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 . This Office Action is in response to preliminary amendments filed 02/04/2025. Claims 1-20 are pending.
Priority
The applicant’s claim for priority as a U.S. national stage of PCT patent application number PCT/CN2022/086807, filed 14 April, 2022 is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 08/21/2024 and 12/11/2025 are is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: item “407” in Fig. 4 and item “713” in Fig. 7.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
in par. [0077], “a PDCP 433 layer” should read “a PDCP 434 layer” for consistency with Fig. 4.
in par. [0077], “a corresponding NAS 257 layer” should read “a corresponding NAS 457 layer” for consistency with Fig. 4.
in par. [0105], “The data may include data in look-up table(s) 709” recites reference number “709” as a look-up table which is inconsistent with the “Timing Advance Value” labeled as reference number “709” in Fig. 7 and par. [0110] of the specification.
in par. [0151], “the process 1000 may end” should read “the process 1100 may end” for consistency with Fig. 11B.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 8 and 16 are objected to because of the following informalities:
in each of claims 8 and 16, “a secondary-timing advance group (S TAG)” should read “a secondary-timing advance group (S-TAG)” (emphasis added).
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
The limitations “means for releasing” and “means for releasing” in claim 17 are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Because these claim limitations are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, they are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. For the limitations of “means for releasing”, there is support for the structure at least in the Applicant’s specification in Fig. 7 and pars. [0113-0114] and support for the functional language in the Applicant’s specification at least in Fig. 8 and pars. [0126-0127].
If applicant does not intend to have these limitations interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitations to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitations recite sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 the appropriate paragraphs of pre-AIA 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.
Claims 1-3, 5, 8-11, 13, and 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Dinan (US 2016/0270112), hereinafter “Dinan”.
Regarding claims 1, 9, 17, Dinan teaches:
A user equipment (UE) configured for wireless communication, comprising:
one or more processors; and
one or more memories coupled to the one or more processors, wherein the one or more processors are configured (see Dinan, Fig. 4, par. [0108]: The wireless device 406 may include at least one communication interface 407, at least one processor 408, and at least one set of program code instructions 410 stored in non-transitory memory 409 and executable by the at least one processor 408), or a method of wireless communication at a user equipment (UE), or an apparatus for wireless communication, comprising at least one of:
means for releasing (see Dinan, Fig. 4, par. [0108]: The wireless device 406 may include at least one communication interface 407, at least one processor 408, and at least one set of program code instructions 410 stored in non-transitory memory 409 and executable by the at least one processor 408), in association with a serving cell that is a special cell (SpCell) and has at least two timing advance groups (TAGs) with one time alignment timer (timeAlignmentTimer) of the at least two TAGs being expired, at least one of: a physical uplink control channel (PUCCH), a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH), or a sounding reference signal (SRS) for at least one of cells or transmission and reception points (TRPs) that share a TAG associated with the one timeAlignmentTimer that is expired (see Dinan, pars. [0206-0207]: When a timeAlignmentTimer expires, if the timeAlignmentTimer is associated with the pTAG: The MAC entity may perform one, many or all the following: flush all HARQ buffers for all serving cells; notify RRC to release PUCCH/SRS for all serving cells; clear any configured downlink assignments and uplink grants. In an example implementation, the MAC entity may further consider running timeAlignmentTimers of sTAGs as expired. If the timeAlignmentTimer is associated with an sTAG expires, then for all Serving Cells belonging to this TAG: The MAC eneity may perform one, many or all the following functions: flush all HARQ buffers; notify RRC to release SRS, and see par. [0221]: a radio resource control layer may be notified to release the secondary PUCCH when a time alignment timer of the first TAG expires, and see Fig. 8, par. [0119]: serving cells having an uplink to which the same TA applies may correspond to serving cells hosted by the same receiver. A TA group may comprise at least one serving cell with a configured uplink, and see par. [0120]: FIG. 8 shows example TAG configurations as per an aspect of an embodiment of the present invention. In Example 1, pTAG comprises PCell, and an sTAG comprises SCell1. In Example 2, a pTAG comprises a PCell and SCell1, and an sTAG comprises SCell2 and SCell3. In Example 3, pTAG comprises PCell and SCell1, and an sTAG1 includes SCell2 and SCell3, and sTAG2 comprises SCe114. Up to four TAGs may be supported in a cell group (MCG or SCG) and other example TAG configurations may also be provided; in this case, based on a timeAlignmentTimer expiring, resources are released for cells associated with the TAG. The TAG and timer are associated with PCells (i.e. a SpCell) and multiple TAGs); or
means for releasing, in association with the serving cell that is the SpCell and has the at least two TAGs with two respective timeAlignmentTimers of the at least two TAGs being expired, the at least one of: the PUCCH, the PUSCH, or the SRS for all cells or TRPs that are in a same cell group as the SpCell (optional limitation).
Regarding claims 2, 10, 18, Dinan teaches the UE or method or apparatus. Dinan further teaches:
wherein a medium access control (MAC) entity of the UE determines to release the at least one of: the PUCCH, the PUSCH, or the SRS and notifies a radio resource control (RRC) entity of the UE to perform the releasing of the at least one of: the PUCCH, the PUSCH, or the SRS (see Dinan, pars. [0206-0207]: When a timeAlignmentTimer expires, if the timeAlignmentTimer is associated with the pTAG: The MAC entity may perform one, many or all the following: flush all HARQ buffers for all serving cells; notify RRC to release PUCCH/SRS for all serving cells; clear any configured downlink assignments and uplink grants. In an example implementation, the MAC entity may further consider running timeAlignmentTimers of sTAGs as expired. If the timeAlignmentTimer is associated with an sTAG expires, then for all Serving Cells belonging to this TAG: The MAC eneity may perform one, many or all the following functions: flush all HARQ buffers; notify RRC to release SRS, and see par. [0221]: a radio resource control layer may be notified to release the secondary PUCCH when a time alignment timer of the first TAG expires).
Regarding claims 3, 11, 19, Dinan teaches the UE or method or apparatus. Dinan further teaches:
wherein the SpCell is at least one of:
a primary cell (PCell) of a master cell group (MCG) (see Dinan, par. [0119]: serving cells having an uplink to which the same TA applies may correspond to serving cells hosted by the same receiver. A TA group may comprise at least one serving cell with a configured uplink. A UE supporting multiple TAs may support two or more TA groups. One TA group may contain the PCell and may be called a primary TAG (pTAG). In a multiple TAG configuration, at least one TA group may not contain the PCell and may be called a secondary TAG (sTAG). Carriers within the same TA group may use the same TA value and the same timing reference. When DC is configured, cells belonging to a cell group (MCG or SCG) may be grouped into multiple TAGs including a pTAG and one or more sTAGs),
a primary secondary cell (PSCell) of a secondary cell group (SCG) (see Dinan, par. [0117]: In DC, the configured set of serving cells for a UE may comprise of two subsets: the Master Cell Group (MCG) containing the serving cells of the MeNB, and the Secondary Cell Group (SCG) containing the serving cells of the SeNB. For a SCG, one or more of the following may be applied: at least one cell in the SCG has a configured UL CC and one of them, named PSCell (or PCell of SCG, or sometimes called PCell), is configured with PUCCH resources), or
is otherwise a PCell (see Dinan, par. [0119]: serving cells having an uplink to which the same TA applies may correspond to serving cells hosted by the same receiver. A TA group may comprise at least one serving cell with a configured uplink. A UE supporting multiple TAs may support two or more TA groups. One TA group may contain the PCell and may be called a primary TAG (pTAG). In a multiple TAG configuration, at least one TA group may not contain the PCell and may be called a secondary TAG (sTAG). Carriers within the same TA group may use the same TA value and the same timing reference. When DC is configured, cells belonging to a cell group (MCG or SCG) may be grouped into multiple TAGs including a pTAG and one or more sTAGs).
Regarding claims 5, 13, Dinan teaches the UE or method. Dinan further teaches:
wherein each of the at least two TAGs are a respective group of serving cells that, for cells with an uplink configured, use a same timing reference cell and a same timing advance value (see Dinan, par. [0119]: serving cells having an uplink to which the same time alignment (TA) applies may be grouped in a TA group (TAG). Serving cells in one TAG may use the same timing reference, and see par. [0119]: Carriers within the same TA group may use the same TA value and the same timing reference).
Regarding claims 8, 16, Dinan teaches the UE or method. Dinan further teaches:
wherein any TAG having the SpCell is a primary-timing advance group (P-TAG), and another TAG is a secondary-timing advance group (S TAG) (see Dinan, Fig. 8, pars. [0119-0120]: One TA group may contain the PCell and may be called a primary TAG (pTAG). In a multiple TAG configuration, at least one TA group may not contain the PCell and may be called a secondary TAG (sTAG). Carriers within the same TA group may use the same TA value and the same timing reference. When DC is configured, cells belonging to a cell group (MCG or SCG) may be grouped into multiple TAGs including a pTAG and one or more sTAGs. FIG. 8 shows example TAG configurations as per an aspect of an embodiment of the present invention. In Example 1, pTAG comprises PCell, and an sTAG comprises SCell1. In Example 2, a pTAG comprises a PCell and SCell1, and an sTAG comprises SCell2 and SCell3. In Example 3, pTAG comprises PCell and SCell1, and an sTAG1 includes SCell2 and SCell3, and sTAG2 comprises SCe114).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 4, 12, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dinan in view of Yamada et al. (US 2019/0124718), hereinafter “Yamada”.
Regarding claims 4, 12, 20, Dinan teaches the UE or method or apparatus. Dinan further teaches:
wherein the SpCell supports PUCCH transmission (see Dinan, par. [0130]: a PUCCH can be configured on a PCell and/or a PSCell)
However, Dinan does not teach:
wherein the SpCell supports contention-based random access.
Yamada, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
wherein the SpCell supports contention-based random access (see Yamada, par. [0060]: In Dual Connectivity, two MAC entities may be configured in the UE: one for the MCG and one for the SCG. Each MAC entity may be configured by RRC with a serving cell supporting PUCCH transmission and contention based Random Access).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the SpCell of Dinan with the contention-based random access support of Yamada with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of improving communication flexibility and efficiency (see Yamada, par. [0004]).
Claims 6 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dinan in view of Zhang et al. (US 2025/0159631), hereinafter “Zhang”.
Regarding claims 6, 14, Dinan teaches the UE or method. Dinan further teaches:
wherein the one or more processors are further configured to:
identify one or more hybrid automatic repeat request identifiers (HARQ IDs) (see Dinan, par. [0122]: when a TAT associated with a pTAG expires: all TATs may be considered as expired, the UE may flush HARQ buffers of serving cells, and see par. [0112]: A cell, comprising a downlink carrier and optionally an uplink carrier, may be assigned a physical cell ID and a cell index. A carrier (downlink or uplink) may belong to only one cell. The cell ID or Cell index may also identify the downlink carrier or uplink carrier of the cell (depending on the context it is used). In the specification, cell ID may be equally referred to a carrier ID, and cell index may be referred to carrier index; in this case, flushing HARQ buffers of serving cells corresponds to determining HARQ buffers of serving cells (i.e. identifying HARQ process IDs for flushing their buffers)), and
flush HARQ buffers corresponding to the one or more HARQ IDs (see Dinan, par. [0122]: when a TAT associated with a pTAG expires: all TATs may be considered as expired, the UE may flush HARQ buffers of serving cells, and see par. [0112]: A cell, comprising a downlink carrier and optionally an uplink carrier, may be assigned a physical cell ID and a cell index. A carrier (downlink or uplink) may belong to only one cell. The cell ID or Cell index may also identify the downlink carrier or uplink carrier of the cell (depending on the context it is used). In the specification, cell ID may be equally referred to a carrier ID, and cell index may be referred to carrier index).
However, Dinan does not teach:
identify one or more HARQ IDs, on a per-TRP basis, having a scheduling control resource set pool index (CORESETPoolIndex) that matches the scheduling CORESETPoolIndex associated with an expired timeAlignmentTimer;
Zhang, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
identify one or more HARQ IDs, on a per-TRP basis, having a scheduling control resource set pool index (CORESETPoolIndex) that matches the scheduling CORESETPoolIndex associated with an expired timeAlignmentTimer (see Zhang, par. [0130]: If the timeAlignmentTimer for one TAG for a TRP (“TRP x”) expires, the UE may perform the following procedure for the corresponding TRP. All HARQ buffers for TRP x may be flushed. RRC may be notified to release PUCCH for TRP x, if configured. RRC may be notified to release SRS for TRP x, if configured. Any configured downlink assignments and configured uplink grants for TRP x may be cleared. Any PUSCH resources for semi-persistent CSI reporting for TRP x may be cleared. Note that signals for TRP x can be the signals associated with CORESETPoolIndex x or signals associated with a TCI state for TRP x, and see par. [0114]: Signals from different TRPs in such a scenario may be associated with different CORESETPoolIndex values, e.g., as configured by RRC. FIG. 6 illustrates exemplary aspects of one possible multi-TRP cellular communication system, e.g., in which a UE 602 communicates with a first TRP 604 (with CORESETPoolIndex=0 and TA0) and a second TRP 606 (with CORESETPoolIndex=1 and TA1); in this case, HARQ buffers for a TRP x with a timeAlignmentTimer that is expired corresponds to determining HARQ IDs on a per-TRP basis. The TRPs have CORESETPoolIndex values, and therefore the HARQ processes determined for flushing HARQ buffers are associated with the CORESETPoolIndex value of TRP x, which is associated with the expired timeAlignmentTimer);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the identifying HARQ IDs with the identifying on a per-TRP basis based on CORESETPoolIndex of Zhang with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of improving efficiency of cellular communication by managing multiple timing advances for multiple TRPs (see Zhang, par. [0110]).
Claims 7 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dinan in view of Xu et al. (US 2024/0414674), hereinafter “Xu”.
Regarding claims 7, 15, Dinan teaches the UE or method.
However, Dinan does not teach:
wherein the one or more processors are further configured to:
determine, on a per-TRP basis, one or more to-be-released or to-be-cleared at least one of: the PUCCH, the PUSCH, the SRS, a semi-persistent scheduling (SPS), a configured grant (CG), or the PUSCH with semi-persistent-channel state information (SP-CSI) associated with an expired timeAlignmentTimer; and
associate a unified transmission configuration indicator (TCI), assigned to a control resource set pool index (CORESETPoolIndex) associated with the expired timeAlignmentTimer, with the determined one or more to-be-released or to-be-cleared at least one of: the PUCCH, the PUSCH, the SRS, the SPS, the CG, or the PUSCH with SP-CSI.
Xu, in the same field of endeavor, teaches:
wherein the one or more processors are further configured to:
determine, on a per-TRP basis, one or more to-be-released or to-be-cleared at least one of: the PUCCH, the PUSCH, the SRS, a semi-persistent scheduling (SPS), a configured grant (CG), or the PUSCH with semi-persistent-channel state information (SP-CSI) associated with an expired timeAlignmentTimer (see Xu, par. [0238]: in response to the first TAT being expired, the downlink/uplink resources associated with the second CORESET pool index may be cleared/released may be based on a relationship between TRPs. For example, if the first TRP is a primary TRP and the second TRP is a secondary TRP, the downlink/uplink resources associated with the second CORESET pool index may be cleared/released in response to the first TAT being expired, and see par. [0238]: The downlink/uplink resources associated with the second CORESET pool index may comprise the one or more second radio resources, and see par. [0234]: The one or more second radio resources may comprise one or more of: a configured downlink assignment; a configured uplink grant; and a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) resource for semi-persistent channel state information (CSI) reporting); and
associate a unified transmission configuration indicator (TCI), assigned to a control resource set pool index (CORESETPoolIndex) associated with the expired timeAlignmentTimer, with the determined one or more to-be-released or to-be-cleared at least one of: the PUCCH, the PUSCH, the SRS, the SPS, the CG, or the PUSCH with SP-CSI (see Xu, par. [0218]: a TRP of the multiple TRPs of a cell may be identified by one or more of: a TRP identity (ID), a cell index, a CORESET pool index, a component carrier index, and a reference signal ID or a reference signal set ID. In an example, a TRP ID of a TRP may comprise a control resource set (CORESET) pool (or group) index (e.g., CORESETPoolIndex) of a control resource set (CORESET) pool (or group), for example, from which a DCI is transmitted from the base station via a control resource set (CORESET) pool of a TRP. In an example, a TRP ID of a TRP may comprise a TRP index indicated in the DCI. In an example, a TRP ID of a TRP may comprise a TCI state group index of a TCI state group. A TCI state group may comprise at least one TCI state with which the wireless device receives downlink TBs, or with which the base station transmits the downlink TBs. In an example, a TRP ID of a TRP may comprise a reference signal ID or a reference signal set ID, and see par. [0238]: in response to the first TAT being expired, the downlink/uplink resources associated with the second CORESET pool index may be cleared/released may be based on a relationship between TRPs. For example, if the first TRP is a primary TRP and the second TRP is a secondary TRP, the downlink/uplink resources associated with the second CORESET pool index may be cleared/released in response to the first TAT being expired, and see par. [0238]: The downlink/uplink resources associated with the second CORESET pool index may comprise the one or more second radio resources, and see par. [0234]: The one or more second radio resources may comprise one or more of: a configured downlink assignment; a configured uplink grant; and a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) resource for semi-persistent channel state information (CSI) reporting; in this case, TRPs are identified by CORESETPoolIndex and associated TCI information. Therefore, the TCI information, CORESETPoolIndex, TAT (timeAlignmentTimer), and resources to be released are all related for each TRP).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the method of Dinan with the determining to-be-released resources and associating TCI of Xu with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of improving performance of multiple uplink timing values determination without increasing signaling overhead (see Xu, par. [0257]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Comsa et al. (US 2024/0188015) teaches a method, apparatus and systems for inter-cell multi TRP operation in wireless communication systems.
Da Silva et al. (US 2024/0023045) teaches a method performed by a communication device for timing advance management in multiple transmission point or panel configuration.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CALEB J BALLOWE whose telephone number is (571)270-0410. The examiner can normally be reached MON-FRI 7:30-5.
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, Nishant B. Divecha can be reached at (571) 270-3125. 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.
/C.J.B./Examiner, Art Unit 2419
/PAO SINKANTARAKORN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2409
Prosecution Insights