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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on June 23, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to pending claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Objection
Claims 5, 6, 10, 11, 13-16 objected to under 37 CFR 1.75(c) as being in improper form because they depend from another multiple dependent claim. Under 35 U.S.C 112(e), a multiple dependent claim shall not serve as a basis for any other multiple dependent claim.
Claim 5 depends on “any of claims 1-4,” but claim 4 is a multiple dependent claim. Claim 6 depends on “any of claims 1-5,”but claim 5 is a multiple dependent claim.
Claim 10 depends on “any of claims 7-9,” but claim 9 is a multiple dependent claim.
Claim 11 depends on “any of claims 7-10,” but claim 10 is a multiple depend claim. Similar issues exist in dependent claims 13-17.
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-5, 7-12, 14, 15 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kang et al(US 2020/0036424 A1) in view of Chavva et al(US 2021/0351885 A1).
Regarding claims 1 and 7, Kang ‘424 teaches, an apparatus for wireless communication ([0353] and Figs. 8, 14, UE 1420), the apparatus comprising: at least one processor( [0353] and Figs. 8, 14, UE 1420 comprising processor 1421); and a memory coupled to the at least one processor( [0353] and Figs. 8, 14, UE 1420 comprising memory 1422), wherein the at least one processor is configured to: initiate, by a user equipment (UE), transmission of capability information of the UE for channel state information (CSI) reporting([0299], [0340], [0341] and Fig. 13, the UE communicating capability of the UE for CSI reporting to the eNB); and
receive, by the UE from a base station, configuration information for the CSI reporting([0227],[0335], [0336], and Figs. 9-13, UE receiving CSI report setting/configuration from the eNB) the configuration information indicating a CSI reference resource comprising a plurality of a first type of time units for CSI reference signal (CSI RS) monitoring( [0266]-[0268] an Figs. 9-13, UE receiving resource setting/configuration that includes CSI-RS timing offset (hereinafter, referred to as ‘X’) from eNB. X may be expressed in the form of the number of slots (i.e., slot unit) or the number of symbols (i.e., symbol unit), Kang ‘424 also shows CSI-RS#0 and CSI-RS#1 appearing in multiple time instances),
a CSI target resource comprising one or more of a second type of time units for which channel state information is to be estimated ([0284]-[0286), [0298], [0299], [0331] and Figs. 9-13, UE receiving setting/configuration that includes Y value indicating the interval between the timing at which the CSI reporting is triggered and the timing at which the UE actually performs the CSI reporting and , a Z values which indicates a processing time interval that is required for the UE to report the CSI using the CSI-RS received from the eNB,)based at least in part on the CSI-reference signal monitoring in the CSI reference resource, or both([0301]-[0303], [0311]-[0312], [0331] and Figs. 9-13, CSI measurement based on CSI-RS resources defined in the measurement setting, Kang ‘424 further teaches calculating CSI based CSI-RS received within the defined time and predicting estimating value by applying the extrapolation to the calculated value up to the CSI reporting timing−Z timing[0331]), and wherein the CSI target resource is later in time compared to the CSI reference resource( [0309], [0320] and Figs. 10-12, the time interval Z (e.g. Z1) is later in time compared to the CSI-RS time interval(X)).
Kang ‘424 does not explicitly teach, wherein a transmission of a CSI report is between the CSI reference resource and the CSI target resource in time.
Chavva ‘885 teaches, wherein a transmission of a CSI report is between the CSI reference resource and the CSI target resource in time([0132], [0139], [0140],[0147] and Figs .7, 8, the UE transmits a CSI report at a current time instance t1 that contains the predicted feedback parameters for a future time instance t1+
∆
.The CSI report transmission occurs after the reference monitoring at t1 but before the future target time interval for which the channel is estimated).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Kang 424 by incorporating the teaching of Chavva ‘885, since such modification would enable to compute Reference Signal Received Power (RSRP) associated with a plurality of beams of the UE at the current time instance, for determining an optimal beam at the current time instance and predicting optimal beams at the future time instances, as suggested by Chavva ‘885([0044]).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Kang ‘424 and Chavva ‘885 teaches all of the claim limitations, Kang ‘424 further teaches, wherein the first type of time unit is the same as or different from the second type of time unit ([0266]- [0268], [0286] and Figs. 9-13, the time units that are associated with X, Y and Z values might be same slots (i.e., slot unit) or the number of symbols (i.e., symbol unit).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Kang ‘424 and Chavva ‘885 teaches all of the claim limitations, Kang ‘424 further teaches, wherein the first type of time unit is different from the second type of time unit ([0266]- [0268], [0286] and Figs. 9-13, the time units that are associated with X, Y and Z values might also be different for example while X maybe slots (i.e., slot unit) the Y or Z could be expressed as number of symbols (i.e., symbol unit)).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Kang ‘424 and Chavva ‘885 teaches all of the claim limitations, Kang ‘424 further teaches, receiving the first type of time unit and the second type of time unit as at least one of a slot, a mini-slot, a subframe, a frame, or a collection of orthogonal frequency-division multiplexing (OFDM) symbols unit ([0266]- [0268], [0286] and Figs. 9-13, the time units that are associated with X, Y and Z values might be indicated as a slot (i.e., slot unit) or the number of symbols (i.e., symbol unit).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Kang ‘424 and Chavva ‘885 teaches all of the claim limitations, Kang ‘424 further teaches, receiving the configuration information in a radio resource control (RRC) message ([0241], [0268], [0298] and Figs. 9-12, CSI reporting setting may be configured (or indicated) through higher layer signaling (e.g., RRC signaling)).
Regarding claim 8, Kang ‘424 teaches, wherein the capability information indicates a minimum duration of the CSI reference resource ([0299], [0340], [0341] and Fig.9- 12, the UE communicating capability of the UE for CSI reporting that includes the minimum CSI-RS needed).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Kang ‘424 and Chavva ‘885 teaches all of the claim limitations, Kang ‘424 further teaches, wherein the capability information indicates a maximum time offset between the CSI reference resource and the CSI target resource ([0299], [0340], [0341] and Fig.9- 12, the UE communicating capability of the UE including time interval between CSI RS (X interval) and the Z interval)).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Kang ‘424 and Chavva ‘885 teaches all of the claim limitations, Kang ‘424 further teaches, wherein the capability information indicates a minimum time offset between the CSI reference resource and transmission of a CSI report ([0291], [0293], [0299] and Figs. 10-13, capability information including the minimum time interval Z that corresponds to a processing time interval that is required for the UE to report the CSI using the CSI-RS received from the eNB).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Kang ‘424 and Chavva ‘885 teaches all of the claim limitations, Kang ‘424 further teaches, wherein the configuration information further indicates a number of CSI-RS occasions to be used to for the channel state information estimation, and the number of CSI-RS occasions comprises a single occasion or multiple occasions ([0325], [0326], [0331] and Fig. 12, receiving configuration information including a measurement restriction On/OFF and selecting number CSI-RS for calculating/predicting based on the measurement restriction indicator).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Kang ‘424 and Chavva ‘885 teaches all of the claim limitations, Kang ‘424 further teaches, wherein the number of CSI-RS occasions comprises multiple occasions ([0325], [0326], [0331] and Fig. 12, the UE may calculate the estimation value for the CSI-RS 1202 and the estimation value for the CSI-RS 1204).
Regarding claim 14, Kang ‘424 teaches, wherein the configuration information indicates the CSI reference resource and a duration of the CSI reference resource ([0266]-[0268] an Figs. 9-13, UE receiving resource setting/configuration that includes CSI-RS time interval X from eNB).
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Kang ‘424 and Chavva ‘885 teaches all of the claim limitations, Kang ‘424 further teaches, wherein the configuration information indicates the CSI reference resource and a time offset between the CSI reference resource and transmission of a CSI report ([0284]-[0286) and Figs. 9-13, UE receiving setting/configuration that includes Y value indicating the interval between the timing at which the CSI reporting is triggered and the timing at which the UE actually performs the CSI reporting).
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Kang ‘424 and Chavva ‘885 teaches all of the claim limitations, Kang ‘424 further teaches, wherein the configuration information indicates the CSI target resource, and a duration of the CSI target resource, a time offset between the CSI reference resources and the CSI target resource, or both([0266]-[0268], [0286] and Figs. 9-13, The UE receiving configuration information that indicates time offset and duration for each of X, Y and Z).
Claims 6 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kang ‘424 and Chavva ‘885 as applied to claim above, and further in view of Lee et al(US 2020/0177254 A1).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Kang ‘424 and Chavva ‘885 teaches all of the claimed limitations except, receiving the configuration information as a first bitmap representing the plurality of the first type of time units for the CSI reference resource, a second bit map representing one or more of the second type of time units for the CSI target resource, or both.
Lee ‘254 teaches, receiving the configuration information as a first bitmap representing the plurality of the first type of time units for the CSI reference resource, a second bit map representing one or more of the second type of time units for the CSI target resource, or both ([0116], [0174], [0195], and Figs. 8-10, CSI-RS measurement configurations X and Y values being indicated using bitmap).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Kang 424 by incorporating the teaching of Lee ‘254, since such modification would provide an apparatuses and system for adaptively configuring and reporting CSI, as suggested by Lee ‘254([0004]).
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Kang ‘424 and Chavva ‘885 teaches all of the claimed limitations except, wherein the configuration information indicates the CSI reference resource and a time offset between the CSI reference resource and a radio frame boundary.
Lee ‘254 teaches, wherein the configuration information indicates the CSI reference resource and a time offset between the CSI reference resource and a radio frame boundary ([0100], CSI-RS resource and time offset between CSI-RS end of frame boundary).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Kang 424 by incorporating the teaching of Lee ‘254, since such modification would provide an apparatus and system for adaptively configuring and reporting CSI, as suggested by Lee ‘254([0004]).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kang ‘424 and Chavva ‘885 as applied to claim above, and further in view of Ramireddy et al(US 2022/0029676 A1).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Kang ‘424 and Chavva ‘885 teaches all of the claimed limitations except, the configuration information indicates the CSI reference resource; and the plurality of the first type of time units comprise a plurality of consecutive slots in the time domain.
Ramireddy ‘676 teaches, the configuration information indicates the CSI reference resource; and the plurality of the first type of time units comprise a plurality of consecutive slots in the time domain ([0277], [0370], [0603], UE receiving CISRS configuration that indicates consecutive slots).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Kang 424 by incorporating the teaching of Ramireddy ‘676, since such modification would provide a method of CSI reporting and a codebook structure for Doppler-delay codebook-based precoding in a wireless communication system, as suggested by Ramireddy ‘676 (abstract).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AWET A HAILE whose telephone number is (571)270-3114. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 8:30 AM - 4:30 PM 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, Michael Thier can be reached at (571)272-2832. 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.
/AWET HAILE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2474
Prosecution Insights