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 .
DETAILED OFFICE ACTION
This action is responsive to the communication received December 23rd, 2024. Claims 1-24 have been entered and are presented for examination.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on December 23rd, 2024, October 18/2024 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-24 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim1-24 of U.S. Patent No. 12,127,180. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims are directed to the same subject matter.
Regarding claim 1, ‘180 discloses a method comprising: transmitting, by a user equipment (UE) to an access node, a beam failure recovery request (BFRQ) for initiating a beam failure recovery, the BFRQ indicating a first reference signal selected by the UE, the first reference signal corresponding to a new beam; during the beam failure recovery, receiving, by the UE, a response to the BFRQ based on a first quasi co-located (QCL) relationship between the first reference signal and a second reference signal, and the second reference signal being a demodulation reference signal (DMRS) of a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) for transmitting the response; and after completion of the beam failure recovery and before any updated QCL configuration responsive to the BFRQ is received, receiving, by the UE, a transmission on the PDCCH or a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) based on a second QCL relationship between the first reference signal and a third reference signal, the third reference signal being a second DMRS of the PDCCH or a DMRS of the PDSCH (see Claim 1).
Regarding claim 2, ‘180 discloses receiving, by the UE, downlink control information (DCI) for scheduling the PDSCH (see Claim 2).
Regarding claim 3, ‘180 discloses receiving, by the UE, PDSCH data or PDCCH data based on an updated QCL relationship between a fourth reference signal and the second DMRS of the PDCCH or the DMRS of the PDSCH, the fourth reference signal corresponding to a first beam (see Claim 3).
Regarding claim 4, ‘180 discloses wherein the first beam is the new beam selected by the UE (see Claim 4).
Regarding claim 5, ‘180 discloses wherein the first beam is another beam different from the new beam selected by the UE (see Claim 5).
Regarding claim 6, ‘180 discloses the updated QCL relationship being a transmission configuration indication (TCI) state (see Claim 6).
Regarding claim 7, ‘180 discloses the TCI state being carried in a higher layer message (see Claim 7).
Regarding claim 8, ‘180 discloses the second DMRS of the PDCCH being the same as the DMRS of the PDCCH (see Claim 1).
Regarding claim 9, ‘180 discloses a user equipment (UE) comprising: at least one processor; and a non-transitory computer readable storage medium storing programming for execution by the at least one processor, the programming including instructions to cause the UE to perform operations including: transmitting, to an access node, a beam failure recovery request (BFRQ) for initiating a beam failure recovery, the BFRQ indicating a first reference signal selected by the UE, the first reference signal corresponding to a new beam; during the beam failure recovery, receiving a response to the BFRQ based on a first quasi co-located (QCL) relationship between the first reference signal and a second reference signal, and the second reference signal being a demodulation reference signal (DMRS) of a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) for transmitting the response; and after completion of the beam failure recovery and before any updated QCL configuration responsive to the BFRQ is received, receiving a transmission on the PDCCH or a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) based on a second QCL relationship between the first reference signal and a third reference signal, the third reference signal being a second DMRS of the PDCCH or a DMRS of the PDSCH (see Claim 9).
Regarding claim 10, ‘180 discloses receiving, by the UE, downlink control information (DCI) for scheduling the PDSCH (see Claim 10).
Regarding claim 11, ‘180 discloses receiving PDSCH data or PDCCH data based on an updated QCL relationship between a fourth reference signal and the second DMRS of the PDCCH or the DMRS of the PDSCH, the fourth reference signal corresponding to a first beam (see Claim 11).
Regarding claim 12, ‘180 discloses wherein the first beam is the new beam selected by the UE (see Claim 12).
Regarding claim 13, ‘180 discloses wherein the first beam is another beam different from the new beam selected by the UE (see Claim 13).
Regarding claim 14, ‘180 discloses the updated QCL relationship being a transmission configuration indication (TCI) state (see Claim 14).
Regarding claim 15, ‘180 discloses the TCI state being carried in a higher layer message (see Claim 15).
Regarding claim 16, ‘180 discloses the second DMRS of the PDCCH being the same as the DMRS of the PDCCH (see Claim 9).
Regarding claim 17, ‘180 discloses a non-transitory storage medium comprising a program that, when executed by a user equipment (UE), causes the UE to perform operations including: transmitting, to an access node, a beam failure recovery request (BFRQ) for initiating a beam failure recovery, the BFRQ indicating a first reference signal selected by the UE, the first reference signal corresponding to a new beam; during the beam failure recovery, receiving a response to the BFRQ based on a first quasi co-located (QCL) relationship between the first reference signal and a second reference signal, and the second reference signal being a demodulation reference signal (DMRS) of a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) for transmitting the response; and after completion of the beam failure recovery and before any updated QCL configuration responsive to the BFRQ is received, receiving a transmission on the PDCCH or a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) based on a second QCL relationship between the first reference signal and a third reference signal, the third reference signal being a second DMRS of the PDCCH or a DMRS of the PDSCH (see Claim 17).
Regarding claim 18, ‘180 discloses the operations further comprising: receiving, by the UE, downlink control information (DCI) for scheduling the PDSCH (see Claim 18).
Regarding claim 19, ‘180 discloses the operations further comprising: receiving PDSCH data or PDCCH data based on an updated QCL relationship between a fourth reference signal and the second DMRS of the PDCCH or the DMRS of the PDSCH, the fourth reference signal corresponding to a first beam (see Claim 19).
Regarding claim 20, ‘180 discloses wherein the first beam is the new beam selected by the UE (see Claim 20).
Regarding claim 21, ‘180 discloses wherein the first beam is another beam different from the new beam selected by the UE (see Claim 21).
Regarding claim 22, ‘180 discloses the updated QCL relationship being a transmission configuration indication (TCI) state (see Claim 22).
Regarding claim 23, ‘180 discloses the TCI state being carried in a higher layer message (see Claim 23).
Regarding claim 24, ‘180 discloses the second DMRS of the PDCCH being the same as the DMRS of the PDCCH (see Claim 17).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER T WYLLIE whose telephone number is (571)270-3937. The examiner can normally be reached 4pm-11:30pm.
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, Ayman Abaza can be reached at (571)270-0422. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER T WYLLIE/Examiner, Art Unit 2465
Prosecution Insights