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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
2. Claims 1, 7, 9 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Abedini et al. (US 2022/0053486, hereinafter Abedini).
Regarding claim 1, Abedini discloses a method comprising: receiving, by a computing device (Fig. 9; para 0222, a relay unit), one or more parameters (para 0222-0232; a relay unit receiving parameters) indicating: a first list of transmission configuration indication (TCI) states for a control link of the computing device (Fig. 9; para 0142-0145; 0184-0185; A second parameter may be a fronthaul-link TCI state index. The range of values of the fronthaul-link TCI state index may be 0, . . . , g−1. The variable g is an integer. By way of example, a downlink fronthaul-link TCI state index value, if indicated, may be an index to one of up to a given number, g, of MT unit activated TCI states. For example, there may be up to 8 (g=8) TCI state index values. In some examples, 3 bits may be used to represent a downlink fronthaul-link TCI state index value); and
a second list of TCI states for a data link of the computing device (Fig. 9; para 0142-0145; 0185; A third parameter may be an access-link TCI state index. The range of values of the access-link TCI state index may be 0, . . . , h−1. The variable h is an integer. By way of example, an access-link TCI state index value, if indicated, may be an index to one of up to a given number, h, of access-link TCI states activated for an RU of the repeater device (e.g., activated via MAC-CE). For example, there may be up to 8 (h=8) access-link TCI state index values. In some examples, 3 bits may be used to represent access-link TCI state index value);
receiving an indication of a first TCI state in the first list of TCI states for the control link (para 0184; second parameter may be a fronthaul-link TCI state index); and
prior to receiving an indication of a second TCI state in the second list of TCI states for the data link, using a default TCI state in the second list of TCI states (para 0200; with respect to the access-link TCI state, in a first aspect, the default state may be one that is currently being used, or that was most recently configured. For example, if a DCI at time t0 indicates an access-link TCI state, then the indicated access-link TCI state may be used until another DCI indicates a different access-link TCI state).
Regarding claim 17, Abedini discloses a method comprising: sending, by a base station (902 of fig. 9) to a computing device (Fig. 9; para 0222, a relay unit), one or more parameters (para 0222-0232; a relay unit receiving parameters) indicating:
a first list of transmission configuration indication (TCI) states for a control link of the computing device (Fig. 9; para 0142-0145; 0184-0185; A second parameter may be a fronthaul-link TCI state index. The range of values of the fronthaul-link TCI state index may be 0, . . . , g−1. The variable g is an integer. By way of example, a downlink fronthaul-link TCI state index value, if indicated, may be an index to one of up to a given number, g, of MT unit activated TCI states. For example, there may be up to 8 (g=8) TCI state index values. In some examples, 3 bits may be used to represent a downlink fronthaul-link TCI state index value); and
a second list of TCI states for a data link of the computing device (Fig. 9; para 0142-0145; 0185; A third parameter may be an access-link TCI state index. The range of values of the access-link TCI state index may be 0, . . . , h−1. The variable h is an integer. By way of example, an access-link TCI state index value, if indicated, may be an index to one of up to a given number, h, of access-link TCI states activated for an RU of the repeater device (e.g., activated via MAC-CE). For example, there may be up to 8 (h=8) access-link TCI state index values. In some examples, 3 bits may be used to represent access-link TCI state index value);
sending, to the computing device (Fig. 9), an indication of a first TCI state in the first list of TCI states for the control link (para 0184; second parameter may be a fronthaul-link TCI state index); and
sending, to the computing device, an indication of a second TCI state in the second list of TCI states for the data link (Fig. 9; para 0142-0145; 0185; A third parameter may be an access-link TCI state index. The range of values of the access-link TCI state index may be 0, . . . , h−1. The variable h is an integer).
Regarding claim 7, Abedini discloses wherein the default TCI state comprises a TCI state: with a lowest TCI state index among one or more TCI state indexes of one or more TCI states in the second list of TCI states (para 0184; TCI state index may be 0,…. G-1) or indicated by a lowest TCI codepoint among one or more TCI codepoints activated by an activation command, wherein the one or more TCI codepoints are associated with a subset of TCI states in the first list of TCI states.
Regarding claim 9, Abedini discloses after the receiving the indication of the first TCI state, using the first TCI state via the control link (para 0297; 0303-0304).
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 20claimed 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.
3. Claims 2-3 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abedini in view of Kurita (WO 2024176444, hereinafter Kurita).
Regarding claim 2, Abedini does not explicitly disclose wherein the computing device comprises a plurality of network control repeater (NCR) forwardings (NCR-Fwds), the method further comprising: receiving a message comprising: an NCR-Fwd index indicating an NCR-Fwd of the plurality of NCR-Fwds; and a TCI state index indicating a TCI state of a list of TCI states associated with the NCR-Fwd.
In an analogous art, Kurita discloses wherein the computing device comprises a plurality of network control repeater (NCR) forwardings (NCR-Fwds) (page 63; para 01; page 17; para 02; multiple NCR- Fwds), the method further comprising: receiving a message comprising: an NCR-Fwd index indicating an NCR-Fwd of the plurality of NCR-Fwds (page 63; para 01; TRP index of multiple NCR- Fwds; and page 69; last para); and a TCI state index indicating a TCI state of a list of TCI states associated with the NCR-Fwd (page 15; last para; page 16; para 01; TCI state associated with NCR-Fwd). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Abedini’s method/system by having Kurita’s disclosure in order to improve resource allocation of a communications system.
Regarding claims 3 and 19, Abedini does not explicitly disclose wherein the computing device comprises a network control repeater (NCR) forwarding (NCR-Fwd) and an NCR mobile-termination (NCR-MT).
In an analogous art, Kurita discloses wherein the computing device comprises a network control repeater (NCR) forwarding (NCR-Fwd) and an NCR mobile-termination (NCR-MT) (page 11; para 02-03; NCR comprises of NCR-MT & NCR-Fwd). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Abedini’s method/system by having Kurita’s disclosure in order to improve resource allocation of a communications system.
4. Claims 4 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abedini in view of Rudolf et al. (US 2023/0283358, hereinafter Rudolf).
Regarding claims 4 and 18, Abedini does not explicitly disclose wherein: the control link is a link between a base station and a network control repeater mobile- termination (NCR-MT) of the computing device; and the data link is a link between a base station and a network control repeater (NCR) forwarding (NCR-Fwd) of the computing device.
In an analogous art, Rudolf discloses wherein: the control link is a link between a base station and a network control repeater mobile- termination (NCR-MT) of the computing device (para 0152; the Uu link between the SR-MT (or NCR-MT) entity and the gNB is referred to as the SR or NCR control link (C-link); and the data link is a link between a base station and a network control repeater (NCR) forwarding (NCR-Fwd) of the computing device (para 0063; NCR_Fwd entity as a backhaul connection with a gNB over a backhaul link (or NCR forward link) for control signaling and/or data). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Abedini’s method/system by having Rudolf’s disclosure in order to improve resource allocation of a communications system.
5. Claims 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abedini in view of He et al. (US 2024/0040500, hereinafter He).
Regarding claim 5, Abedini does not explicitly disclose wherein the computing device comprises a network control repeater (NCR) forwarding (NCR-Fwd) and an NCR mobile-termination (NCR-MT), and wherein the NCR-MT and the NCR-Fwd operate in different frequencies.
In an analogous art, He discloses wherein the computing device comprises a network control repeater (NCR) forwarding (NCR-Fwd) and an NCR mobile-termination (NCR-MT), and wherein the NCR-MT and the NCR-Fwd operate in different frequencies (para 0008; different frequency for NCR-MT and NCR-Fwd). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Abedini’s method/system by having He’s disclosure in order to reduce interference in a communication system.
6. Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abedini in view of Reghavan et al. (US 2020/0229161, hereinafter Raghavan).
Regarding claim 6, Abedini does not explicitly disclose receiving the indication of the second TCI state in the second list of TCI states; and using the second TCI state to communicate via the data link.
In an analogous art, Raghavan discloses receiving the indication of the second TCI state in the second list of TCI states (para 0053 and 0055); and using the second TCI state to communicate via the data link. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Abedini’s method/system by having Reghavan’s disclosure in order to reduce interference in a communication system.
7. Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abedini in view of Liou et al. (US 2019/0297640, hereinafter Liou).
Regarding claim 8, Abedini does not expclitly disclose wherein the using the default TCI state comprises: using, for transmissions or receptions via the data link, quasi co-location parameters that correspond to quasi co-location parameters indicated by the default TCI state.
In an analogous art, Liou discloses wherein the using the default TCI state comprises: using, for transmissions or receptions via the data link, quasi co-location parameters that correspond to quasi co-location parameters indicated by the default TCI state (para 0186; 0211 and 0239). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Abedini’s method/system by having He’s disclosure in order to reduce interference in a communication system.
8. Claims 10-11 and 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kurita in view of Rudolf et al. (US 2023/0283358, hereinafter Rudolf).
Regarding claim 10, Kurita discloses a method comprising: receiving, by a computing device comprising a plurality of network control repeater (NCR) forwardings (NCR-Fwds) (page 63; para 01; TRP index of multiple NCR- Fwds; and page 69; last para), a data link beam indication control message comprising: an NCR-Fwd index indicating an NCR-Fwd of the plurality of NCR-Fwds (page 63; para 01; page 17; para 02; multiple NCR- Fwds); and a transmission configuration indication (TCI) state index indicating a TCI state of a list of TCI states associated with the NCR-Fwd (page 15; last para; The TCI state of the beam of the backhaul link of NCR-Fwd must be the same as that of the beam of the control link. - NCR-MT and NCR-Fwd must have the same TDD configuration and page 17; first para).
Kurita does not explicitly disclose using the TCI state via a data link of the NCR-Fwd.
In an analogous art, Rudolf discloses using the TCI state via a data link of the NCR-Fwd (para 0063; and 0152; NCR_Fwd entity as a backhaul connection with a gNB over a backhaul link (or NCR forward link) for control signaling and/or data). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kurita’s method/system by having Rudolf’s disclosure in order to improve resource allocation of a communications system.
Regarding claim 11, Kurita discloses wherein the data link beam indication control message comprises a resource set index indicating a resource set in a list of sets of resources of the NCR- Fwd (page 13; para 01-02; resource index), wherein each resource of the resource set is associated with a respective pair of a time resource and a beam index (page 19; para 02 – beam index, time resource).
Regarding claim 14, Kurita discloses wherein the data link beam indication control message indicates: a downlink beam for receptions via the data link of the NCR-Fwd (page 16; para 01); or an uplink beam for transmissions via the data link of the NCR-Fwd (page 16; para 01).
Regarding claim 15, Kurita does not explicitly disclose wherein the using the TCI state via the data link comprises using a spatial domain filter determined based on a reference signal indicted by the TCI state.
In an analogous art, Rudolf discloses wherein the using the TCI state via the data link comprises using a spatial domain filter (para 0164 – spatial domain transmit and receive filters) determined based on a reference signal indicted by the TCI state (para 0099; 0101; and 0162). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kurita’s method/system by having Rudolf’s disclosure in order to improve resource allocation of a communications system.
Regarding claim 16, Kurita does not explicitly disclose receiving one or more configuration parameters, wherein the one or more configuration parameters indicate, for the NCR-Fwd, the list of TCI states.
In an analogous art, Rudolf discloses receiving one or more configuration parameters, wherein the one or more configuration parameters indicate, for the NCR-Fwd, the list of TCI states (para 0059; 0063; 0100; 0102; and 0152). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kurita’s method/system by having Rudolf’s disclosure in order to improve resource allocation of a communications system.
9. Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kurita/Rudolf in view of MolavianJazi et al. (US 2023/0283348, hereinafter MolavianJazi).
Regarding claim 12, Kurita/Rudolf does not explicitly disclose wherein the data link beam indication control message comprises one or more updated beam indexes, and wherein each updated beam index of the one or more updated beam indexes is for a respective resource of one or more resources in a set of resources of the NCR-Fwd.
In an analogous art, MolavianJazi discloses wherein the data link beam indication control message comprises one or more updated beam indexes (para 0346; 0348), and wherein each updated beam index of the one or more updated beam indexes is for a respective resource of one or more resources in a set of resources of the NCR-Fwd (para 0353-0356). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kurita’s method/system by having MolavianJazi’s disclosure in order to improve resource allocation of a communications system.
10. Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kurita/Rudolf in view of Li et al. (US 2023/0268982, hereinafter Li).
Regarding claim 13, Kurita/Rudolf does not expclitly disclose wherein the data link beam indication control message comprises a first field, wherein:
a first value of the first field indicates activation of one or more resources in a resource set associated with the NCR-Fwd; and a second value of the first field indicates deactivation of the one or more resources in the resource set associated with the NCR-Fwd.
In an analogous art, Li discloses wherein the data link beam indication control message comprises a first field, wherein: a first value of the first field indicates activation of one or more resources in a resource set associated with the NCR-Fwd (para 0195; and 0198; activation); and a second value of the first field indicates deactivation of the one or more resources in the resource set associated with the NCR-Fwd (para 0073; 0152-0153; activation/deactivation). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kurita/Rudoff’s method/system by having Li’s disclosure in order to improve resource allocation of a communications system.
11. Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abedini/Kurita in view of He et al. (US 2024/0040500, hereinafter He).
Regarding claim 20, Abedini/Kurita does not explicitly disclose wherein the computing device comprises a network control repeater (NCR) forwarding (NCR-Fwd) and an NCR mobile-termination (NCR-MT), and wherein the NCR-MT and the NCR-Fwd operate in different frequencies.
In an analogous art, He discloses wherein the computing device comprises a network control repeater (NCR) forwarding (NCR-Fwd) and an NCR mobile-termination (NCR-MT), and wherein the NCR-MT and the NCR-Fwd operate in different frequencies (para 0008; different frequency for NCR-MT and NCR-Fwd). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Abedini/Kurita’s method/system by having He’s disclosure in order to reduce interference in a communication system.
Conclusion
12. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMINA CHOUDHRY whose telephone number is (571)270-7102. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Thursday (7:30 a.m. to 5.00p.m.).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Yemane Mesfin can be reached on (571)272-3927. 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). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/SAMINA F CHOUDHRY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2462
Prosecution Insights