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
Receipt is acknowledged of the amendment filed 11/12/2024. Claim 1 has been amended. Claims 2-20 have been added. No claims have been canceled. Claims 1-20 are pending and an action is as follows.
Claim Objections
Claims 3-4, 10, 14-15 and 19 are objected to because of the following informalities: The initialism “BFR” should be provided its own corresponding definition prior its recitation in the claims for clarity. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: The ‘C’ in the recited “… Claim 1, …” should be lower case to keep uniformity throughout the claim set. Appropriate correction is required.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1-11 of U.S. Patent No. 12,074,680 (hereinafter Patent ‘680). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because of the following:
Claim 1 of the instant application (hereinafter IA) recites all of the claim limitations recited in claim 1 of Patent ‘680, the difference being that claim 1 of the IA omits the claim limitations directed to “the UE is configured to transmit the PUCCH using multiple repetitions via multiple uplink beams corresponding to different beam groups, based on beam failure recovery (BFR) being triggered for the first beam group, the UE transmits the PUCCH repetitions via the multiple uplink beams, and the UCI indicates an identifier (ID) of the first beam group in which the BFR is triggered and a new candidate beam ID associated with one or more of the multiple uplink beams” as recited in claim 1 of Patent ‘680.
Claim 2 of the IA recites all the claim limitations recited in claim 2 of Patent ‘680.
Claim 3 of the IA recites all the claim limitations recited in claim 3 of Patent ‘680.
Claim 4 of the IA recites all the claim limitations recited in claim 4 of Patent ‘680.
Claim 5 of the IA recites all the claim limitations recited in claim 5 of Patent ‘680.
Claim 6 of the IA recites all the claim limitations recited in claim 6 of Patent ‘680.
Claim 7 of the IA recites all the claim limitations recited in claim 7 of Patent ‘680.
Claim 8 of the IA recites all the claim limitations recited in claim 8 of Patent ‘680.
Claim 9 of the IA recites all the claim limitations recited in claim 9 of Patent ‘680.
Claim 10 of the IA recites all the claim limitations recited in claim 10 of Patent ‘680.
Claim 11 of the IA recites all the claim limitations recited in claim 11 of Patent ‘680.
Claim 12 of the IA recites all the claim limitations recited in claim 15 of Patent ‘680 and is also substantially similar to the method claim 1 of Patent ‘680, however claim 12 of the IA omits claim limitations found in claim 15 of Patent ‘680 and it omits reciting the processor and memory having executable instructions as found in the method claim 1 of Patent ‘680 which are standard and typical components of a UE as recited in the method of claim 1 of Patent ‘680.
Claim 13 of the IA recites all the claim limitations recited in claim 16 and claim 2 of Patent ‘680, however claim 2 of Patent ‘680 is directed to the method of the UE.
Claim 14 of the IA recites all the claim limitations recited in claim 3 of Patent ‘680, however claim 3 of Patent ‘680 is directed to the method of the UE.
Claim 15 of the IA recites all the claim limitations recited in claim 4 of Patent ‘680, however claim 4 of Patent ‘680 is directed to the method of the UE.
Claim 16 of the IA recites all the claim limitations recited in claim 5 of Patent ‘680, however claim 5 of Patent ‘680 is directed to the method of the UE.
Claim 17 of the IA recites all the claim limitations recited in claim 8 of Patent ‘680, however claim 8 of Patent ‘680 is directed to the method of the UE.
Claim 18 of the IA recites all the claim limitations recited in claim 9 of Patent ‘680, however claim 9 of Patent ‘680 is directed to the method of the UE.
Claim 19 of the IA recites all the claim limitations recited in claim 10 of Patent ‘680, however claim 10 of Patent ‘680 is directed to the method of the UE.
Claim 20 of the IA recites all the claim limitations recited in claim 11 of Patent ‘680, however claim 11 of Patent ‘680 is directed to the method of the UE.
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)(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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 8-9, 12-13 and 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Deenoo et al. US 2020/0374960 (hereinafter Deenoo).
Regarding claim 1, Deenoo a method of wireless communication by a user equipment (UE), comprising:
PNG
media_image1.png
526
778
media_image1.png
Greyscale
communicating using beams associated with at least two beam groups; and
([See Deenoo, Fig. 3, ¶123] Communicating using beams associated with at least two beam groups shown as the first beam group of Resource Pool 302 and the second beam group of Resource 301.)
transmitting, in uplink control information (UCI) on a physical uplink control channel (PUCCH), an indication of a beam failure recovery request (BFRQ) specific to a first beam group of the at least two beam groups associated with a beam failure,
([Deenoo, Fig. 3, Beam failure 316, Beam recovery request 320, ¶123-¶125] The UE 304 transmits, in uplink control information (UCI) comprising the beam recovery request 320 on a PUCCH, whereby the beam recovery request is specific to a first beam group 302 of the a least two beam groups (at least two beam groups 302 and 301) associated with a beam failure 316)
wherein:
the UCI is transmitted using a physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) resource, and
([Deenoo, Fig. 3, ¶123 and ¶125] The beam recovery request is UCI which is transmitted by the UE 304 using PUCCH resource (described in ¶125 as resources which may comprise time, frequency or beam resources))
the PUCCH resource is used for transmissions using one or more of a plurality of beam groups.
([Deenoo, Fig. 3, ¶123, ¶125 and ¶128] The PUCCH resource (described in ¶125 as resources which may comprise time, frequency or beam resources) is used for transmissions 320 (comprising the Beam Recovery Request transmissions) using one or more of a plurality of beam groups 302 (of groups 301-302))
Regarding claim 12, Deenoo an apparatus for wireless communication by a user equipment (UE), comprising:
([Deenoo, Fig. 1B, ¶18-¶19] The wireless transmit/receive unit (WTRU) 102 is interchangeable referred to as a UE)
at least one memory having executable instructions stored thereon; and
[Deenoo, Fig. 1B, Memory 130-132, ¶254]
one or more processors configured to execute the executable instructions to cause the apparatus to:
[Deenoo, Fig. 1B, Processor 118, ¶31-¶32 and ¶254 (processor executes the stored program instructions)]
PNG
media_image1.png
526
778
media_image1.png
Greyscale
communicate using beams associated with at least two beam groups; and
([See Deenoo, Fig. 3, ¶123] Communicating using beams associated with at least two beam groups shown as the first beam group of Resource Pool 302 and the second beam group of Resource 301.)
transmit, in uplink control information (UCI) on a physical uplink control channel (PUCCH), an indication of a beam failure recovery request (BFRQ) specific to a first beam group of the at least two beam groups associated with a beam failure,
([Deenoo, Fig. 3, Beam failure 316, Beam recovery request 320, ¶123-¶125] The UE 304 transmits, in uplink control information (UCI) comprising the beam recovery request 320 on a PUCCH, whereby the beam recovery request is specific to a first beam group 302 of the a least two beam groups (at least two beam groups 302 and 301) associated with a beam failure 316)
wherein:
the UCI is transmitted using a physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) resource, and
([Deenoo, Fig. 3, ¶123 and ¶125] The beam recovery request is UCI which is transmitted by the UE 304 using PUCCH resource (described in ¶125 as resources which may comprise time, frequency or beam resources))
the PUCCH resource is used for transmissions using one or more of a plurality of beam groups.
([Deenoo, Fig. 3, ¶123, ¶125 and ¶128] The PUCCH resource (described in ¶125 as resources which may comprise time, frequency or beam resources) is used for transmissions 320 (comprising the Beam Recovery Request transmissions) using one or more of a plurality of beam groups 302 (of groups 301-302))
Regarding claim 2 and claim 13, Deenoo teaches the method of claim 1 and the apparatus of claim 12 respectively, wherein each beam group of the at least two beam groups is associated with one of transmission receive points (TRPs).
([Deenoo, Fig. 3, ¶123 also see ¶71 and ¶142] Each of the beam group of the at least two beam groups (beam groups 301 and 302 of Fig. 3) is associated with one of transmission points (TRPs) shown as the associated gNB 306 of Fig. 3.)
Regarding claim 8 and claim 17, Deenoo teaches the method of claim 1 and the apparatus of claim 12 respectively wherein:
the UE is configure with a set of PUCCH resources; and
([Deenoo, ¶139] The WTRU which is interpreted as the claimed UE, is configured with a PUCCH including dedicated resources for dedicated scheduling requests (D-SR), UCI transmissions)
each PUCCH resource in the set of associated with the specified uplink beam
([Deenoo, ¶139] The WTRU is configured with PUCCH comprising dedicated resources for D-RS, UCI transmission resources corresponding to a beam specified as the candidate beam in step 318.)
Regarding claim 9 and claim 18, Deenoo teaches the method of claim 8 and the apparatus of claim 17 respectively, wherein the specified uplink beam for each PUCCH resource of the set of PUCCH resources is indicated via at least one of:
radio resource control (RRC), medium access control (MAC) control element (CE), or downlink control information (DCI) signaling; or
a default uplink beam rule.
([Deenoo, ¶114-¶116 (specified uplink beams in the resource pool of PUCCH resources is indicated via RRC)] the (specified uplink beams in the resource pool of PUCCH resources is indicated via RRC), [Deenoo, ¶117] (specified uplink beams in the resource pool of PUCCH resources is indicated via MAC CE), [Deenoo, ¶117] (specified uplink beams in the resource pool of PUCCH resources is indicated via DCI), and [Deenoo, ¶148-¶150] (specified uplink beams in the resource pool of PUCCH resources is indicated via default configuration of PUCCH resources/beams).)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-7, 10, 11, 14-16, 19 and 20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The Examiner has conducted a prior art search of the available Patent and Non-Patent Literature and was unable to find any prior art which teaches either solely or in combination with another reference the claim limitations of “the method of claim 1 wherein the UCI conforms to a UCI format for beam group specific BFR”, “the method of claim 8, wherein: based on the BFR being triggered for the first beam group, the UE transmits same UCI on all PUCCH resources in the set of PUCCH resources; and the UCI indicates an ID of the first beam group in which the BFR is triggered and a new candidate beam ID associated with one or more PUCCH resources of the set of PUCCH resources”, and “the method of claim 8, wherein each PUCCH resource or the PUCCH resource set is configured via a bandwidth part (BWP) uplink dedicated information element (IE) for an intended serving cell.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LONNIE V SWEET whose telephone number is (571)270-3622. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday.
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, Hassan Phillips can be reached at 571-272-3940. 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.
/LONNIE V SWEET/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2467
