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 .
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
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) 1, 11 and 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsai US Patent Application Publication No. US20230050608 in view of Muruganathan et al US Patent Application Publication No. US20230063015 A1.
As per claim 1, Tsai teaches a method and apparatus for wireless communication at a wireless device (fig. 1), comprising: and at least one processor (110)coupled to a transceiver (105), the at least one processor is configured to: receive, from a network node (101), a transmission configuration indicator (TCI) indicating a beam direction (note at least para. [0013], lines 17-22, para. [0016], lines 1-6; and para. [0021], lines 1-7) ; and receive, from the network node, a data transmission via the beam direction indicated in the TCI (note at least para. [0013], lines 17-22, para. [0016], lines 1-6; and para. [0021], lines 1-7). However, it fails to explicitly teach the use of a non-codebook-based solution to exchange information. Muruganathan et al teaches a non-codebook-based solution to exchange information (note at least para. [0002]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skill in the art to have modify Tsai by using a non-codebook-based solution for exchanging information in order to improve reliability of the transmissions Muruganathan et al para. [0121], line 6. In addition, Tsai does not explicitly teach a memory coupled to the processor. However, in order processor to perform its function a memory is required. Therefore a memory storing information is inherently provided in Tsai. For the sake of argument, note fig. 13 of Muruganathan et al that shows a memory (1302) coupled to a processor (1304), the memory stores instructions to operate the processor. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skill in the art to incorporate such a teaching in Tsai in order to facilitate proper operation of the processor.
As per claim 11, Tsai teaches the wireless device as a user device (see para. [0009].
As per claim 26, see rejection of claim 1.
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The prior arts of record do not teach or fairly suggest in combination with the other limitations, the limitations of transmission configuration indicator (TCI) indicating a non-codebook-based beam direction based on at least one of quasi-co-location (QCL) information or angular information”, recited in claims 12 and 21.
Claims 12-25 are allowed.
Claims 2-10 and 27-30 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEAN B CORRIELUS whose telephone number is (571)272-3020. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00AM-3:00PM Monday-Thursday.
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, Sam K Ahn can be reached at 571-272-3044. 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.
/JEAN B CORRIELUS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2633
Prosecution Insights