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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claims 20-40 are presented for examination.
Information Disclosure Statement
The IDS filed on 3/4/2025 are considered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 31-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 31 recites the limitation "a user equipment (UE)" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Is this the same UE as in the preamble?
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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 21-23, 25-26, 28-29, 31-33, 35-36 and 38-39 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsumura et al (Matsumura), US 2022/0217647, in view of obviousness.
As per claim 21, Matsumura teaches the invention including an apparatus comprising processing circuitry configured to:
Determine a user equipment (UE) supports multiple Downlink Control Information (multi-DCI) based multiple transmission and reception point (multi-TRP) operations with a network (pp. 0041, 0068, 0144-0156);
Determine a capability of the UE in multi-DCI multi-TRP operation related to overlapping physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) transmissions from the network (pp. 0144-0156); and
Receive an information element (IE) indicating the capability of the UE related to the overlapping PDSCH transmissions (pp. 0156, 0158).
Matsumura does not teach to generate, for transmission to the network, an information element (IE) indicating the capability of the UE related to the overlapping PDSCH transmissions. However, since the apparatus is receiving the UE capability report with indication of the UE related to the overlapping PDSCH transmission from the UE, it would have been obvious for the apparatus to generate such information from the report to be transmitted to other entities in the network in the same or different transmission format. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to combine the teaching of Matsumura and further forward the UE capability report including an information element (IE) indicating the capability of the UE related to the overlapping PDSCH transmissions to the network, either in the same format received or a different generated transmission format.
As per claim 22, Matsumura teaches the invention as claimed in claim 21. Matsumura further teaches wherein the capability relates to PDSCH transmission that overlap in time but do not overlap in frequency (pp. 0156, 0158: various indication of overlapping and non-overlapping in time or frequency).
As per claim 23, Matsumura teaches the invention as claimed in claim 22. Matsumura further teaches wherein the PDSCH transmission fully overlap in time or partially overlap in time (pp. 0156, 0158: various indication of fully overlapping or partially overlapping in time).
As per claim 25, Matsumura teaches the invention as claimed in claim 21. Matsumura further teaches wherein the capability relates to PDSCH transmission that fully overlap in frequency, wherein the overlap in frequency comprises a first PDSCH transmission of a first set of PDSCH transmission in a first resource element (RE) fully overlapping with a second PDSCH transmission of a second set of PDSCH transmission in a second RE (pp. 0043-0045, 0068: Non-Coherent Joint Transmission results in RE fully or partially overlapping).
As per claim 26, Matsumura teaches the invention as claimed in claim 25. Matsumura further teaches wherein the first set of PDSCH transmission fully overlaps with the second set of PDSCH transmission in every RE (pp. 0043-0045, 0068: Non-Coherent Joint Transmission results in RE fully or partially overlapping).
As per claim 28, Matsumura teaches the invention as claimed in claim 21. Matsumura further teaches wherein the capability relates to PDSCH transmissions that partially overlap in frequency, wherein the overlap in frequency comprises a first PDSCH transmission of a first set of PDSCH transmissions in a first resource element (RE) partially overlapping with a second transmission of a second set of PDSCH transmissions in a second RE (pp. 0043-0045, 0068: Non-Coherent Joint Transmission results in RE fully or partially overlapping).
As per claim 29, Matsumura teaches the invention as claimed in claim 28. Matsumura further teaches wherein at least one of the first set of PDSCH transmission does not overlaps in frequency with any of the second set of PDSCH transmission (pp. 0043-0045, 0059, 0068: may solely overlap in time, not frequency).
As per claim 31, Matsumura teaches the invention including a user equipment (UE), comprising:
Transceiver circuitry configured to communicate with a network (figures 8 and 9; pp. 0221-0222); and
Processing circuitry communicatively coupled to the transceiver circuitry (figure 8 and 9) and configured to:
Determine a user equipment (UE) supports multiple Downlink Control Information (multi-DCI) based multiple transmission and reception point (multi-TRP) operations with a network (pp. 0041, 0068, 0144-0156);
Determine a capability of the UE in multi-DCI multi-TRP operation related to overlapping physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) transmissions from the network (pp. 0144-0156); and
Receive an information element (IE) indicating the capability of the UE related to the overlapping PDSCH transmissions (pp. 0156, 0158).
Matsumura does not teach to generate, for transmission to the network, an information element (IE) indicating the capability of the UE related to the overlapping PDSCH transmissions. However, since the apparatus is receiving the UE capability report with indication of the UE related to the overlapping PDSCH transmission from the UE, it would have been obvious for the apparatus to generate such information from the report to be transmitted to other entities in the network in the same or different transmission format. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to combine the teaching of Matsumura and further forward the UE capability report including an information element (IE) indicating the capability of the UE related to the overlapping PDSCH transmissions to the network, either in the same format received or a different generated transmission format.
As per claim 32, Matsumura teaches the invention as claimed in claim 31. Matsumura further teaches wherein the capability relates to PDSCH transmission that overlap in time but do not overlap in frequency (pp. 0156, 0158: various indication of overlapping and non-overlapping in time or frequency).
As per claim 33, Matsumura teaches the invention as claimed in claim 32. Matsumura further teaches wherein the PDSCH transmission fully overlap in time or partially overlap in time (pp. 0156, 0158: various indication of fully overlapping or partially overlapping in time).
As per claim 35, Matsumura teaches the invention as claimed in claim 31. Matsumura further teaches wherein the capability relates to PDSCH transmission that fully overlap in frequency, wherein the overlap in frequency comprises a first PDSCH transmission of a first set of PDSCH transmission in a first resource element (RE) fully overlapping with a second PDSCH transmission of a second set of PDSCH transmission in a second RE (pp. 0043-0045, 0068: Non-Coherent Joint Transmission results in RE fully or partially overlapping).
As per claim 36, Matsumura teaches the invention as claimed in claim 35. Matsumura further teaches wherein the first set of PDSCH transmission fully overlaps with the second set of PDSCH transmission in every RE (pp. 0043-0045, 0068: Non-Coherent Joint Transmission results in RE fully or partially overlapping).
As per claim 38, Matsumura teaches the invention as claimed in claim 31. Matsumura further teaches wherein the capability relates to PDSCH transmissions that partially overlap in frequency, wherein the overlap in frequency comprises a first PDSCH transmission of a first set of PDSCH transmissions in a first resource element (RE) partially overlapping with a second transmission of a second set of PDSCH transmissions in a second RE (pp. 0043-0045, 0068: Non-Coherent Joint Transmission results in RE fully or partially overlapping).
As per claim 39, Matsumura teaches the invention as claimed in claim 38. Matsumura further teaches wherein at least one of the first set of PDSCH transmission does not overlaps in frequency with any of the second set of PDSCH transmission (pp. 0043-0045, 0059, 0068: may solely overlap in time, not frequency).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 24, 27, 30 are 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.
Claims 34, 37, 40 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Sun et al, EP 4059179B1
Matsumura et al, US 2023/0209569
Matsumura et al, US 2023/0125906
Mondal et al, US 2022/0085939
Khoshnevisan et al, CN 115428556A
A shortened statutory period for reply to this Office action is set to expire Three MONTHS from the mailing date of this action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KENNY S LIN whose telephone number is (571) 272-3968.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Noel Beharry can be reached on 571-270-5630. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
KENNY S. LIN
Examiner
Art Unit 2416
/Kenny S Lin/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2416
May 7, 2026
Prosecution Insights