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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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)(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, 3-4, 6, 11-12, 16, and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by ZHANG et al. (Patent No: US 2022/0014346 A1), hereinafter, ZHANG.
Regarding Claim 1, ZHANG teaches,
An apparatus comprising: at least one processor; and at least one memory, the at least one memory storing instructions, that when executed by the least one processor, to cause the apparatus at least to: -Paragraph [0009] ([0009] recites, “In some aspects, a user equipment for wireless communication includes: a memory; and one or more processors, coupled to the memory….”)
signal to a network node, before being connected to the network node, using a measurement report, that the apparatus has an interest in connecting to the network node using multiple transceiver points. -Fig. 6C, 8 (810); Paragraph [0085-0090] ( [0090] recites, “ As further shown in FIG. 6C, and by reference number 624, the UE may transmit, and the base station may receive, a report indicating one or more candidate TRPs that satisfy criteria to be paired in the full-duplex communication mode or the simultaneous half-duplex mTRP mode based at least in part on the TRP pairing indications. For example, in some aspects, the report transmitted to the base station may indicate one or more candidate TRP pairs, a recommended communication mode to be enabled for each candidate TRP pair, one or more metrics associated with the one or more candidate TRP pairs, and/or the like. For example, in some aspects, the report may include a two-bit indicator field to indicate the recommended communication mode (e.g., ‘11’ to indicate the full-duplex communication mode, ‘01’ to indicate simultaneous downlink reception in the mTRP communication mode, ‘10’ to indicate simultaneous uplink transmission in the mTRP communication mode, and/or the like).” As explained above, the UE might indicate interest in connecting to multiple TRP in some field of the report which includes metrics (measurement) of multiple candidate TRPs)
Regarding Claim 3, ZHANG teaches the limitations of Claim 1.
ZHANG further teaches,
The apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, further cause the apparatus at least to: receive, from the network node before being connected to the network node, broadcast system information comprising multi-transceiver point capability information for the network node; -Fig. 6C (620); Paragraph[0086-0087] ([0086] recites, “As shown in FIG. 6C, and by reference number 620, the UE may receive one or more TRP pairing indications identifying one or more TRPs (and/or TRP pairs) that have a capability to be paired in the full-duplex communication mode or the simultaneous half-duplex mTRP communication mode. For example, in some aspects, the one or more TRP pairing indications may be broadcast or otherwise transmitted by the base station via RRC signaling, a medium access control (MAC) control element (MAC-CE), downlink control information (DCI), and/or other suitable signaling. “)
and determine whether to perform an access to the network node, in dependence upon the multi-transceiver point capability information. -Fig. 6C (622); Paragraph [0088] ([0088] recites, “As further shown in FIG. 6C, and by reference number 622, the UE may measure SSB beams transmitted by one or more neighbor TRPs during an SSB measurement timing configuration (SMTC) window. For example, in some aspects, the UE may measure an RSRP associated with the SSB beams transmitted by the neighbor TRP(s), and the UE may further determine an antenna panel of the UE that is associated with each SSB beam. Accordingly, in some aspects, the UE may determine whether the neighbor TRP(s) satisfy one or more criteria to be paired in the full-duplex communication mode or the simultaneous half-duplex mTRP mode based at least in part on the one or more TRP pairing indications.”)
Regarding Claim 4, ZHANG teaches the limitations of Claim 3.
ZHANG further teaches,
The apparatus as claimed in claim 3, wherein the broadcast system information is mandatory minimum system information, a system information block (SIB) or SIB1. -Paragraph [0086, 0123] ([0086] recites, “….Additionally, or alternatively, the one or more TRP pairing indications may be broadcast or otherwise transmitted by individual TRPs via a system information block (SIB), a master information block (MIB), and/or the like….”)
Regarding Claim 6, ZHANG teaches the limitations of Claim 3.
ZHANG further teaches,
The apparatus as claimed in claim 3, wherein the multi-transceiver point capability information is comprised, at least, within channel measurements resource of a system information block -Paragraph [0091-0092, 0129] ([0091-0092] recites, “…in cases where the one or more TRP pairing indications indicate that a candidate TRP pair (e.g., a neighbor TRP and a serving TRP, a pair of neighbor TRPs, and/or the like) has a capability to be paired together to enable the full-duplex communication mode, the one or more metrics indicated in the report may include respective signal-to-interference-plus-noise ratios (SINRs) or CQIs for the candidate TRP pair…… Accordingly, to determine each SINR or CQI, the UE may be configured to measure a channel measurement resource (CMR) associated with a downlink transmission from a corresponding TRP…. For example, the uplink signals that are transmitted to measure the self-interference may include one or more random access preambles that are configured to be transmitted via an SSB beam associated with the paired TRP to request system information.” [0129] recites, “…the respective L1-SINRs are based at least in part on channel measurement resources and interference measurement resources associated with downlink SSB beams transmitted by the first candidate TRP and the second candidate TRP.”)
and/or wherein the multi-transceiver point capability information is comprised, at least, within a single/multi -downlink control information (s/m -DCI) of a system information block. -Paragraph [0103] ([0103] recites, “the one or more TRP pairing indications are received from the base station in RRC signaling, a MAC-CE, or DCI.”)
Regarding Claim 11, ZHANG teaches the limitations of Claim 1.
ZHANG further teaches,
The apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, further cause the apparatus at least to: signal to the network node, during a random-access procedure and/or a connection setup procedure, that the apparatus has an interest in connecting to the network node using multiple transceiver points. -Fig. 6C (624); Paragraph [0090] ([0090] recites, “As further shown in FIG. 6C, and by reference number 624, the UE may transmit, and the base station may receive, a report indicating one or more candidate TRPs that satisfy criteria to be paired in the full-duplex communication mode or the simultaneous half-duplex mTRP mode based at least in part on the TRP pairing indications. For example, in some aspects, the report transmitted to the base station may indicate one or more candidate TRP pairs, a recommended communication mode to be enabled for each candidate TRP pair, one or more metrics associated with the one or more candidate TRP pairs, and/or the like. For example, in some aspects, the report may include a two-bit indicator field to indicate the recommended communication mode (e.g., ‘11’ to indicate the full-duplex communication mode, ‘01’ to indicate simultaneous downlink reception in the mTRP communication mode, ‘10’ to indicate simultaneous uplink transmission in the mTRP communication mode, and/or the like).”As shown in Fig. 6C, the report including preferred mode is sent as part of connection setup.)
Regarding Claim 12, ZHANG teaches the limitations of Claim 11.
ZHANG further teaches,
The apparatus as claimed in claim 11, wherein the signaling that the apparatus has an interest in connecting to the network node using multiple transceiver points is: comprised within a Msg1 of a contention based random access procedure; defined by a preamble of the random access request or Msg1; comprised within a RRC connection request; or comprised within a Msg 3 of a contention based random access procedure. -Fig. 7; Paragraph [0100, 0109] ([0100] recites, “As further shown in FIG. 7, in some aspects, process 700 may include transmitting, to a base station, a report indicating at least one candidate TRP to be paired in the full-duplex communication mode or the simultaneous half-duplex mTRP communication mode based at least in part on the one or more TRP pairing indications (block 720).“ [0109] recites, “ process 700 includes transmitting one or more random access preambles to a first candidate TRP via one or more uplink beams while receiving from a second candidate TRP via one or more downlink beams, and determining one or more self-interference measurements based at least in part on the transmitting and the receiving,..” As explained above the report to the base station can be part of random access request (Msg1) or Msg3 in case of contention based random access or as part of RRC connection request as shown in Fig. 6C (624))
Claim 16 is the method claim corresponding to the apparatus claim 1. The applicant’s attention is directed towards claim 1 above which is rejected. Claim 16 is rejected under the same rational as claim 1.
Claim 18 is the method claim corresponding to the apparatus claim 3. The applicant’s attention is directed towards claim 3 above which is rejected. Claim 18 is rejected under the same rational as claim 3.
Claim 19 is the method claim corresponding to the apparatus claim 4. The applicant’s attention is directed towards claim 4 above which is rejected. Claim 19 is rejected under the same rational as claim 4.
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.
Claims 2, 5, 17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZHANG
in view of HE et al. (Patent No: US 2022/0303079 A1), hereinafter, HE.
Regarding Claim 2, ZHANG teaches the limitations of Claim 1.
Although implicit, ZHANG does not explicitly mention,
The apparatus as claimed in claim 1 wherein the measurement report is a beam measurement report.
However, in an analogous invention, HE teaches,
The apparatus as claimed in claim 1 wherein the measurement report is a beam measurement report. -Paragraph [0040] ([0040] recites, “Thus, a single report instance may identify/include multiple different DL beams by reporting the corresponding measurement result(e.g., CRI, SSB RI, etc.). In a multi-TRP deployment scenario, different beams may correspond to a single TRP or different beams may correspond to different TRPs. However, the exemplary embodiments are not limited to (M) being equal to two. Those skilled in the art will understand how the exemplary concepts described herein will be applied to scenarios in which (M) is equal to more than two.”
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the “TRANSMIT RECEIVE POINT PAIRING INDICATION” proposed by ZHANG to include the concept of “the measurement report is a beam measurement report” of HE. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to improve the uplink spectrum efficiency [0056].
Regarding Claim 5, ZHANG teaches the limitations of Claim 1.
Although implicit, ZHANG does not explicitly mention,
The apparatus as claimed in claims 3, wherein the multi-transceiver point capability information indicates whether the network node supports multiple transceiver point operation of a cell.
However, in an analogous invention, HE teaches,
The apparatus as claimed in claims 3, wherein the multi-transceiver point capability information indicates whether the network node supports multiple transceiver point operation of a cell. -Paragraph [0001, 0018] ([0001] recites, “A network may deploy a cell that is configured with multiple transmission reception points (TRPs). A multi-TRP deployment scenario may support downlink and uplink communications with a user equipment (UE).” [0018] recites, “The exemplary embodiments may be utilized with any network that is configured with multi-TRP capability. Therefore, the 5G NR network as described herein may represent any type of network that is configured with multi-TRP capability. “)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the “TRANSMIT RECEIVE POINT PAIRING INDICATION” proposed by ZHANG to include the concept of “the multi-transceiver point capability information indicates whether the network node supports multiple transceiver point operation of a cell” of HE. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to improve the uplink spectrum efficiency [0056].
Claim 17 is the method claim corresponding to the apparatus claim 2. The applicant’s attention is directed towards claim 2 above which is rejected. Claim 17 is rejected under the same rational as claim 2.
Claim 20 is the method claim corresponding to the apparatus claim 5. The applicant’s attention is directed towards claim 5 above which is rejected. Claim 20 is rejected under the same rational as claim 5.
Claims 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZHANG
in view of Muller et al. (Patent No: US 2023/0239937 A1), hereinafter, Muller.
Regarding Claim 7, ZHANG teaches the limitations of Claim 3.
Although implicit, ZHANG does not explicitly mention,
The apparatus as claimed in claim 3, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, further cause the apparatus at least to: select a cell for access, in dependence upon the multi-transceiver point capability information indicating that the network node supports multiple transceiver point operation for the cell, and the cell satisfying a cell selection criterion for access.
However, in an analogous invention, Muller teaches,
The apparatus as claimed in claim 3, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, further cause the apparatus at least to: select a cell for access, in dependence upon the multi-transceiver point capability information indicating that the network node supports multiple transceiver point operation for the cell, and the cell satisfying a cell selection criterion for access. -Paragraph [0007, 0071] ([0007] recites, “FIG. 3 illustrates a network including two TRPs 20A, 20B that serve respective cells 22A, 22B. The TRPs each broadcast a unique SSB, namely, SSB1 and SSB2, in their respective cells. UEs in the RRC IDLE and RRC CONNECTIVE INACTIVE states are searching, synchronizing, measuring and resolving different NR Cells based on received SSB transmissions. The information obtained in such procedures is used to control cell selection/re-selection and camping on NR cells. When a UE needs to access the RAN system, it uses the Physical Random-Access Channel (PRACH) resources and configuration defined via the SSB for the NR Cell it is camping on and synchronized to” It is easily understandable to an ordinary person with the skill in the art that to access certain criterion for RACH has to be met.)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the “TRANSMIT RECEIVE POINT PAIRING INDICATION” proposed by ZHANG to include the concept of “select a cell for access, in dependence upon the multi-transceiver point capability information indicating that the network node supports multiple transceiver point operation for the cell, and the cell satisfying a cell selection criterion for access.” of Muller. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to improve mobility [0062].
Regarding Claim 8, ZHANG and Muller teach the limitations of Claim 7.
ZHANG further teaches,
The apparatus as claimed in claim 7, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, further cause the apparatus at least to: select a cell that supports multiple transceiver point operation and best satisfies the cell selection criterion for initial access. -Fig. 7; Paragraph [0078, 100 ] ([0078] recites, “…For example, different TRPs may be associated with the same serving cell and different physical cell identifiers (PCIs)…” [100] recites, “in some aspects, process 700 may include transmitting, to a base station, a report indicating at least one candidate TRP to be paired in the full-duplex communication mode or the simultaneous half-duplex mTRP communication mode based at least in part on the one or more TRP pairing indications (block 720).“ The candidate TRP reported to the base station meets the criterion for initial access and therefore requested to be paired.)
Regarding Claim 9, ZHANG and Muller teach the limitations of Claim 7.
ZHANG further teaches,
The apparatus as claimed in claim 7, wherein the selection criterion is based on received power at the apparatus for multiple transceiver points of the cell and/or received quality at the user equipment for multiple transceiver points of the cell. -Fig. 6C; Paragraph [0088] ([0088] recites, “As further shown in FIG. 6C, and by reference number 622, the UE may measure SSB beams transmitted by one or more neighbor TRPs during an SSB measurement timing configuration (SMTC) window. For example, in some aspects, the UE may measure an RSRP associated with the SSB beams transmitted by the neighbor TRP(s), and the UE may further determine an antenna panel of the UE that is associated with each SSB beam. Accordingly, in some aspects, the UE may determine whether the neighbor TRP(s) satisfy one or more criteria to be paired in the full-duplex communication mode or the simultaneous half-duplex mTRP mode based at least in part on the one or more TRP pairing indications.”)
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZHANG
in view of Xu et al. (Patent No: US 2022/0240224 A1), hereinafter, Xu.
Regarding Claim 10, ZHANG teaches the limitations of Claim 3.
Although implicit, ZHANG does not explicitly mention,
The apparatus as claimed in claim 3, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, further cause the apparatus at least to: initiate access by the apparatus transmitting, to the network node, a random access message and terminate by the apparatus transmitting, to the network node, a first beam report or a first channel state information report after receiving a contention resolution message and/or a radio resource control connection setup message.
However, in an analogous invention, Xu teaches,
The apparatus as claimed in claim 3, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, further cause the apparatus at least to: initiate access by the apparatus transmitting, to the network node, a random access message -Fig. 13 A/B/C; Paragraph [0211] ([0211] recites, “The base station may configure the wireless device with different resource parameters for each TRP of the multiple TRPs, if the base station is associated with multiple TRPs (e.g., TRP0 and TRP1). The base station may, for example, configure the wireless device with different resource parameters (e.g., CORESETs, data channels, and/or RS) for a first TRP (e.g., TRP0) and for a second TRP (e.g., TRP1). For at least some beam determination procedures, the wireless device may only indicate one beam (or RS) to the base station. The wireless device may, for example, determine an RS of the first TRP (e.g., an RS associated with TRP0) and perform a random access procedure based on the RS.” Msg. 1 in Fig. 13A is the random access message.)
and terminate by the apparatus transmitting, to the network node, a first beam report or a first channel state information report after receiving a contention resolution message and/or a radio resource control connection setup message. -Paragraph [0256]([0256] recites, “…The configuration parameters may indicate an association relationship between a preamble and the RS via the random access occasion. The wireless device may determine the preamble associated with the first RS based on the association relationship. The random access response may comprise an uplink grant. The uplink grant may be used to schedule one or more uplink resources for the transport block. The sending (e.g., transmitting), based on the random access response, the transport block may comprise sending (e.g., transmitting) the transport block based on the uplink grant. The transport block may indicate an identity of the wireless device. The identity may comprise one of: a cell radio network temporary identifier (C-RNTI); or a wireless device contention resolution identity. The transport block may indicate one or more of: an index of the second RS; an RSRP value of the second RS; an RSRQ value of the second RS; or the second CORESET pool index. The wireless device may receive a second transport block, of the random access procedure via a physical downlink shared channel, for contention resolution, based on (e.g., for example, after or in response to) sending (e.g., transmitting) the transport block.” [0184] recites, “…The wireless device may send/transmit UCI (e.g., HARQ acknowledgements (HARQ-ACK), CSI report, SR, and the like) via a PUCCH or a PUSCH..”)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the “TRANSMIT RECEIVE POINT PAIRING INDICATION” proposed by ZHANG to include the concept of “initiate access by the apparatus transmitting, to the network node, a random access message and terminate by the apparatus transmitting, to the network node, a first beam report or a first channel state information report after receiving a contention resolution message and/or a radio resource control connection setup message.” of Xu. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to improve transmission and/or reception performance based on the RS that is also associated with the CORESET pool index [0219].
Claims 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZHANG
in view of KUMAR et al. (Patent No: US 2025/0159652 A1), hereinafter, KUMAR.
Regarding Claim 13, ZHANG teaches the limitations of Claim 1.
Although implicit, ZHANG does not explicitly mention,
The apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, further cause the apparatus at least to: receive from the network node, before being connected to the network node, a measurement configuration for performing reception quality measurements separately for at least two transceiver points; and perform configured reception quality measurements separately for the at least two transceiver points in dependence upon the received measurement configuration; and transmit at least a measurement report, to the network node, in dependence upon the configured reception quality measurements for the at least two transceiver points.
However, in an analogous invention, KUMAR teaches,
The apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, further cause the apparatus at least to: receive from the network node, before being connected to the network node, a measurement configuration for performing reception quality measurements separately for at least two transceiver points; -Paragraph [0006, 0098] ([0006] recites, “a method of wireless communication performed by a user equipment (UE) includes operating in a multi-transmission-reception point (multi-TRP) mode” [0098] recites, ”..The one or more processors 384 may provide RRC layer functionality associated with broadcasting of system information (e.g., master information block (MIB), system information blocks (SIBs)), RRC connection control (e.g., RRC connection paging, RRC connection establishment, RRC connection modification, and RRC connection release), inter-RAT mobility, and measurement configuration for UE measurement reporting..”)
and perform configured reception quality measurements separately for the at least two transceiver points in dependence upon the received measurement configuration; -Paragraph [0157] ([0157] recites, “A UE is expected to report one or more measurement instances (of RSTD, downlink RSRP, and/or UE Rx-Tx time difference measurements) in a single measurement report” Downlink RSRP is reception quality)
and transmit at least a measurement report, to the network node, in dependence upon the configured reception quality measurements for the at least two transceiver points. -Paragraph [0037] ([0037] recites, “the non-co-located physical TRPs may be the serving base station receiving the measurement report from the UE …”)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the “TRANSMIT RECEIVE POINT PAIRING INDICATION” proposed by ZHANG to include the concept of “receive from the network node, before being connected to the network node, a measurement configuration for performing reception quality measurements separately for at least two transceiver points; and perform configured reception quality measurements separately for the at least two transceiver points in dependence upon the received measurement configuration; and transmit at least a measurement report, to the network node, in dependence upon the configured reception quality measurements for the at least two transceiver points.” of KUMAR. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to improve the number of resources that may be measured during a given measurement period [0198].
Regarding Claim 14, ZHANG and KUMAR teach the limitations of Claim 13.
Although implicit, ZHANG does not explicitly mention,
The apparatus as claimed in claim 13, wherein the measurement report indicates reception quality measurements separately for the at least two transceiver points.
However, in an analogous invention, KUMAR teaches,
The apparatus as claimed in claim 13, wherein the measurement report indicates reception quality measurements separately for the at least two transceiver points. -Paragraph [0137] ([0137] recites, “the positioning entity uses a measurement report from the UE of received signal strength measurements of multiple downlink transmit beams to determine the angle(s) between the UE and the transmitting base station(s).” )
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the “TRANSMIT RECEIVE POINT PAIRING INDICATION” proposed by ZHANG to include the concept of “the measurement report indicates reception quality measurements separately for the at least two transceiver points.” of KUMAR. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to improve the number of resources that may be measured during a given measurement period [0198].
Regarding Claim 15, ZHANG and KUMAR teach the limitations of Claim 13.
ZHANG further teaches,
The apparatus as claimed in claim 13, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, further cause the apparatus at least to: perform configured reception quality measurements separately and simultaneously for the at least two transceiver points in dependence upon the received measurement configuration; -Paragraph [0088] ([0088] recites, “As further shown in FIG. 6C, and by reference number 622, the UE may measure SSB beams transmitted by one or more neighbor TRPs during an SSB measurement timing configuration (SMTC) window. For example, in some aspects, the UE may measure an RSRP associated with the SSB beams transmitted by the neighbor TRP(s), and the UE may further determine an antenna panel of the UE that is associated with each SSB beam.”)
transmit at least a measurement report, to the network node, in dependence upon the configured simultaneous reception quality measurements for the at least two transceiver point, wherein the measurement report indicates reception quality measurements separately for the at least two transceiver points wherein the reception quality measurements indicate reception quality that can be received simultaneously from the at least two transceiver points. -Fig. 6C; Paragraph [0088-0090] ([0088-0090] recites, “…the UE may determine whether the neighbor TRP(s) satisfy one or more criteria to be paired in the full-duplex communication mode or the simultaneous half-duplex mTRP mode based at least in part on the one or more TRP pairing indications. For example, in some aspects, a neighbor TRP may be a candidate TRP to be paired with the serving TRP or another neighbor TRP in cases where SSB beams associated with the neighbor TRP and the TRP to be paired with the neighbor TRP are associated with different panels and the RSRP measurements associated with the SSB beams transmitted by the neighbor TRP satisfy one or more thresholds (e.g., a cell switching threshold, a TRP pairing threshold that may have a lower absolute value than the cell switching threshold or a negative value relative to an RSRP measurement associated with the serving base station, and/or the like). Accordingly, in cases where the neighbor TRP to be paired with the serving TRP or the pair of neighbor TRPs to be paired with each other are associated with different panels and the RSRP measurements associated with the SSB beams transmitted by the neighbor TRP(s) satisfy one or more thresholds, the UE may refer to the TRP pairing indication(s) to determine whether the neighbor TRP is included among the neighbor TRPs that can be paired with the serving TRP and/or whether the pair of neighbor TRPs can potentially be paired with each other. As further shown in FIG. 6C, and by reference number 624, the UE may transmit, and the base station may receive, a report indicating one or more candidate TRPs that satisfy criteria to be paired in the full-duplex communication mode or the simultaneous half-duplex mTRP mode based at least in part on the TRP pairing indications.” It is easily understandable to an ordinary person with the skill in the art that with TRP pairing indication report sent to the base station, reception quality measurement (RSRP) can be added as pairing decision itself is based on the measurements.)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AHMED SAIFUDDIN whose telephone number is (703)756-4581. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30am-6:00pm.
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, KHALED M KASSIM can be reached on 571-270-3770. 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.
/AHMED SAIFUDDIN/Examiner, Art Unit 2475
/KHALED M KASSIM/supervisory patent examiner, Art Unit 2475
Prosecution Insights