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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 1-8, 21, 22 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.
The independent claims recite “determining a beam used for downlink channel transmission of the terminal device”. It is unclear how the downlink channel transmission can be “of the terminal device” because a terminal device is sending the uplink communications, not downlink communications.
Appropriate correction required.
Claim 17 is rejected as failing to define the invention in the manner required by 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
The claim(s) are narrative in form and replete with indefinite language. The structure which goes to make up the device must be clearly and positively specified. The structure must be organized and correlated in such a manner as to present a complete operative device. The claim(s) must be in one sentence form only. Note the format of the claims in the patent(s) cited. Claim 17 lacks the structural components that are required by an apparatus claim.
Appropriate correction required.
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 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) 1-8, 21, 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Turtinen et al. “Turtinen” US 2024/0334527.
Regarding claim 1, Turtinen teaches a beam determination method, performed by a network side device, comprising:
in a transmission process of small data transmission (SDT), determining latest uplink transmission of a terminal device relative to downlink channel transmission (Step 310 shows SDT initiation (Figure 3). Further, Paragraphs 68-69 show the messages are with respect to UL and DL communications (See also paragraphs 64-65 which shows the UL transmission with respect to the SDT procedure)); and
determining a beam used for the downlink channel transmission of the terminal device according to a synchronization signal block (SSB) associated with the latest uplink transmission (the beams used for communication are identified by a SSB; Paragraph 50. Thus the beam determined to be used for DL is based on SSB as claimed. Paragraph 74 further teaches how the beam information is associated with SSB as the base station (120) sends beam failure configuration information to the UE).
Regarding claim 2, Turtinen teaches the transmission process includes a CG-SDT determining the latest UL transmission of the terminal relative to the DL channel is a PRACH or PUSCH (in CG-SDT, beams are identified by the preamble/PRACH resources; Paragraph 61).
Regarding claim 3, Turtinen teaches in RA-SDT, determining the latest UL transmission of the device relative to the DL channel is a PRACH transmission (in RA-SDT, beams are identified by the preamble/PRACH resources; Paragraph 61).
Regarding claim 4, Turtinen teaches an SSB associated with the PUSCH has a QCL relationship with the DL transmission and determining the beam for DL transmission of the device according to the SSB comprises determining a beam used for the DL transmission of the device according to the SSB association with the PUSCH transmission and the QCL relationship (The beams are associated with QCL and SSB associated with downlink transmissions; Paragraph 74. The information can be transmit on a PUSCH; Paragraph 51, thus one can see the SSB associated with the PUSCH has a QCL relationship as claimed. **Examiner notes this limitation is further limiting an optional limitation from claim 2 which was not rejected. Therefore, this claim carries no weight**).
Regarding claim 5, Turtinen teaches in a case the PUSCH is CG-PUSCH, and an SSB associated with the CG-PUSCH has QCL with the DL transmission, determining a beam used for the DL according to the SSB associated with the CG-PUSCH and QCL relationship (The beams are associated with QCL and SSB associated with downlink transmissions; Paragraph 74. The information can be transmit on a PUSCH; Paragraph 51, thus one can see the SSB associated with the PUSCH has a QCL relationship as claimed. Further, CG resources are used with respect to the various processes and thus it would be a CG-PUSCH as claimed; Paragraphs 52-54) **Examiner notes this limitation is further limiting an optional limitation from claim 2 which was not rejected. Therefore, this claim carries no weight**).
Regarding claim 6, Turtinen teaches an SSB associated with the PRACH has a QCL relationship with the DL transmission and determining the beam for DL transmission of the device according to the SSB comprises determining a beam used for the DL transmission of the device according to the SSB association with the PUSCH transmission and the QCL relationship (The beams are associated with QCL and SSB associated with downlink transmissions; Paragraph 74. Beams are identified by PRACH resources; Paragraph 61.Thus one can see the SSB associated with the PRACH has a QCL relationship as claimed).
Regarding claim 7, Turtinen teaches wherein in the transmission process of SDT, the PRACH transmission is initiated, and in response to a RACH procedure being successful, an SSB associated with the PRACH transmission has a QCL relationship with a designated downlink channel transmission in the downlink channel transmission (The beams are associated with QCL and SSB associated with downlink transmissions; Paragraph 74. Beams are identified by PRACH resources; Paragraph 61.Thus one can see the SSB associated with the PRACH has a QCL relationship as claimed. Paragraph 665 further teaches the use of a preamble and RACH resources allocated fot SDT transmission. This would infer a successful RACH procedure since the resources are being used), and determining the beam used for the downlink channel transmission of the terminal device according to the SSB associated with the latest uplink transmission comprises:
determining, according to the SSB associated with the PRACH transmission and the QCL relationship, a beam used for the designated downlink channel transmission of the terminal device (The beams are associated with QCL and SSB associated with downlink transmissions; Paragraph 74. Beams are identified by PRACH resources; Paragraph 61. Thus one can see the SSB associated with the PRACH has a QCL relationship as claimed);
wherein the designated downlink channel transmission comprises at least one of:
physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) transmission not related to a message Msg2; PDCCH transmission not related to a message Msg3; PDCCH transmission not related to a message Msg4; physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) transmission not related to the message Msg2; or PDSCH transmission not related to the message Msg4 (indication is sent to the UE with respect to the PDCCH; Paragraph 55. This particular transmission is not related to Msg 2, 3, or 4).
Regarding claim 8, Turtinen teaches the DL transmission is PDCCH or PDSCH (PDCCH; Paragraphs 47 and 55).
Regarding claim 9, Turtinen teaches a beam determination method, performed by a UE, comprising:
in a transmission process of small data transmission (SDT), determining latest uplink transmission of a terminal device relative to downlink channel transmission (Step 310 shows SDT initiation (Figure 3). Further, Paragraphs 68-69 show the messages are with respect to UL and DL communications (See also paragraphs 64-65 which shows the UL transmission with respect to the SDT procedure)); and
determining a beam used for the downlink channel transmission of the terminal device according to a synchronization signal block (SSB) associated with the latest uplink transmission (the beams used for communication are identified by a SSB; Paragraph 50. Thus the beam determined to be used for DL is based on SSB as claimed. Paragraph 74 further teaches how the beam information is associated with SSB as the base station (120) sends beam failure configuration information to the UE).
Regarding claim 10, Turtinen teaches the transmission process includes a CG-SDT determining the latest UL transmission of the terminal relative to the DL channel is a PRACH or PUSCH (in CG-SDT, beams are identified by the preamble/PRACH resources; Paragraph 61).
Regarding claim 11, Turtinen teaches in RA-SDT, determining the latest UL transmission of the device relative to the DL channel is a PRACH transmission (in RA-SDT, beams are identified by the preamble/PRACH resources; Paragraph 61).
Regarding claim 12, Turtinen teaches an SSB associated with the PUSCH has a QCL relationship with the DL transmission and determining the beam for DL transmission of the device according to the SSB comprises determining a beam used for the DL transmission of the device according to the SSB association with the PUSCH transmission and the QCL relationship (The beams are associated with QCL and SSB associated with downlink transmissions; Paragraph 74. The information can be transmit on a PUSCH; Paragraph 51, thus one can see the SSB associated with the PUSCH has a QCL relationship as claimed. **Examiner notes this limitation is further limiting an optional limitation from claim 2 which was not rejected. Therefore, this claim carries no weight**).
Regarding claim 13, Turtinen teaches in a case the PUSCH is CG-PUSCH, and an SSB associated with the CG-PUSCH has QCL with the DL transmission, determining a beam used for the DL according to the SSB associated with the CG-PUSCH and QCL relationship (The beams are associated with QCL and SSB associated with downlink transmissions; Paragraph 74. The information can be transmit on a PUSCH; Paragraph 51, thus one can see the SSB associated with the PUSCH has a QCL relationship as claimed. Further, CG resources are used with respect to the various processes and thus it would be a CG-PUSCH as claimed; Paragraphs 52-54) **Examiner notes this limitation is further limiting an optional limitation from claim 2 which was not rejected. Therefore, this claim carries no weight**).
Regarding claim 14, Turtinen teaches an SSB associated with the PRACH has a QCL relationship with the DL transmission and determining the beam for DL transmission of the device according to the SSB comprises determining a beam used for the DL transmission of the device according to the SSB association with the PUSCH transmission and the QCL relationship (The beams are associated with QCL and SSB associated with downlink transmissions; Paragraph 74. Beams are identified by PRACH resources; Paragraph 61.Thus one can see the SSB associated with the PRACH has a QCL relationship as claimed).
Regarding claim 15, Turtinen teaches wherein in the transmission process of SDT, the PRACH transmission is initiated, and in response to a RACH procedure being successful, an SSB associated with the PRACH transmission has a QCL relationship with a designated downlink channel transmission in the downlink channel transmission (The beams are associated with QCL and SSB associated with downlink transmissions; Paragraph 74. Beams are identified by PRACH resources; Paragraph 61.Thus one can see the SSB associated with the PRACH has a QCL relationship as claimed. Paragraph 665 further teaches the use of a preamble and RACH resources allocated fot SDT transmission. This would infer a successful RACH procedure since the resources are being used), and determining the beam used for the downlink channel transmission of the terminal device according to the SSB associated with the latest uplink transmission comprises:
determining, according to the SSB associated with the PRACH transmission and the QCL relationship, a beam used for the designated downlink channel transmission of the terminal device (The beams are associated with QCL and SSB associated with downlink transmissions; Paragraph 74. Beams are identified by PRACH resources; Paragraph 61. Thus one can see the SSB associated with the PRACH has a QCL relationship as claimed);
wherein the designated downlink channel transmission comprises at least one of:
physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) transmission not related to a message Msg2; PDCCH transmission not related to a message Msg3; PDCCH transmission not related to a message Msg4; physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) transmission not related to the message Msg2; or PDSCH transmission not related to the message Msg4 (indication is sent to the UE with respect to the PDCCH; Paragraph 55. This particular transmission is not related to Msg 2, 3, or 4).
Regarding claim 16, Turtinen teaches the DL transmission is PDCCH or PDSCH (PDCCH; Paragraphs 47 and 55).
Regarding claim 17, Turtinen teaches a network side device (device 120 of Figures 1-4) performing the method of claim 1 wherein claim 1 includes::
in a transmission process of small data transmission (SDT), determining latest uplink transmission of a terminal device relative to downlink channel transmission (Step 310 shows SDT initiation (Figure 3). Further, Paragraphs 68-69 show the messages are with respect to UL and DL communications (See also paragraphs 64-65 which shows the UL transmission with respect to the SDT procedure)); and
determining a beam used for the downlink channel transmission of the terminal device according to a synchronization signal block (SSB) associated with the latest uplink transmission (the beams used for communication are identified by a SSB; Paragraph 50. Thus the beam determined to be used for DL is based on SSB as claimed. Paragraph 74 further teaches how the beam information is associated with SSB as the base station (120) sends beam failure configuration information to the UE).
Regarding claim 18, Turtinen teaches a terminal device comprising a processor (device 110 of Figures 1-4 which includes processor 511 (see Figure 5)) configured to:
in a transmission process of small data transmission (SDT), determining latest uplink transmission of a terminal device relative to downlink channel transmission (Step 310 shows SDT initiation (Figure 3). Further, Paragraphs 68-69 show the messages are with respect to UL and DL communications (See also paragraphs 64-65 which shows the UL transmission with respect to the SDT procedure)); and
determining a beam used for the downlink channel transmission of the terminal device according to a synchronization signal block (SSB) associated with the latest uplink transmission (the beams used for communication are identified by a SSB; Paragraph 50. Thus the beam determined to be used for DL is based on SSB as claimed. Paragraph 74 further teaches how the beam information is associated with SSB as the base station (120) sends beam failure configuration information to the UE).
Regarding claim 21, Turtinen teaches a non-transitory CRM (Paragraph 86) performing the method of claim 1 wherein claim 1 includes:
in a transmission process of small data transmission (SDT), determining latest uplink transmission of a terminal device relative to downlink channel transmission (Step 310 shows SDT initiation (Figure 3). Further, Paragraphs 68-69 show the messages are with respect to UL and DL communications (See also paragraphs 64-65 which shows the UL transmission with respect to the SDT procedure)); and
determining a beam used for the downlink channel transmission of the terminal device according to a synchronization signal block (SSB) associated with the latest uplink transmission (the beams used for communication are identified by a SSB; Paragraph 50. Thus the beam determined to be used for DL is based on SSB as claimed. Paragraph 74 further teaches how the beam information is associated with SSB as the base station (120) sends beam failure configuration information to the UE).
Regarding claim 22, Turtinen teaches a non transitory CRM (Paragraph 86) performing the method of claim 1 wherein claim 1 includes:
in a transmission process of small data transmission (SDT), determining latest uplink transmission of a terminal device relative to downlink channel transmission (Step 310 shows SDT initiation (Figure 3). Further, Paragraphs 68-69 show the messages are with respect to UL and DL communications (See also paragraphs 64-65 which shows the UL transmission with respect to the SDT procedure)); and
determining a beam used for the downlink channel transmission of the terminal device according to a synchronization signal block (SSB) associated with the latest uplink transmission (the beams used for communication are identified by a SSB; Paragraph 50. Thus the beam determined to be used for DL is based on SSB as claimed. Paragraph 74 further teaches how the beam information is associated with SSB as the base station (120) sends beam failure configuration information to the UE).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRANDON M RENNER whose telephone number is (571)270-3621. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7am-5pm 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, Derrick Ferris can be reached at (571)-272-3123. 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.
/BRANDON M RENNER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2411
Prosecution Insights