DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
The IDS documents submitted on 07/26/2024 and 12/31/2025 have been received and considered by the Examiner.
The preliminary amendment submitted on 07/26/2024 has been received and considered by the Examiner. Claims 3-7, 9, 11, 22-26, 28, and 33-35 were amended, and claims 13-19 were cancelled.
Priority to PCT application CN 2022/084481, dated 03/31/2022, is acknowledged.
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) 1-7, 9-12, 20-26, and 28-38 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Xu et al. (US 2024/0406968 A1, hereinafter “Xu”).
As to Claims 1,12, 20, and 31:
Xu describes a method for a wireless device to select a timing advance value and TCI state from various options based on a MAC CE.
Specifically, Xu teaches:
Receiving an indication of at least two timing advance groups (TAGs) per serving cell for multiple transmit receive point operation
Xu describes a “wireless device” that “may receive ... from a base station, one or more RRC messages” that may include “one or more first unified TCI states associated with a first TAG of a cell” and “one or more second unified TCI states associated with a second TAG of the cell” (Xu, 0236). This exchange further occurs during “a procedure of TA value determination for multiple TRPs” (Xu, 0236).
Here, “one or more RRC messages” correspond to “an indication”,
“a first TAG of a cell” and “a second TAG of the cell” correspond to “at least two timing advance groups (TAGs) per serving cell”, and
“for multiple TRPs” corresponds to “for multiple transmit receive point operation”.
Each TAG is associated with an uplink or joint transmission configuration indicator (TCI) state
Again, Xu teaches that the “one or more first unified TCI states” are “associated with a first TAG of a cell” and the “one or more second unified TCI states” are “associated with a second TAG of the cell” (Xu, 0236). Xu also clarifies that “[e]ach unified TCI state ... may be a joint TCI state” (Xu, 0236).
Here, the “first TAG of a cell” and “second TAG of the cell” correspond to “each TAG”, and
the “first unified TCI states” and “second unified TCI states” that are “joint TCI state[s]” correspond to “joint transmission configuration indicator (TCI) state” from the list of “an uplink or joint transmission configuration indicator (TCI)”.
Receiving an activation message that activates one or more TCI states for one or more uplink channels or reference signals
Xu teaches that “[t]he base station may indicate one or more TCI states to the UE (e.g., via RRC signaling, a MAC CE, and/or a DCI)” and then “[t]he UE may receive a downlink transmission with a receive (Rx) beam determined based on the one or more TCI states” (Xu, 0162). Xu also adds that “[i]f the UE has the capability of beam correspondence, the UE may determine a spatial domain filter of a transmit (Tx) beam based on a spatial domain filter of the corresponding Rx beam” (Xu, 0162).
Here, “RRC signaling, a MAC CE, and/or a DCI” map to “receiving an activation message”,
the base station “indicat[ing] one or more TCI states” used for “receiv[ing] a downlink transmission” corresponds to “activates one or more TCI states”, and
“a transmit (Tx) beam” from the “UE” corresponds to “one or more uplink channels” from the list of “one or more uplink channels or reference signals”.
Selecting a common TAG for the one or more uplink channels or reference signals based at least in part on a common TAG rule
Xu teaches that a “TAG may be selected from the first TAG and the second TAG based on whether the unified TCI state is from the first unified TCI states or from the second unified TCI states” and that “[t]he wireless device may transmit uplink signal based on the unified TCI state” (Xu, 0228).
Here, “whether the unified TCI state is from the first unified TCI states or from the second unified TCI states” corresponds to “selecting a common TAG rule ... based at least in part on a common TAG rule”, and
the “uplink signal” maps to “one or more uplink channels or reference signals”.
Transmitting a reference signal or a communication on an uplink channel using the common TAG
Xu teaches that “[t]he wireless device may transmit uplink signal [sic] based on the unified TCI state and/or the timing advance value” that was selected (Xu, 0228).
Claim 12 encompasses the same subject matter as Claim 1 from the perspective of the network device.
Claim 20 encompasses the same subject matter as Claim 1 in the form of an apparatus claim that additionally requires:
A memory; and one or more processors, coupled to the memory
Xu describes an “example wireless device comprising: one or more processors and a memory storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the wireless device to perform one or more of the example methods” (Xu, 0297).
Claim 31 encompasses the same subject matter as Claim 1 in the form of an apparatus claim from the perspective of the network node.
As to Claims 3, 22, and 33:
Xu teaches:
The common TAG rule specifies that TCI states activated by a same medium access control control element (MAC CE) of a same control resource set (CORESET) pool index are to use the common TAG
Xu teaches “[t]he wireless device may receive ... a first message indicating a unified TCI state” and “[t]he first message may comprise ... a first MAC CE” and that “[t]he TAG may be selected from the first TAG and the second TAG based on whether the unified TCI state is from: the one or more first unified TCI states” (Xu, 0238). Elsewhere, Xu teaches that “[t]he TAG may be selected from the first TAG and the second TAG based on whether a CORESET pool index, associated with the TAG, having a lowest or highest CORESET pool index” (Xu, 0232).
Claim 22 encompasses the same subject matter as Claim 3 in the form of an apparatus claim.
Claim 33 encompasses the same subject matter as Claim 3 in the form of an apparatus claim from the perspective of the network node.
As to Claims 4, 23, and 34:
Xu teaches:
The common TAG rule specifies that uplink or joint TCI states of the one or more uplink channels or reference signals are to use the common TAG
Xu teaches that “[t]he TAG may be selected from the first TAG and the second TAG based on whether the unified TCI state is from: the one or more first unified TCI states; or from the one or more second unified TCI states” (Xu, 0238).
Claim 23 encompasses the same subject matter as Claim 4 in the form of an apparatus claim.
Claim 34 encompasses the same subject matter as Claim 4 in the form of an apparatus claim from the perspective of the network node.
As to Claims 5, 24, and 35:
Xu teaches:
The common TAG rule specifies that if a TAG is indicated for uplink or joint TCI states, the TAG that is indicated is to be the common TAG and other TAGs for other uplink or joint TCI states are to be ignored
Xu teaches the “wireless device may determine a timing advance value of a TAG” that “may be selected from the first TAG and the second TAG based on whether the unified TCI state is from the first unified TCI states or from the second TCI states” so that “[t]he wireless device may transmit uplink signal[s] based on the unified TCI state” (Xu, 0228).
Here, “a TAG” selected “based on ... the unified TCI state” corresponds to “the common TAG rule”,
the “unified TCI state” that is selected corresponds to “if a TAG is indicated for uplink or joint TCI states”, and
the “unified TCI state” that is selected to “transmit uplink signal[s]” corresponds to “the TAG that is indicated is to be the common TAG”, and
the other TCI states that are not used to “transmit uplink signal[s]” corresponds to “other TAGs for other uplink or joint TCI states are to be ignored”.
Claim 24 encompasses the same subject matter as Claim 5 in the form of an apparatus claim.
Claim 35 encompasses the same subject matter as Claim 5 in the form of an apparatus claim from the perspective of the network node.
As to Claims 6, 25, and 36:
Xu teaches:
Selecting the common TAG includes selecting a TAG that has a lowest identifier among the at least two TAGs
Xu teaches that “[t]he TAG may be selected from the first TAG and the second TAG based on whether a CORESET pool index, associated with the TAG, having a lowest ... CORESET pool index” (Xu, 0232).
Claim 25 encompasses the same subject matter as Claim 6 in the form of an apparatus claim.
Claim 36 encompasses the same subject matter as Claim 6 in the form of an apparatus claim from the perspective of the network device.
As to Claims 7, 26, and 37:
Selecting the common TAG includes selecting a TAG that has a highest identifier among the at least two TAGs
Xu teaches that “[t]he TAG may be selected from the first TAG and the second TAG based on whether a CORESET pool index, associated with the TAG, having a ... highest CORESET pool index” (Xu, 0232).
Claim 26 encompasses the same subject matter as Claim 7 in the form of an apparatus claim.
Claim 37 encompasses the same subject matter as Claim 26 in the form of an apparatus claim from the perspective of the network device.
As to Claims 9 and 28
Xu teaches:
The one or more uplink channels or reference signals include one or more sounding reference signal (SRS) resources of an SRS resource set
Xu describes a “first TAG, of the cell, associated with a first RS set” and “a second TAG, of the cell, associated with a second RS set” which “may comprise ... an SRS resource” (Xu, 0250).
The common TAG rule specifies that SRS resources of the SRS resource set are to be associated with the common TAG
Xu teaches that a “wireless device may determine a timing advance value of a TAG ... based on whether the RS is from the first RS set or from the second RS set” (Xu, 0248). Xu also describes a “first TAG, of the cell, associated with a first RS set” and “a second TAG, of the cell, associated with a second RS set” which “may comprise ... an SRS resource” (Xu, 0250).
Claim 28 encompasses the same subject matter as Claim 9 in the form of an apparatus claim.
As to Claim 10 and 29:
Xu teaches:
The common TAG rule specifies that uplink or joint TCI states of the SRS resources in the SRS resource set are to be associated with the common TAG
Xu teaches that a “wireless device may determine a timing advance value of a TAG ... based on whether the RS is from the first RS set or from the second RS set” (Xu, 0248). Xu also describes a “first TAG, of the cell, associated with a first RS set” and “a second TAG, of the cell, associated with a second RS set” which “may comprise ... an SRS resource” (Xu, 0250). Xu further adds that the “first unified TCI states” are “associated with a first TAG of a cell” and the “second unified TCI states” are “associated with a second TAG of the cell” (Xu, 0236).
Claim 29 encompasses the same subject matter as Claim 10 in the form of an apparatus claim.
As to Claims 11 and 30:
Xu teaches:
The common TAG rule specifies that if a TAG is indicated for an uplink or joint TCI state of an SRS resource, the TAG that is indicated is to be the common TAG and other TAGs for uplink or joint TCI states of other SRS resources are to be ignored
Xu teaches the “wireless device may determine a timing advance value of a TAG” that “may be selected from the first TAG and the second TAG based on whether the unified TCI state is from the first unified TCI states or from the second TCI states” so that “[t]he wireless device may transmit uplink signal[s] based on the unified TCI state” (Xu, 0228). Xu further describes a “first TAG, of the cell, associated with a first RS set” and “a second TAG, of the cell, associated with a second RS set” which “may comprise ... an SRS resource” (Xu, 0250).
Here, “a TAG” selected “based on ... the unified TCI state” corresponds to “the common TAG rule”,
the “unified TCI state” that is selected corresponds to “if a TAG is indicated for uplink or joint TCI states”, and
the “unified TCI state” that is selected to “transmit uplink signal[s]” corresponds to “the TAG that is indicated is to be the common TAG”,
the other TCI states that are not used to “transmit uplink signal[s]” corresponds to “other TAGs for other uplink or joint TCI states ... are to be ignored”, and
the “RS sets” which “may comprise ... an SRS resource” associated with a “TAG” corresponds to “TAGS ... of other SRS resources”.
Claim 30 encompasses the same subject matter as Claim 11 in the form of an apparatus claim.
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) 8, 27, and 38 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu (US 2024/0406968 A1) in view of You et al. (US 2023/0328745 A1, hereinafter “You”).
As to Claims 8, 27, and 38:
Xu does not explicitly disclose:
The common TAG rule specifies that if no TAG is associated with the one or more uplink channels or reference signals, a default TAG is to be the common TAG
However, You does describe a method to derive the uplink transmission timing for a timing advance group based on the downlink transmission timing.
Specifically, You teaches:
The common TAG rule specifies that if no TAG is associated with the one or more uplink channels or reference signals, a default TAG is to be the common TAG
You states that “when valid MAC signaling or DCI does not exist, it may be assumed that the serving cell belongs to one specific TAG. At this time, as an example, a specific TAG may be configured/defined as a default TAG” (You, 0238).
Here, “when valid MAC signaling or DCI does not exist” corresponds to “if no TAG is associated with the one or more uplink channels or reference signals”, and
“a default TAG” maps to “a default TAG is to be the common TAG”.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the default TAG described in You into Xu’s method for selecting a timing advance based on a TCI state. This can ensure a UE in Xu’s method for TAG configuration has a valid TAG, just as described in paragraph 0238 of You.
Claim 27 encompasses the same subject matter as Claim 8 in the form of an apparatus claim.
Claim 38 encompasses the same subject matter as Claim 8 in the form of an apparatus claim from the perspective of the network device.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Ying et al. (US 2023/0292144 A1) describes activating TCI states using a MAC CE. Dong et al. (US 2024/00080083 A1) describes detecting a “triggering event” to activate or switch a TCI state such as receiving a MAC CE or DCI.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Benjamin Peter Welte whose telephone number is (703)756-5965. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, EST.
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 G 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.
BENJAMIN PETER WELTE
Examiner
Art Unit 2477
/CHIRAG G SHAH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2477
Prosecution Insights