DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim 14 has been cancelled.
Claim 21 has been added.
Status of Claims
2. This Office Action is in response to the application filed on 06/05/20226. Claims 1 and through 21 are presently pending and are presented for examination.
3. 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.
Response to Arguments
4. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-13 and 15-21 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 § 112
5. 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 1, and 16 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 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, because it recites the limitation “if beam direction relevant information is not explicitly provided in the DCI 2_0, determining the beam direction relevant information from a transmission configuration indicator (TCI) state of a control resource set (CORESET) associated with a search space set for monitoring the DCI 2_0.” It is not clear what happens if the beam direction relevant information is explicitly encoded in the DCI 2_0. It is not clear whether “a search space set” in this limitation is the same as “a search space set” in the previous limitation. It also seems a step or limitation is missing between the two limitations in claim 1.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "beam direction…". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 2-13 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, because of their dependency from claim 1.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, for the same reasons stated for claim 1.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, for the same reasons stated for claim 16.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. 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 1-5, 8-10, 13, and 15-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shibaike et al. (US 2023/0254893 A1) in view of Myung et al. (US 2023/0300881 A1).
For claim 1 Shibaike teaches a wireless communication method by a user equipment (UE) (paragraph 11 “the channel occupancy time (COT) sharing is based on the same beam (directivity), and if a plurality of beams with different directions are used, it is necessary that the gNB and the UE have a common recognition regarding the beam (directivity) applied to Directional LBT/CCA of a downlink (DL)”), comprising:
being configured by a base station to detect a downlink control information (DCI) 2_0 (paragraph 99 “in the case of DCI, a field for transmitting beam information may be added to DCI format 2_0 which is a slot format notification for a group of a plurality of UEs 200”); and
determining indication information of the DCI 2_0 according to first information (paragraph 99 “in the case of DCI, a field for transmitting beam information may be added to DCI format 2_0 which is a slot format notification (indicating information) for a group of a plurality of UEs 200”),
Shibaike teaches wherein the indication information comprises a resource block (RB) set availability (paragraphs 125-127 “DCI format 2_0 include available RB set indicator”) and Shibaike does not explicitly teach a search space set group switching;
However, Myung teaches DCI format 2_0 may include search space group switching flag (Myung: paragraphs 363-364).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to use the teachings of Myung in the DCI 2_0 of Shibaike to configure or design a DCI 2-0 to indicate both RB set availability and search space group switching to address a group of UEs by enabling search space group switching flag (Myung: paragraphs 363-364).
wherein the method further comprises (further configurations):
Shibaike does not explicitly teach if beam direction relevant information is not explicitly provided in the DCI 2 0, determining the beam direction relevant information from a transmission configuration indicator (TCI) state of a control resource set (CORESET) associated with a search space set for monitoring the DCI 2 0.
However, Myung teaches when search space sets are configured in a specific BWP, if the UE receives a DL signal/channel in a specific beam direction or beam group direction (e.g., a CORESET having a specific TCI state), the UE may monitor only a search space set associated (e.g., in the QCL relationship) with the beam direction or beam group direction of the received DL signal/channel (Myung: paragraphs 369-371).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to use the teachings of Myung in the DCI 2_0 of Shibaike to determine beam direction alternative when the beam direction is not explicitly not included in the DCI 2-0 by design or by configuration (Myung: paragraphs 369-371).
For claim 2 Shibaike teaches the method, wherein the first information comprises the beam direction relevant information, and the beam direction relevant information comprises one or more beams or one or more beam indexes, where the one or more beam indexes correspond to one or more reference signals with indexes (paragraph 204 “a new reference signal (RS) and/or beam indicating a beam direction used in DL Directional-LBT may be defined. The RS and/or beam index for DL Directional-LBT is predefined and configured to correspond to one or more beam directions (specifically, SSB/CSI-RS) used for transmission in DL”).
For claim 3 Shibaike teaches the method, wherein the first information is included in the DCI 2_0 or the first information is obtained through the DCI 2_0 (paragraph 99 “in the case of DCI, a field for transmitting beam information may be added to DCI format 2_0 which is a slot format notification for a group of a plurality of UEs 200”).
For claim 4 Shibaike teaches the method, wherein the indication information comprises a slot format indication (SFI), or a channel occupancy time (COT) remaining duration (paragraph 99 “in the case of DCI, a field for transmitting beam information may be added to DCI format 2_0 which is a slot format notification (SFI) for a group of a plurality of UEs 200”, Fig. 12B “DCI indicates COT sharing”).
For claim 5 Shibaike teaches the method of claim 4, wherein each beam index corresponds to a reference signal index, and each beam index corresponding to the reference signal with index comprises that a transmission within the COT remaining duration is quasi-co-located (QCLed) with the reference signal with index (paragraph 156 “calculate based on SSB-based Directional LBT/CCA parameters (QCL-type D related) according to the configuration of CSI-RS (e.g., the maximum CSI-RS beam number (index), or the maximum CSI-RS beam number with QCL type D associated with SSB)”) or
For claim 9 Shibaike teaches the method of claim 2, wherein the beam direction relevant information is used for more than one cell (paragraph 264 “the base station accommodates a plurality of cell”).
For claim 10 Shibaike teaches the method, wherein when the UE has an uplink transmission within a gNB COT, the UE shares the gNB COT for the uplink transmission (paragraphs 5 and 11 “sharing of a channel occupancy time (COT) between a radio base station (gNB) and a terminal (User Equipment, UE)”).
For claim 13 Shibaike teaches the method, wherein a physical layer of the UE is configured by a higher layer of the UE to receive a downlink transmission in one or more first symbols (paragraphs 98-99 “The beam information may be transmitted by downlink control information (DCI) or may be transmitted by using upper layer (e.g., RRC) signaling”).
For claim 15 Shibaike in view of Myung teaches a wireless communication method by a base station (as discussed in claim 1), comprising:
configuring a user equipment (UE) to detect downlink control information (DCI) 2_0 (as discussed in claim 1); and
controlling the UE to determine an indication information of the DCI 2_0 according to (as discussed in claim 1);
wherein the indication information comprises a resource block (RB) set availability and a search space group switching (as discussed in claim 1).
For claim 16 Shibaike in view of Myung teaches a user equipment (UE) (Fig. 13 “UE”), comprising:
a memory (Shibaike: Fig. 13 “memory 1002”);
a transceiver (Shibaike: Fig. 13 “processor 1001”); and
a processor coupled to the memory and the transceiver (Shibaike: Fig. 13 “processor 1001 coupled to memory 1002”);
wherein the processor (Fig. 13 “processor 1001”) is configured to perform:
being configured by a base station to detect a downlink control information (DCI) 2_0 (as discussed in claim 1); and
determining (as discussed in claim 1);
wherein the indication information comprises a resource block (RB) set availability and a search space set group switching (as discussed in claim 1);
wherein the method further comprises:
if beam direction relevant information is not explicitly provided in the DCI 2 0, determining the beam direction relevant information from a transmission configuration indicator (TCI) state of a control resource set (CORESET) associated with a search space set for monitoring the DCI 2_0 (as discussed in claim 1).
For claim 17 Shibaike in view of Myung teaches the UE of claim 16, wherein the first information comprises the beam direction relevant information, and the beam direction relevant information comprises one or more beams or one or more beam indexes, where the one or more beam indexes correspond to one or more reference signals with indexes (as discussed in claims 1 and 2); or
the first information is included in the DCI 2_0 (as discussed in claims 1and 2) or
the first information is obtained through the DCI 2_0 (as discussed in claims 1and 2).
For claim 18 Shibaike in view of Myung teaches a base station (Fig. 13 “base station”), comprising:
a memory (Shibaike: Fig. 13 “memory 1002”);
a transceiver (Shibaike: Fig. 13 “communication device 1004”) ; and
a processor coupled to the memory and the transceiver (Shibaike: Fig. 13 “processor 1001 coupled to memory 1002”);
wherein the processor is configured (Fig. 13 “processor 1001”) to perform the method of claim 15 (as discussed in claims 1 and 15).
For claim 19 Shibaike in view of Myung teaches a chip, comprising:
a processor, configured to call and run a computer program stored in a memory, to cause a device in which the chip is installed to execute the method of claim 1 (Shibaike: paragraph 238 “the processor 1001 performs operation by loading predetermined software (program) on hardware such as the processor 1001 and the memory 1002, and realizes various functions of the device by controlling communication via the communication device 1004, and controlling at least one of reading and writing of data on the memory 1002 and the storage 1003” and as discussed in claim 1).
For claim 20 Shibaike in view of Myung teaches a chip, comprising:
a processor, configured to call and run a computer program stored in a memory, to cause a device in which the chip is installed to execute the method of claim 15 (Shibaike: paragraph 238 “the processor 1001 performs operation by loading predetermined software (program) on hardware such as the processor 1001 and the memory 1002, and realizes various functions of the device by controlling communication via the communication device 1004, and controlling at least one of reading and writing of data on the memory 1002 and the storage 1003” and as discussed in claims 1 and 15).
For claim 21 Shibaike in view of Myung teaches the method of claim 15, wherein the first information comprises the beam direction relevant information, and the beam direction relevant information comprises one or more beams or one or more beam indexes, where the one or more beam indexes correspond to one or more reference signals with indexes (as discussed in claim 17).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
7. 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 6-8 and 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shibaike et al. (US 2023/0254893 A1) in view of Keating et al. (US 2022/0322274 A1).
For claim 6 Shibaike does not explicitly teach the method of claim 2, wherein the DCI 2_0 comprises N bits to indicate the beam direction relevant information for N beams, where N is an integer.
However, Keating teaches there may be 3 bits in DCI to indicate one of the active TCI state indicating a reference beam direction for PRS (Keating: paragraph 86 and Fig. 8).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of claimed invention to use the teachings of Keating in the DCI format of Shibaike in order to design an N bits DCI for steering a beam to a neighbor cell with respect a reference beam (Keating: paragraph 86).
For claim 7 Shibaike in view of Keating teaches the method of claim 6, wherein the N bits have one to one mapping with the N beams, where the N beams is represented by N reference signal indexes (as discussed in claim 6).
For claim 8 Shibaike in view of Keating teaches the method of claim 7, wherein a first bit value of the N bits indicates (as discussed in claim 6) that a corresponding
beam is considered together with the COT a channel occupancy time (COT)remaining duration and [/or] the RB set availability, [and/] or a second bit value of the N bits indicates that another corresponding beam is not considered together with the COT remaining duration and/or the RB set availability (Shibaike: paragraph 98 “DCI indicates COT” and paragraphs 114-115 “QCL as the synchronization signal block or the reference signal indicated by the DCI in the channel occupancy time (COT)”, paragraph 124 “The COT period (CO configuration ( available LBT sub-band, COT length)) can be indicated to the group of UEs 200 using DCI format 2_0”, and paragraphs 126-127 “availableRB-SetPerCell… Available RB set Indicator 1, Available RB set Indicator 2, ... , Available RB set Indicator N1”).
For claim 11 Shibaike in view of Keating teaches the method of claim 10, wherein the UE shares the gNB COT for the uplink transmission if the UE is indicated with a scheduling request indicator (SRI) for the uplink transmission and the SRI is matched with the beam direction relevant information for a channel occupancy time (COT) (Shibaike: paragraph 11 “the COT sharing is based on the same beam (directivity)”, paragraph 87 “Channel occupancy time (COT)" may mean the total time during which a gNB/UE that shares channel occupancy and an arbitrary gNB/UE perform transmission on a channel after the gNB/UE performs a corresponding channel access procedure”, paragraph 98 “DCI indicates COT” and paragraphs 114-115 “QCL as the synchronization signal block or the reference signal indicated by the DCI in the channel occupancy time (COT)”, paragraph 124 “The COT period (CO configuration ( available LBT sub-band, COT length)) can be indicated to the group of UEs 200 using DCI format 2_0”, and paragraphs 126-127 “availableRB-SetPerCell… Available RB set Indicator 1, Available RB set Indicator 2, ... , Available RB set Indicator N1”).
For claim 12 Shibaike in view of Keating teaches the method of claim 10, wherein the UE shares the gNB COT if the UE is indicated with a transmission configuration indicator (TCI) state for the uplink transmission and the TCI state is matched with the beam direction relevant information for a channel occupancy time (COT) (Shibaike: paragraph 11 “the COT sharing is based on the same beam (directivity)”, paragraph 87 “"Channel occupancy time (COT)" may mean the total time during which a gNB/UE that shares channel occupancy and an arbitrary gNB/UE perform transmission on a channel after the gNB/UE performs a corresponding channel access procedure”, paragraph 98 “DCI indicates COT” and paragraphs 114-115 “QCL as the synchronization signal block or the reference signal indicated by the DCI in the channel occupancy time (COT)”, paragraph 124 “The COT period (CO configuration ( available LBT sub-band, COT length)) can be indicated to the group of UEs 200 using DCI format 2_0”, and paragraphs 126-127 “availableRB-SetPerCell… Available RB set Indicator 1, Available RB set Indicator 2, ... , Available RB set Indicator N1”).
For claim 14 Shibaike in view of Keating teaches the method, wherein if the beam direction relevant information is not explicitly provided in the DCI 2 0, the UE determines the beam direction relevant information from the TCI state of a control resource set (CORESET) associated with search space set for monitoring the DCI 2 0 (Keating: paragraph 86 “the terminal device 110-1 may be configured with transmission configuration indication (TCI) state which is associated with one RS-ID (SSB or CSI-RS) for spatial quasi-colocation relation via radio resource control signaling. There may be 3 bits in DCI to indicate one of the active TCI state indicating a reference beam direction for PRS. From the reference beam, angle information is given for steering to a neighbor cell”).
Conclusion
8. 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.
9. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to David M OVEISSI whose telephone number is (571)270-3127. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8Am-5PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jeffrey Rutkowski can be reached at (571) 270 - 1215. 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.
/MANSOUR OVEISSI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2415
Prosecution Insights