CTFR 17/915,061 CTFR 83553 DETAILED ACTION This office action is responsive to communications filed on January 13, 2026. Claims 10 and 23 have been amended. Claims 11, 12, 24, and 25 have been canceled. Claims 1-10, 13-23, and 26-30 are pending in the application. Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Information Disclosure Statement The Information Disclosure Statement filed on 4/17/2026 has been considered. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 28 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ying et al. (US 2022/0116129) in view of Li et al. (US 2022/0159662) . Regarding Claim 28, Ying teaches an apparatus for wireless communications at a base station, comprising: means for transmitting, to a first user equipment (UE), a cross-link interference measurement configuration which provides a cross-link interference measurement resource for measurement by the first UE of cross-link interference from an aggressor UE ( “a TRP may command the same or a different UE to perform CLI measurement. The CLI measurement may provide an indication of the level of interference experience by a UE. A TRP may configure a UE using RRC and/or an RRC message on a CLI measurement resource. A resource configuration IE may include the following fields: resource ID, resource type, power control offset, resource mapping, reference signal sequence id, and spatial relation information” – See [0077]; “CLI measurement and the UE can be configured with multiple SRS resource sets with usage “CLI measurement.”” – See [0265]; “UE 910A may experience UE-to-UE interference 960 due to the UL transmission 950 generated from UE 910B” – See [0044]; See also Fig. 9; The base station transmits, to a first UE, a CLI measurement configuration indicating SRS resources on which the first UE measures CLI from an aggressor UE). Ying does not explicitly teach means for transmitting, to the first UE, an indication of a reference cell to be used by the first UE for estimation of a cross-link interference measurement resource timing; and means for receiving a cross-link interference report from the first UE which includes one or more cross-link interference measurements made by the first UE on the cross-link interference measurement resource and in accordance with the cross-link interference measurement resource timing. However, Li teaches means for transmitting, to the first UE, an indication of a reference cell to be used by the first UE for estimation of a cross-link interference measurement resource timing ( “implementations can include receiving timing information indicating a timing of an arrival associated with a CLI signal to be measured to avoid an interruption on one or more serving cells during a measurement of the CLI signal. The timing information can include information indicating that a downlink timing of a serving cell is used for the measurement of the CLI signal” – See [0011]; “FIG. 12 illustrates a flowchart of an example of a CLI measurement process that uses timing information. At 1205, the UE receives timing information. In some implementations, the timing information is received from a gNB” – See [0188]; The gNB/base station transmits, to the first UE, an indication that the serving cell is used as a timing reference for the CLI measurement); and means for receiving a cross-link interference report from the first UE which includes one or more cross-link interference measurements made by the first UE on the cross-link interference measurement resource and in accordance with the cross-link interference measurement resource timing ( “At 1210, the UE performs a measurement of the CLI signal based on the timing information” – See [0188]; “The UE can report the measurement to its serving cell such that the serving cell is able to be aware of the interference situation of the victim UE” – See [0171]; See also Fig. 12; The first UE measures the CLI in accordance with the timing reference cell indication and reports it to the base station in step 1215). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ying to include means for transmitting, to the first UE, an indication of a reference cell to be used by the first UE for estimation of a cross-link interference measurement resource timing; and means for receiving a cross-link interference report from the first UE which includes one or more cross-link interference measurements made by the first UE on the cross-link interference measurement resource and in accordance with the cross-link interference measurement resource timing. Motivation for doing so would be to take propagation delay differences between the victim UE to its serving cell and the victim UE to the aggressor UE into consideration when performing CLI measurements (See Li, [0172]). Claim 30 is rejected based on reasoning similar to Claim 28 . Response to Arguments 07-37 AIA Applicant’s arguments filed on January 13, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. On pages 10-11 of the remarks, Applicant argues “Applicant respectfully disagrees with the rejections and requests withdrawal of the rejections in view of the amendments and following remarks. Factual findings made by the Office are the "necessary underpinnings to establish obviousness." Manual of Patent Examining Procedure ("MPEP") § 2141(II). "The key to supporting any rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is the clear articulation of the reason(s) why the claimed invention would have been obvious. The Supreme Court in KSR Int'l Co. V. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 538, 418, (2007) noted that the analysis supporting a rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103 should be made explicit." MPEP § 2143. Moreover, "impermissible hindsight must be avoided and the legal conclusion must be reached on the basis of the facts gleaned from the prior art." MPEP § 2142. Further, the Office must consider the claimed invention "as a whole"; this prevents evaluation of the invention part-by-part. See Allergan, Inc. v. Apotex, Inc., 754 F.3d 952 (Fed. Cir. 2014) ("[t]his form of hindsight reasoning, using the invention as a roadmap to find its prior art components discount[s] the value of combining various existing features or Although Applicant does not necessarily concede the rejections, in an effort to expedite compact prosecution, Applicant has amended independent 10 and 23 are amended to incorporate the subject matter of allowable dependent claims 12 and 25, respectively. In light of these amendments and arguments, independent claims 1, 10, 14, 23, 27-30 are patentable over the cited references.” Applicant provides remarks with vague references to claims 28 and 30 being patentable over the cited prior art based on provided amendments and arguments. Examiner notes that independent claims 28 and 30 were not amended to incorporate the subject matter that was indicated as being allowable in the previous Office Action dated November 21, 2025. Thus, they are still rejected based on the same grounds as the previous Office Action. With respect to the arguments provided by the Applicant, Applicant’s arguments fail to comply with 37 CFR 1.111(b) because they amount to a general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references. Applicant provides various case law and MPEP citations dealing with the establishment of obviousness and impermissible hindsight, but there does not appear to be a specific argument relating to claims 28 or 30. Nor does there appear to be a specific argument in regard to the combination of the Ying and Li references which are relied upon in the rejection of claims 28 and 30 under 35 U.S.C. 103 . Allowable Subject Matter 12-151-07 AIA 07-97 12-51-07 Claim s 1-10, 13-23, and 26, 27, and 29 are allowed. Conclusion 07-39 AIA THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 Scott M Sciacca whose telephone number is (571)270-1919. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday, 7:30 A.M. - 5:00 P.M. 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, Joseph Avellino can be reached at (571) 272-3905. 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. /SCOTT M SCIACCA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2478 Application/Control Number: 17/915,061 Page 2 Art Unit: 2478 Application/Control Number: 17/915,061 Page 3 Art Unit: 2478 Application/Control Number: 17/915,061 Page 4 Art Unit: 2478 Application/Control Number: 17/915,061 Page 5 Art Unit: 2478 Application/Control Number: 17/915,061 Page 6 Art Unit: 2478 Application/Control Number: 17/915,061 Page 7 Art Unit: 2478
Prosecution Insights