting CSI-RSs via RIS 310-a) are included in a first group and CSI-RS resources five through eight (e.g., resources configured for reflecting CSI-RSs via RIS 310-b) are included in a second group; See [0094]); and
a processor (The device 605 may also include a processor; See [0110]) configured to determine whether or not to simultaneously receive the first signal and the second signal based on a condition (Accordingly, UE 115-d may determine that CSI-RSs received in resources from different groups correspond to different beams that may be used concurrently, while CSI-RSs received in resources from the same group (e.g., the first group corresponding to RIS 310-a) correspond to beams that may not be used concurrently (e.g., reflected beams 315 that correspond to a same source beam 315 from base station 105-b); See [0094]),
wherein the condition is whether an identifier of control information that schedules the first signal and an identifier of control information that schedules the second signal are the same or different (The control signaling may include one or more of an indication of a threshold (e.g., maximum) rank of the CSI-RS resources, an indication of CSI-RS resources that can be concurrently scheduled (e.g., corresponding to concurrently reflected beams), or an indication of CSI-RS resources that cannot be concurrently scheduled, any of which may be referred to as a communication beam threshold. In some other examples, the base station may transmit control signaling indicating that a CSI-RS resource set corresponds to a group of RISs. For example, the base station may transmit, to a UE, an explicit indication of the resources corresponding to different RISs. Alternatively, the UE may implicitly determine the resources corresponding to different RISs based on MS signatures. The resource set may additionally include an indication that a UE may use CSI-RS resources concurrently (e.g., if multiple reflective elements or multiple RISs are used for CSI reporting); See [0047]).
Regarding claim 2, Yerramalli further discloses the terminal as claimed in claim 1, wherein the processor determines to simultaneously receive the first signal and the second signal in a case where an identifier of control information that schedules the first signal and an identifier of control information that schedules the second signal are same (The control signaling may include one or more of an indication of a threshold (e.g., maximum) rank of the CSI-RS resources, an indication of CSI-RS resources that can be concurrently scheduled (e.g., corresponding to concurrently reflected beams), or an indication of CSI-RS resources that cannot be concurrently scheduled, any of which may be referred to as a communication beam threshold. In some other examples, the base station may transmit control signaling indicating that a CSI-RS resource set corresponds to a group of RISs. For example, the base station may transmit, to a UE, an explicit indication of the resources corresponding to different RISs. Alternatively, the UE may implicitly determine the resources corresponding to different RISs based on MS signatures. The resource set may additionally include an indication that a UE may use CSI-RS resources concurrently (e.g., if multiple reflective elements or multiple RISs are used for CSI reporting), wherein using one of the identifiers is interpreted as being the same; See [0047]).
Regarding claim 3, Yerramalli further discloses the terminal as claimed in claim 1, wherein the processor determines to simultaneously receive the first signal and the second signal in a case where an identifier of control information that schedules the first signal and an identifier of control information that schedules the second signal are different (The control signaling may include one or more of an indication of a threshold (e.g., maximum) rank of the CSI-RS resources, an indication of CSI-RS resources that can be concurrently scheduled (e.g., corresponding to concurrently reflected beams), or an indication of CSI-RS resources that cannot be concurrently scheduled, any of which may be referred to as a communication beam threshold. In some other examples, the base station may transmit control signaling indicating that a CSI-RS resource set corresponds to a group of RISs. For example, the base station may transmit, to a UE, an explicit indication of the resources corresponding to different RISs. Alternatively, the UE may implicitly determine the resources corresponding to different RISs based on MS signatures. The resource set may additionally include an indication that a UE may use CSI-RS resources concurrently (e.g., if multiple reflective elements or multiple RISs are used for CSI reporting), wherein using two different identifiers is interpreted as such; See [0047]).
Regarding claim 4, Yerramalli further discloses the terminal as claimed in claim 1, wherein the processor determines to simultaneously receive the first signal and the second signal in a case where a time resource of the first signal partially or entirely overlaps with a time resource of the second signal (Accordingly, UE 115-d may determine that CSI-RSs received in resources from different groups correspond to different beams that may be used concurrently, while CSI-RSs received in resources from the same group (e.g., the first group corresponding to RIS 310-a) correspond to beams that may not be used concurrently (e.g., reflected beams 315 that correspond to a same source beam 315 from base station 105-b), implying there is overlap; See [0094]).
Regarding claim 6, Yerramalli discloses a communication method performed by a terminal (UE; See Fig. 3, #115-d), the communication method comprising:
receiving a first signal to which a beam from a first wireless relay device (RIS #1; See Fig. 3, #310-a) is applied and a second signal to which a beam from a second wireless relay device (RIS #2; See Fig. 3, #310-b) is applied, the beam from the second wireless relay device being different from that for the first signal (base station 105-b may explicitly indicate grouping of CSI-RS resources within the CSI-RS resource set that may be concurrently used. For example, base station 105-b may configure eight CSI-RS resources divided between RIS 310-a and RIS 310-b. Base station 105-b may dedicate (e.g., configure) CSI-RS resources one through four (or any quantity or configuration of the CSI-RS resources) for RIS 310-a and CSI-RS resources five through eight for RIS 310-b. In some examples, base station 105-b may indicate (e.g., in control signaling configuring the CSI-RS resource set) that CSI-RS resources one through four (e.g., resources configured for reflecting CSI-RSs via RIS 310-a) are included in a first group and CSI-RS resources five through eight (e.g., resources configured for reflecting CSI-RSs via RIS 310-b) are included in a second group; See Fig. 3, #315-b, #315-d and [0094]); and
determining whether or not to simultaneously receive the first signal and the second signal based on a condition (Accordingly, UE 115-d may determine that CSI-RSs received in resources from different groups correspond to different beams that may be used concurrently, while CSI-RSs received in resources from the same group (e.g., the first group corresponding to RIS 310-a) correspond to beams that may not be used concurrently (e.g., reflected beams 315 that correspond to a same source beam 315 from base station 105-b); See [0094]),
wherein the condition is whether an identifier of control information that schedules the first signal and an identifier of control information that schedules the second signal are the same or different (The control signaling may include one or more of an indication of a threshold (e.g., maximum) rank of the CSI-RS resources, an indication of CSI-RS resources that can be concurrently scheduled (e.g., corresponding to concurrently reflected beams), or an indication of CSI-RS resources that cannot be concurrently scheduled, any of which may be referred to as a communication beam threshold. In some other examples, the base station may transmit control signaling indicating that a CSI-RS resource set corresponds to a group of RISs. For example, the base station may transmit, to a UE, an explicit indication of the resources corresponding to different RISs. Alternatively, the UE may implicitly determine the resources corresponding to different RISs based on MS signatures. The resource set may additionally include an indication that a UE may use CSI-RS resources concurrently (e.g., if multiple reflective elements or multiple RISs are used for CSI reporting); See [0047]).
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.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yerramalli as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Takeda et al. (U.S. PGPub 2022/0232597), hereinafter referred to as Takeda.
Regarding claim 5, Yerramalli fails to teach the terminal as claimed in claim 1, wherein the control unit assumes out-of-order scheduling in a case where the first signal and the second signal are determined to be simultaneously received and where the first signal and the second signal are shared data channels.
Takeda teaches wherein the control unit assumes out-of-order scheduling in a case where the first signal and the second signal are determined to be simultaneously received and where the first signal and the second signal are shared data channels (Out-of-order scheduling, for purposes of this disclosure, may refer to the case where for any two HARQ process IDs in a given scheduled cell, a UE 110 is scheduled to receive a first PDSCH starting in symbol j by a PDCCH ending in symbol i, and the UE 110 is also scheduled to receive a second PDSCH starting earlier than the end of the first PDSCH with a PDCCH that ends later than symbol i. One or more additional components/subcomponents of the UE 110 may be configured to or may comprise means for determining data scheduling for the one of the Pcell or the PScell for simultaneous reception of PDSCHs and out-of-order PDSCHs or PUSCHs associated with the first PDCCH and the second PDCCH, based on the configuration information; See [0067 and [0104]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the apparatus of Yerramalli to include wherein the control unit assumes out-of-order scheduling in a case where the first signal and the second signal are determined to be simultaneously received and where the first signal and the second signal are shared data channels taught by Takeda in order to enhance cross-carrier scheduling with multi-transmission and reception points and dynamic spectrum sharing while minimizing latency.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed July 29, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On pages 5-7 of the Applicants’ Response, Applicants state that Yerramalli et al. (U.S. PGPub 2023/0078537), hereinafter referred to as Yerramalli fails to teach wherein the condition is whether an identifier of control information that schedules the first signal and an identifier of control information that schedules the second signal are the same or different (The control signaling may include one or more of an indication of a threshold (e.g., maximum) rank of the CSI-RS resources, an indication of CSI-RS resources that can be concurrently scheduled (e.g., corresponding to concurrently reflected beams), or an indication of CSI-RS resources that cannot be concurrently scheduled, any of which may be referred to as a communication beam threshold. In some other examples, the base station may transmit control signaling indicating that a CSI-RS resource set corresponds to a group of RISs. For example, the base station may transmit, to a UE, an explicit indication of the resources corresponding to different RISs. Alternatively, the UE may implicitly determine the resources corresponding to different RISs based on MS signatures. The resource set may additionally include an indication that a UE may use CSI-RS resources concurrently (e.g., if multiple reflective elements or multiple RISs are used for CSI reporting); See [0047]).
Upon further examination of the Yerramilli reference, Examiner has introduced the control signaling may include one or more of an indication of a threshold (e.g., maximum) rank of the CSI-RS resources, an indication of CSI-RS resources that can be concurrently scheduled (e.g., corresponding to concurrently reflected beams), or an indication of CSI-RS resources that cannot be concurrently scheduled, any of which may be referred to as a communication beam threshold. In some other examples, the base station may transmit control signaling indicating that a CSI-RS resource set corresponds to a group of RISs. For example, the base station may transmit, to a UE, an explicit indication of the resources corresponding to different RISs. Alternatively, the UE may implicitly determine the resources corresponding to different RISs based on MS signatures. The resource set may additionally include an indication that a UE may use CSI-RS resources concurrently (e.g., if multiple reflective elements or multiple RISs are used for CSI reporting) (See [0047]).
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.
Conclusion
Any response to this action should be mailed to:
Commissioner for Patents,
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
Hand delivered responses should be brought to:
Customer Service Window
Randolph Building
401 Dulany Street
Alexandria, VA 22314
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ASHLEY L SHIVERS whose telephone number is (571)270-3523. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00am-5:00pm.
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, Chirag Shah can be reached at 571-272-3144. 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.
/ASHLEY SHIVERS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2477 10/2/2026
Prosecution Insights