DETAILED ACTION
This office action is a response to an amendment filed on 09/15/2025.
Response to Amendment
Claims 1-44, 61 and 63 have been cancelled.
Claims 45-46, 48-49, 51, 55-58, 60 have been amended.
New claims 65-66 have been added.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 09/15/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant argues on pages 11-16 in the remarks that the current prior art does not tech the claimed limitations of claims 45, 57 and 66, therefore, this case should be allowed. In response, examiner disagrees with the applicant. The examiner’s interpretation of these claims are an apparatus with a processor and a memory determining to monitor physical downlink control channel candidates in overlapping monitoring occasions of two or more control resource sets of the communication network, wherein the two or more control resource sets are using at least two different QCL-Type-D (quasi co-location Type-D) on an active downlink bandwidth part of one or more cells, selecting a first control resource set using a first QCL-Type-D and a second control resource set using a second QCL-Type-D for monitoring at least two of the physical downlink control channel candidates and the selection of the first control resource set is based on at least one of: common search space sets or user specific search space sets of at least one control resource set on an active downlink bandwidth part of at least one cell that associated with one or more physical cell identifiers. R1-2107485’s teaching in section 2.1.2, “Target RS applying joint/separate TCI” using an UE is equated to an apparatus, figure 4, the TRP or base station shown in this figure is equated to an apparatus, it’s teaching on section 2.1.2, observation 2 about tracking is equated to determining with the apparatus as well as monitoring occasions, tracking and determining DL QCL information for PDCCH reception explicitly teaches monitor physical downlink control channel candidates, figure 4 explicitly teaches having overlaps between two resources, it's teaching on section 2.1.2, observation 2, proposal 4 about using a subset of CORESET is interpreted as using two or more control resource sets of the communication network, it’s teaching on section 2.1.4 about using a single or multiple serving for DL TCI spatial relation framework is interpreted as using downlink communication, figure 4 explicitly teaches using one or more cells, on section 2.1.6, “TCI state pool sharing in CA operation /Working assumption from RAN#105 (bullet point 4)” and table 6 is interpreted as using active bandwidth part for one or more cells, it’s teaching on section 2.1.8, proposal 17 bout using QCL-Type-D without PL-RS and with PL-RS is interpreted as using two different types of QCL-Type-D for two or more control resource sets, it’s teaching on section 2.1.2, observation 2, proposal 4 about using a subset of CORESET is interpreted as using a first control resource set and using a second control resource set, it’s teaching on section 2.1.8, proposal 17, determining (DL beam for measurement) with a QCL-Type-D using configuration 1 for providing QCL-Type-D without or with PL-RS explicitly teaches selecting a first and a second QCL-Type-D for a first and a second control resource set, it’s teaching on observation 2, proposal 4 about using a subset of CORESET is interpreted as using a first and a second control resource sets, it teaching on section 2.1.2, proposal 4, CSS is equated to common search space set and USS is equated to user specific search space set, it’s teaching on section 2.1.2,proposal 4, observation 3 about determining QCL assumption for PDCCH reception according to associate CORESET is interpreted as selection selecting the first control resource set based on the common search space sets, it’s teaching on section 2.1.4, proposal 10 about detecting (DL DCI) from PDCCH reception associate with CORESET pool and using the DCI for indicating a TCI state (to provide common QCL information) is interpreted as using the TCI with CORESET, it's teaching on section 2.1.2, proposal 5 about using PS-RNTI with a P-Cell is read as using one cell that associated with one or more physical cell identifiers, section 2.1.6, “working assumption from RAN#105 (bullet point 4)”, using maximum number of TCI agates pools for supporting across BWPs is interpreted as using one control resource set on active downlink bandwidth part. Furthermore, Cirik teaching in paragraph 222 and 223 together teach an apparatus of a communication network, comprising: at least one processor; and at least one memory storing instructions that, when executed with the at least one processor. The examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, Cirik in combination with R1-2107485 teach this limitation.
As for applicant’s arguments about dependent claims, these claims can not be allowed, because these claims depend on independent claims.
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 45-50, 52-55 and 57-60, 62 and 64-66 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 (a) as being anticipated by (applicant admitted prior art) 3GPP TSG RAN WG1#106-e, R1-2107485 (hereinafter, “R1-2107485” (publication date: August/16-27, 2021)) in view of Cirik et al. (hereinafter, “Cirik”; 20200351841).
In response to claims 45, 57 and 66,
R1-2107485 teaches determine, with the apparatus, to monitor physical downlink control channel candidates in overlapping monitoring occasions of two or more control resource sets of the communication network (section 2.1.2, “Target RS applying joint/separate TCI”, UE is equated to an apparatus, figure 4, the TRP or base station shown in this figure is equated to an apparatus, section 2.1.2, observation 2, tracking is equated to determining with the apparatus as well as monitoring occasions, tracking and determining DL QCL information for PDCCH reception explicitly teaches monitor physical downlink control channel candidates, figure 4 explicitly teaches having overlaps between two resources, section 2.1.2, observation 2, proposal 4, subset of CORESET is interpreted as using two or more control resource sets of the communication network),
wherein the two or more control resource sets are using at least two different QCL-Type-D (quasi co-location Type-D) on an active downlink bandwidth part of one or more cells (section 2.1.4, using a single or multiple serving for DL TCI spatial relation framework is interpreted as using downlink communication, figure 4 explicitly teaches using one or more cells, section 2.1.6, “TCI state pool sharing in CA operation /Working assumption from RAN#105 (bullet point 4)” and table 6 is interpreted as using active bandwidth part for one or more cells, section 2.1.8, proposal 17, using QCL-Type-D without PL-RS and with PL-RS is interpreted as using two different types of QCL-Type-D for two or more control resource sets); and
select a first control resource set using a first QCL-Type-D and a second control resource set using a second QCL-Type-D for monitoring at least two of the physical downlink control channel candidates (section 2.1.2, observation 2, proposal 4, subset of CORESET is interpreted as using a first control resource set and using a second control resource set, section 2.1.8, proposal 17, determining (DL beam for measurement) with a QCL-Type-D using configuration 1 for providing QCL-Type-D without or with PL-RS explicitly teaches selecting a first and a second QCL-Type-D for a first and a second control resource set),
wherein the selection of the first control resource set is based on at least one of: common search space sets or user specific search space sets of at least one control resource set on an active downlink bandwidth part of at least one cell that associated with one or more physical cell identifiers (observation 2, proposal 4, subset of CORESET is interpreted as using a first and a second control resource sets, section 2.1.2, proposal 4, CSS is equated to common search space set and USS is equated to user specific search space set, section 2.1.2,proposal 4, observation 3,determining QCL assumption for PDCCH reception according to associate CORESET is interpreted as selection selecting the first control resource set based on the common search space sets, section 2.1.4, proposal 10, detecting (DL DCI) from PDCCH reception associate with CORESET pool and using the DCI for indicating a TCI state (to provide common QCL information) is interpreted as using the TCI with CORESET, section 2.1.2, proposal 5, using PS-RNTI with a P-Cell is read as using one cell that associated with one or more physical cell identifiers, section 2.1.6, “working assumption from RAN#105 (bullet point 4)”, using maximum number of TCI agates pools for supporting across BWPs is interpreted as using one control resource set on active downlink bandwidth part), and the selection of the second control resource set is based on user specific search space sets of at least one control resource set on an active downlink bandwidth part of at least one cell that associated with at least two physical cell identifiers.
R1-2107485 does not teach explicitly an apparatus of a communication network, comprising: at least one processor; and at least one memory storing instructions that, when executed with the at least one processor.
Cirik in view of R1-2107485 teaches an apparatus of a communication network, comprising: at least one processor; and at least one memory storing instructions that, when executed with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to at least (paragraph 222 and 223 together teach this limitation):
It would have been obvious within the scope of a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify R1-2107485 for using at least one processor; and at least one memory storing instructions that, when executed with the at least one processor as taught by Cirik because it would allow using a unified TCI framework for supporting source/target QCL relations in the current supported QCL type-D.
In response to claims 46 and 58,
R1-2107485 teaches to monitor physical downlink control channel candidates in overlapping monitoring occasions of the two or more control resource sets associated with the first QCL-TypeD and second QCL-TypeD (section 2.1.2, observation 2, tracking is equated to determining and monitoring occasions, tracking and determining DL QCL information for PDCCH reception explicitly teaches monitor physical downlink control channel candidates, figure 4 explicitly teaches having overlaps between two resources, section 2.1.2, observation 2, proposal 4, subset of CORESET is interpreted as using two or more control resource sets of the communication network, section 2.1.8, proposal 17, determining (DL beam for measurement) with a QCL-Type-D using configuration 1 for providing QCL-Type-D without or with PL-RS explicitly teaches using a first and a second type QCL-Type-D).
R1-2107485 does not teach explicitly wherein the instructions, when executed with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus.
Cirik in view of R1-2107485 teaches wherein the instructions, when executed with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus (paragraph 222 and 223 together teach this limitation):
It would have been obvious within the scope of a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify R1-2107485 for using instructions, when executed with the at least one processor as taught by Cirik because it would allow using a unified TCI framework for supporting source/target QCL relations in the current supported QCL Type-D.
In response to claims 47 and 59,
R1-2107485 teaches wherein the first and the second control resource sets have been activated with transmission configuration indication states (section 2.1.2, observation 2, proposal 4, subset of CORESET is interpreted as using, section 2.1.4, using a single or multiple serving for DL TCI spatial relation framework is interpreted using multiple TCI states, section 2.1.2, applying QCL information (by the UE) joint/separate TCI for all CORESET explicitly teaches activating TCI states for the first and second control resource sets).
In response to claims 48 and 60,
R1-2107485 teaches wherein the transmission configuration indication states comprise at least one of a joint transmission configuration indication state or a downlink transmission configuration indication state associated with at least two different QCL-Type set to type-D properties (section 2.1.2, applying QCL information (by the UE) joint/separate TCI for all CORESET explicitly teaches the transmission configuration indication states comprise at least one of a joint transmission configuration indication state, section 2.1.8, proposal 17,QCL-Type-D without PLRS is equated to one type of QCL-Type-D property and QCL-Type-D with PL-RS is equated to another type of QCL-Type-D property, determining (DL beam for measurement) with a QCL-Type-D using configuration 1 for providing QCL-Type-D without or with PL-RS explicitly teaches using at least two different QCL-Type set to type-D properties).
In response to claim 49
R1-2107485 does not teach explicitly about claim 49.
Cirik in view of R1-2107485 teaches wherein the downlink transmission configuration indication state of the first and the second control resource sets corresponding to the user specific search space sets is associated with a physical cell identification different from that of a serving cell (paragraph 343, one or more CORESETs are interpreted as using a first and a second CORESET, using a TCI field (in a DCI) transmitted by a PDCCH in a CORESET explicitly teaches using the transmission configuration indication state of the first and the second control resource sets, paragraph 373 using one or more second CORESET with using user specific search (USS) set is interpreted as using the first and the second control resource sets corresponding to the user specific search space sets, paragraph 375-376, using one or more cells are interpreted as using a physical cell that is different from a serving cell, using cell specific index with one or more CORESETs associate with one or more cells explicitly teaches using a physical cell identification different from that of a serving cell).
It would have been obvious within the scope of a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify R1-2107485 for using transmission configuration indication state of the first and the second control resource sets corresponding to the user specific search space sets is associated with a physical cell identification different from that of a serving cell as taught by Cirik because it would allow using a unified TCI framework for supporting source/target QCL relations in the current supported QCL type-D.
In response to claims 50 and 62,
R1-2107485 does not teach explicitly about claims 50 and 62.
Cirik in view of R1-2107485 teaches wherein the instructions, when executed with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to select a control resource set corresponding to at least one of a common search space set or a user specific search space set with a lowest index in a cell with a lowest index as compared to other cells of the communication network (paragraph 372, associating a first CORESET with common search space (CSS) set is interpreted as select a control resource set corresponding to at least one of a common search space set , paragraph 373 using one or more second CORESET with using user specific search (USS) set is interpreted as using the first and the second control resource sets corresponding to the user specific search space sets, paragraph 375-376, using one or more cells are interpreted as using a physical cell that is different from a serving cell, using cell specific index of the cell being the lowest among the cell specific indices with one or more CORESETs associate with one or more cells explicitly teaches using a lowest index in a cell with a lowest index as compared to other cells of the communication network).
It would have been obvious within the scope of a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify R1-2107485 for using select a control resource set corresponding to at least one of a common search space set or a user specific search space set with a lowest index in a cell with a lowest index as compared to other cells of the communication network as taught by Cirik because it would allow using a unified TCI framework for supporting source/target QCL relations in the current supported QCL Type-D.
In response to claim 52,
R1-2107485 does not teach explicitly about claim 52.
Cirik in view of R1-2107485 teaches wherein the instructions, when executed with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to select a control resource set corresponding to the common search space set with a lowest index in a cell with a lowest index as compared to other cells of the communication network that have a control resource set corresponding to the user specific search space associated with a physical cell identification different from that of the cell (paragraph 372, associating a first CORESET with common search space (CSS) set is interpreted as select a control resource set corresponding to at least one of a common search space set , paragraph 373 using one or more second CORESET with using user specific search (USS) set is interpreted as using the first and the second control resource sets corresponding to the user specific search space sets, paragraph 375-376, using one or more cells are interpreted as using a physical cell that is different from a serving cell, using cell specific index of the cell being the lowest among the cell specific indices with one or more CORESETs associate with one or more cells explicitly teaches this limitation).
It would have been obvious within the scope of a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify R1-2107485 for using select a control resource set corresponding to at least one of a common search space set or a user specific search space set with a lowest index in a cell with a lowest index as compared to other cells of the communication network as taught by Cirik because it would allow using a unified TCI framework for supporting source/target QCL relations in the current supported QCL type-D.
In response to claim 53,
R1-2107485 does not teach explicitly about claim 53.
Cirik in view of R1-2107485 teaches wherein the user specific search space is associated with a physical cell identification different from that of the cell and containing a common search space(, paragraph 373 using one or more second CORESET with using user specific search (USS) set is interpreted as using the first and the second control resource sets corresponding to the user specific search space sets, paragraph 375-376, using one or more cells are interpreted as using a physical cell that is different from a serving cell, using cell specific index with one or more CORESETs associate with one or more cells explicitly teaches using a physical cell identification different from that of a serving cell).
It would have been obvious within the scope of a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify R1-2107485 for using transmission configuration indication state of the first and the second control resource sets corresponding to the user specific search space sets is associated with a physical cell identification different from that of a serving cell as taught by Cirik because it would allow using a unified TCI framework for supporting source/target QCL relations in the current supported QCL type-D.
In response to claims 54 and 65,
R1-2107485 does not teach explicitly about claims 54 and 65.
Cirik in view of R1-2107485 teaches wherein the instructions, when executed with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to select any control resource set of two or more control resource sets having the same QCL-Type-D (paragraph 380-381, selecting first or second CORESET for QCL-Type-D explicitly teaches this limitation).
In response to claim 64,
R1-2107485 does not teach explicitly about claim 64.
Cirik in view of R1-2107485 teaches wherein the selecting the first control resource set comprises selecting a control resource set corresponds to the common search space set with a lowest index in a cell with a lowest index as compared to other cells of the communication network that have a control resource set corresponding to the user specific search space associated with a physical cell identification different from that of the cell (paragraph 372, associating a first CORESET with common search space (CSS) set is interpreted as select a control resource set corresponding to at least one of a common search space set , paragraph 373 using one or more second CORESET with using user specific search (USS) set is interpreted as using the first and the second control resource sets corresponding to the user specific search space sets, paragraph 375-376, using one or more cells are interpreted as using a physical cell that is different from a serving cell, using cell specific index of the cell being the lowest among the cell specific indices with one or more CORESETs associate with one or more cells explicitly teaches using a lowest index in a cell with a lowest index as compared to other cells of the communication network).
It would have been obvious within the scope of a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify R1-2107485 for using select a control resource set corresponding to at least one of a common search space set or a user specific search space set with a lowest index in a cell with a lowest index as compared to other cells of the communication network as taught by Cirik because it would allow using a unified TCI framework for supporting source/target QCL relations in the current supported QCL type-D.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 51 and 55-56 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.
As for dependent claim 51, this claim is objected, because there is no prior art in the record that teaches claimed limitation “wherein when there is no at least one control resource set corresponding to a common search space in the active downlink bandwidth part of one or more cells, the cell with a lowest index that is selected does not have a control resource set corresponding to the user specific search space associated with a physical cell identification different from that of the cell.”
The closest prior art in the record Cirik et al. (20200351841) teaches in paragraph 343 about using one or more CORESET with a TCI field in a DCI, he teaches in paragraph 372-373 about using CSS and USS with the CORESET, he teaches in paragraph 375-376 about using cell specific index with the CORESET and he teaches in paragraph 380-381 about using a QCL-Type-D with a first and a second CORESET, but he fails to teach the above cited limitation.
As for dependent claim 55, this claim is objected, because there is no prior art in the record that teaches claimed limitation “wherein the instructions, when executed with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to select a control resource set with a lowest index in a cell as compared to other cells of the communication network that do not have a control resource set corresponding to the user specific search space set associated with a physical cell identification different from that of the cell and containing a common search space.”
The closest prior art in the record Cirik et al. (20200351841) teaches in paragraph 343 about using one or more CORESET with a TCI field in a DCI, he teaches in paragraph 372-373 about using CSS and USS with the CORESET, he teaches in paragraph 375-376 about using cell specific index with the CORESET and he teaches in paragraph 380-381 about using a QCL-Type-D with a first and a second CORESET, but he fails to teach the above cited limitation.
As for dependent claim 56, this claim is objected, because there is no prior art in the record that teaches claimed limitation “wherein the instructions, when executed with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to select a control resource set with a lowest user specific search space set index in a cell as compared to other cells of the communication network that do not have a control resource set corresponding to the user specific search space associated with a physical cell identification different from that of the cell and containing a common search space.”
The closest prior art in the record Cirik et al. (20200351841) teaches in paragraph 343 about using one or more CORESET with a TCI field in a DCI, he teaches in paragraph 372-373 about using CSS and USS with the CORESET, he teaches in paragraph 375-376 about using cell specific index with the CORESET and he teaches in paragraph 380-381 about using a QCL-Type-D with a first and a second CORESET, but he fails to teach the above cited limitation.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABUSAYEED HAQUE whose telephone number is (571)270-7252. The examiner can normally be reached 9 am -7:30 pm.
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, Faruk Hamza can be reached at 571-272-7969. 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.
/ABUSAYEED M HAQUE/Examiner, Art Unit 2466
/CHRISTOPHER M CRUTCHFIELD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2466
Prosecution Insights