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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 1/7/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/9/2025 with regards to claims 1, 18, 20 and 29 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant argues:
Applicant respectfully submits that LIU and GUO do not disclose or suggest each and every feature recited in amended claim 20. For example, LIU and GUO do not disclose or suggest "transmitting signaling that identifies a second type of channel state feedback processing to switch to when a power threshold is satisfied," as recited in amended claim 20.
The examiner calls attention to the prior art of LIU. LIU writes, “Optionally, the UE may autonomously select a feedback mode by measuring the reference signals, and report the feedback mode to the base station. Optionally, the base station may notify, by using higher layer (RRC) signaling or dynamic signaling (DCI), the UE of a feedback mode that should be used. The UE measures the reference signals, and determines a set of channel state information CSI of the UE based on the selected feedback mode or the feedback mode configured by the base station” (paragraph 0116). LIU states the base station may notify, by using RRC or DCI signaling, the UE of a feedback mode that should be used. LIU indicates based on the decision by the base station, for instance when a power threshold is satisfied, the base may switch the feedback mode that should be used by transmitting a RRC or DCI signal.
Applicant respectfully submits that LIU, GUO, and KAHN do not disclose or suggest each and every feature recited in amended claim 1. For example, LIU, GUO, and KAHN do not disclose or suggest "receiving signaling that identifies a second type of channel state feedback processing to which the first device is to switch when a power threshold is satisfied," as recited in amended claim 1.
The examiner calls attention to the prior art of LIU. LIU writes, “Optionally, the UE may autonomously select a feedback mode by measuring the reference signals, and report the feedback mode to the base station. Optionally, the base station may notify, by using higher layer (RRC) signaling or dynamic signaling (DCI), the UE of a feedback mode that should be used. The UE measures the reference signals, and determines a set of channel state information CSI of the UE based on the selected feedback mode or the feedback mode configured by the base station” (paragraph 0116). LIU states the base station may notify, by using RRC or DCI signaling, the UE of a feedback mode that should be used. LIU indicates based on the decision by the base station, for instance when a power threshold is satisfied, the base may switch the feedback mode that should be used by transmitting a RRC or DCI signal.
Since the independent claims remain rejected, the rejections of the dependent claims, 2-17, 19, 21-28, and 30, persist.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 20 and 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LIU, et al. (US 20190334602 A1, hereinafter, "LIU") in view of GUO, et al. (US 20220302978 A1, hereinafter, "GUO").
Regarding claim 29, LIU teaches a second device for wireless communication (paragraph 0162;
figure 7, 200: base station), comprising:
one or more memories (paragraph 0178; figure 9, 42: memory);
and one or more processors coupled to the one or more memories (paragraph 0178; figure 9,
41: processor),
the one or more processors (paragraph 0178; figure 9, 41: processor) configured to cause the
second device to:
transmit signaling that identifies a second type of channel state feedback processing to switch to when a power threshold is satisfied;
LIU writes, “Optionally, the UE may autonomously select a feedback mode by measuring the reference signals, and report the feedback mode to the base station. Optionally, the base station may notify, by using higher layer (RRC) signaling or dynamic signaling (DCI), the UE of a feedback mode that should be used. The UE measures the reference signals, and determines a set of channel state information CSI of the UE based on the selected feedback mode or the feedback mode configured by the base station” (paragraph 0116).
receive first channel state feedback processed using a first type of channel state feedback
processing;
LIU writes, “In a feasible design, the at least one element in the CSI is an RI that is recently reported
before the UE determines the M pieces of first reference signal resource indication information, and the
determining, by the UE in the first feedback mode, at least one element in the CSI based on the N first
reference signal resources, and determining the M pieces of first reference signal resource indication
information based on the at least one element in the CSI includes: determining, by the UE in the
first feedback mode, the recently reported RI based on the N first reference signal resources, and
determining the M pieces of first reference signal resource indication information based on the recently
reported RI” (paragraph 0010). LIU states determining, by the UE in the first feedback mode, the
recently reported RI based on the N first reference signal resources, and determining the M pieces of
first reference signal resource indication information based on the recently reported RI, where the at
least one element in the CSI is an RI.
and receive, after satisfaction of the power threshold, second channel state feedback processed using the second type of channel state feedback processing,
LIU writes, “The UE may determine the feedback mode in a plurality of manners. For example, the UE
may measure received power of the N first reference signal resources. When the UE determines that
there is more than one first reference signal resource whose received power exceeds a predetermined
threshold, the UE may determine to use the first feedback mode to report the CSI. When the UE
determines that there is only one first reference signal resource whose received power exceeds a
predetermined threshold, the UE may determine to use the second feedback mode to report the CSI.
The UE may further determine the feedback mode in other manners, and such manners are not
excluded herein” (paragraph 0133). LIU specifies that when the UE determines that there is only one
first reference signal resource whose received power exceeds a predetermined threshold, the UE may
determine to use the second feedback mode to report the CSI.
LIU fails to explicitly disclose information regarding, “wherein the second type of channel state
feedback processing is associated with less power consumption than the first type of channel state
feedback processing.”
However, in analogous art, GUO teaches wherein the second type of channel state feedback
processing is associated with less power consumption than the first type of channel state feedback
processing.
GUO writes, “CSI reports are reported to the gNB using the Physical Uplink Shared Channel (PUSCH).
Wideband CSI will have a smaller payload size compared to subband CSI. Therefore, subband CSI will use
more PUSCH resources as compared to wideband CSI” (paragraph 0013). GUO adds, “...selecting the CSI
report configuration for the UE, the PRB bundling configuration for the UE, or both the CSI report
configuration for the UE and the PRB bundling configuration for the UE comprises determining that the
UE is UL power-limited based on the UL power-limited status of the UE; and, upon determining that the
UE is UL power-limited, selecting wideband CSI reporting for the CSI report configuration” (paragraph
0019). GUO indicates the wideband CSI is selected for UL power-limited status. Therefore, the wideband
CSI consumes less power than the subband CSI which uses more PUSCH resources.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention and method of LIU to include aspects of the method and apparatus described by GUO that "relates to Channel State Information (CSI) reporting and Physical Resource Block (PRB) bundling in a wireless communication system that includes an Active Antenna System (AAS)." GUO provides motivation for modification of the invention stating, “Embodiments of the present disclosure improve both UL and DL performance by adaptively selecting the best PRB bundling and CSI reporting configuration. A good trade-off is reached between UL and DL, beamforming and channel estimation, and hence overall system performance is improved adaptively." (paragraph 0093).
Claim 20 is a method claim corresponding to the apparatus claim 29 that has already been
rejected above. The applicant’s attention is directed to the rejection of claim 29. Claim 20 is rejected
under the same rational as claim 29.
Claim(s) 21, 23-24, and 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LIU and GUO as applied to claims 20 and 29 above, and further in view of CHAVVA, et al. (US 20210351885 A1, hereinafter, "CHAVVA").
Regarding claim 30, LIU and GUO teach the second device of claim 29,
Additionally, LIU teaches wherein the one or more processors (paragraph 0178; figure 9, 41:
processor) are further configured to cause the second device to:
LIU and GUO fail to explicitly disclose information regarding “decode the first channel state feedback based at least in part on the first type of channel state feedback processing; and decode the second channel state feedback based at least in part on the second type of channel state feedback
processing.”
However, in analogous art, CHAVVA teaches decode the first channel state feedback based at
least in part on the first type of channel state feedback processing; and decode the second channel
state feedback based at least in part on the second type of channel state feedback processing.
CHAVVA writes, “In an exemplary embodiment, wherein generating the CSI report comprises encoding,
by the neural network (602c), the compiled at least one of the computed values of the CSI feedback
parameters and the predicted values the CSI feedback parameters” (paragraph 0042). CHAVVA
continues, “The gNB 607 can decode the encoded CSI report. The decoding involves determining
whether mode ‘1’ or mode ‘2’ was used for encoding the CSI report. If it is determined that mode ‘1’
was used, the gNB 607 can decode ‘K’ symbols of the encoded CSI report to ‘N’ symbols of the original
CSI report, generated by the UE 601. If it is determined that mode ‘2’ was used, the gNB 607 can decode
‘P’ symbols to ‘N’ symbols to obtain the original CSI report” (paragraph 0186). CHAVVA states that
generating the CSI reports comprise encoding by the neural network, the compiled at least one of the
computed values of the CSI feedback parameters and the predicted values the CSI feedback parameters.
The gNB, (i.e. BS), can decode the encoded CSI report whether mode ‘1’ or mode ‘2’. CHAVVA indicates
the decoding can determine whether the first or second channel state feedback, and take appropriate
measures to decode the CSI report.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention and method of LIU and GUO to include aspects of the method and apparatus described by CHAVVA "relate to Channel State Information (CSI) reporting in 5.sup.th Generation (5G) New Radio (NR) communication systems, and more particularly to methods and systems for generating a CSI report comprising of parameters estimated and predicted using Machine Learning." CHAVVA provides motivation for modification of the invention stating, “Another object of the embodiments herein is to predict probable values of the feedback parameters at future time instances, using the at least one ML based model, and include the predicted feedback parameters in the CSI report; wherein the at least one ML based model may consider variations in factors such as delay in gNB scheduling PDSCH, channel conditions, block error rate, CSI reporting periodicity, code rate, and so on, for predicting the future values of the feedback parameters, in order to improve the accuracy of prediction and increase the optimality of the CSI report" (paragraph 0086).
Claim 21 is a method claim corresponding to the apparatus claim 30 that has already been rejected above. The applicant’s attention is directed to the rejection of claim 30. Claim 21 is rejected under the same rational as claim 30.
Regarding claim 23, LIU and GUO teach the method of claim 20,
LIU and GUO fail to explicitly disclose information regarding “wherein the first type of channel state feedback processing is a first type of neural network processing with a first architecture.”
However, in analogous art, CHAVVA teaches wherein the first type of channel state feedback processing is a first type of neural network processing with a first architecture.
CHAVVA writes, “The neural network 602c of the UE 601 can compute and/or predict a plurality of
values of PMI and a plurality of values of RI for type-1 or type-2 CSI reporting” (paragraph 0124; figure 6,
602c: neural network). CHAVVA indicates the neural network can compute and/or predict a plurality of
values for type-1 or type-2 CSI reporting.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of
the claimed invention, to modify the invention and method of LIU and GUO to include aspects of
the method and apparatus described by CHAVVA "relate to Channel State Information (CSI) reporting in
5.sup.th Generation (5G) New Radio (NR) communication systems, and more particularly to methods
and systems for generating a CSI report comprising of parameters estimated and predicted using
Machine Learning." CHAVVA provides motivation for modification of the invention stating, “Another
object of the embodiments herein is to predict probable values of the feedback parameters at future
time instances, using the at least one ML based model, and include the predicted feedback parameters
in the CSI report; wherein the at least one ML based model may consider variations in factors such as
delay in gNB scheduling PDSCH, channel conditions, block error rate, CSI reporting periodicity, code rate,
and so on, for predicting the future values of the feedback parameters, in order to improve the accuracy
of prediction and increase the optimality of the CSI report" (paragraph 0086).
Regarding claim 24, LIU, GUO, and CHAVVA teach the method of claim 23,
Additionally, CHAVVA teaches wherein the second type of channel state feedback processing is a second type of neural network processing with a second architecture.
CHAVVA writes, “The neural network 602c of the UE 601 can compute and/or predict a plurality of
values of PMI and a plurality of values of RI for type-1 or type-2 CSI reporting” (paragraph 0124; figure 6,
602c: neural network). CHAVVA indicates the neural network can compute and/or predict a plurality of
values for type-1 or type-2 CSI reporting.
Claim(s) 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LIU and GUO as applied to claim 20 above, and further in view of MAO (US 20210234574 A1, hereinafter, "MAO").
Regarding claim 22, LIU and GUO teach the method of claim 20,
LIU and GUO fail to explicitly disclose information regarding “wherein at least one of the first channel state feedback or the second channel state feedback includes: Type-I channel state information, Type-II channel state information, Type-III channel state information, or a combination thereof.”
However, in analogous art, MAO teaches wherein at least one of the first channel state feedback or the second channel state feedback includes: Type-I channel state information, Type-II channel state information, Type-III channel state information, or a combination thereof.
MAO writes, “The at least one memory and the computer program code can be further configured to,
with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to at least generate and report Type II channel
state information (CSI) feedback configured with at least one frequency reporting granularity and/or at
least one time reporting granularity, wherein Type II CSI part 1 and part 2 are associated with different
reporting granularities in frequency and time” (paragraph 0020).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of
the claimed invention, to modify the invention and method of LIU and GUO to include aspects of
the method and apparatus described by MAO that "relate to communication systems. For example,
some embodiments may relate to channel state information feedback." MAO provides motivation for
modification of the invention stating, “Certain embodiments described herein may simplify channel
hardening, is reduce reporting overhead for CSI feedback and/or lower UE computation complexity.
Certain embodiments are, therefore, directed to improvements in computer-related technology,
specifically, by conserving network resources and reducing power consumption of network entities
and/or user equipment located within the network" (paragraph 0038).
Claim(s) 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LIU, GUO, and CHAVVA as applied to claim 23 above, and further in view of AKOUM, et al. (US 20200052758 A1, hereinafter, "AKOUM").
Regarding claim 25, LIU, GUO, and CHAVVA teach the method of claim 23,
LIU, GUO, and CHAVVA fail to explicitly disclose information regarding “wherein the second type of channel state feedback processing is a non-neural network type of processing.”
However, in analogous art, AKOUM teaches wherein the second type of channel state feedback
processing is a non-neural network type of processing.
AKOUM writes, “For example, the azimuth (H) domain can be characterized by a first CSI feedback
process, the vertical (V) domain can be characterized by a second CSI feedback process, and the
uncorrelated (U) domain can be characterized by a third CSI feedback process. The feedback processes
for the three domains can be different feedback processes, or two or more processes can be a same process and/or a similar process” (paragraph 0088). AKOUM adds, “Other directed and undirected model classification approaches (e.g., naïve Bayes, Bayesian networks, decision trees, neural networks,
fuzzy logic models, and probabilistic classification models) providing different patterns of independence
can be employed. Classification as used herein, can be inclusive of statistical regression that is utilized to
develop models of priority” (paragraph 0070). AKOUM indicates three CSI feedback processes. AKOUM
also indicates that different model approaches can be employed including non-neural network type.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of
the claimed invention, to modify the invention and method of LIU, GUO, and CHAVVA to include aspects of the method and apparatus described by AKOUM "relates generally to the field of mobile communication and, more specifically, to channel state information frameworks in wireless communication systems for advanced networks (e.g., 4G, 5G, and beyond)." AKOUM provides
motivation for modification of the invention stating, “Advantages of the disclosed aspects include, but
are not limited to, a feedback framework that is a general framework that works for FDD and TDD
reciprocity, and incorporates over-the-air calibration, which is crucial for both types of reciprocity to work. Another advantage is allowing the mobile device to control what goes in the feedback container,
which is a powerful tool to obtain the necessary feedback without overwhelming the system (e.g., the
communication network) with unnecessary overhead. A further advantage of the disclosed aspects is
that it allows for lower overhead and better testability of the reciprocity procedures, as well as over-the-
air calibration, especially for FDD reciprocity-based systems. A further advantage is that over-the-air
calibration following the feedback container does not have to reside in one coherence time and can be
sent on demand without incurring additional feedback overhead for different groups of antennas. Yet
another advantage is that the framework discussed herein does not have to be restricted to SU-MIMO,
but can also include a distributed feedback solution across multiple mobile devices" (paragraph 0073).
Claim(s) 26-27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LIU and GUO as applied to claim20 above, and further in view of CHAVVA and LI, et al. (US 20200136705 A1, hereinafter, "LI").
Regarding claim 26, LIU and GUO teach the method of claim 20, wherein the signaling identifies:
LIU and GUO fail to explicitly disclose information regarding “the first type of channel state feedback processing, the second type of channel state feedback processing, and the power threshold,” and “wherein the first type of channel state feedback processing comprises a first neural network processing technique and the second type of channel state feedback processing comprises a second neural network processing technique.”
However, in analogous art, LI teaches the first type of channel state feedback processing, the second type of channel state feedback processing, and the power threshold,
LI writes, “It is known that channel state indication (CSI) feedback type I may transmit first channel state information to the base station, and the first channel state information may include channel state feedback type indication (CTI), rank (RI), precoding matrix indicator (PMI) and channel quality indication (CQI), and beam information, etc.; and channel state indication (CSI) feedback type II may transmit second channel state information to the base station, the second channel state information may include beam number information (for example, which may be the superior beam number information as described above), PMI, and beam information, etc.” (paragraph 0031). LI adds, “... a beam power threshold may be determined in advance, and the beam power threshold is compared with the power of the plurality of second beams...” (paragraph 0038).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention and method of LIU and GUO to include aspects of the method and apparatus described by LI "relates to the field of wireless communications, and particularly, to a beam feedback method performed by a user equipment and a corresponding user equipment." LI provides motivation for modification of the invention stating, “In order to improve throughput of a communication system, full dimensional multiple input multiple output (Full Dimensional MIMO, FD-MIMO) and massive multiple input multiple output (Massive MIMO) antennas have been proposed. Compared with traditional MIMO systems, a base station can use more beams to perform data transmission with user equipment in FD-MIMO and Massive MIMO systems" (paragraph 0002).
LIU, GUO, and LI fail to explicitly disclose information regarding “wherein the first type of channel state feedback processing comprises a first neural network processing technique and the second type of channel state feedback processing comprises a second neural network processing technique.”
However, in analogous art, CHAVVA teaches wherein the first type of channel state feedback processing comprises a first neural network processing technique and the second type of channel state feedback processing comprises a second neural network processing technique.
CHAVVA writes, “A method for generating Channel State Information (CSI) reports, the method comprising: determining, by a User Equipment, a plurality of radio parameters for a connection between the UE and a Next Generation node B (gNB); computing, by a neural network in the UE, values of CSI feedback parameters at a current time instance based on the determined plurality of radio parameters; predicting, by the neural network, probable values of the CSI feedback parameters at a future time instance; generating, by the neural network, a CSI report, by compiling at least one of the computed values of the CSI feedback parameters and the predicted values the CSI feedback parameters; and transmitting, by the UE, the CSI report to the gNB (paragraph 0007). The first neural network can predict the CRI based on the contents in the measurement database. The second neural network can predict the RI based on the contents in the measurement database and the predicted value of CRI (paragraph 0174).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of
the claimed invention, to modify the invention and method of LIU, GUO, and LI to include aspects of
the method and apparatus described by CHAVVA "relate to Channel State Information (CSI) reporting in
5.sup.th Generation (5G) New Radio (NR) communication systems, and more particularly to methods
and systems for generating a CSI report comprising of parameters estimated and predicted using
Machine Learning." CHAVVA provides motivation for modification of the invention stating, “Another
object of the embodiments herein is to predict probable values of the feedback parameters at future
time instances, using the at least one ML based model, and include the predicted feedback parameters
in the CSI report; wherein the at least one ML based model may consider variations in factors such as
delay in gNB scheduling PDSCH, channel conditions, block error rate, CSI reporting periodicity, code rate,
and so on, for predicting the future values of the feedback parameters, in order to improve the accuracy
of prediction and increase the optimality of the CSI report" (paragraph 0086).
Regarding claim 27, LIU, GUO, LI, and CHAVVA teach the method of claim 26, wherein the signaling includes:
Additionally, LIU teaches radio resource control signaling, downlink control information signaling, medium access control (MAC) control element (CE) signaling, or a combination thereof.
LIU writes, “Optionally, the base station may notify, by using higher layer (RRC) signaling or dynamic
signaling (DCI), the UE of a feedback mode that should be used. The UE measures the reference signals,
and determines a set of channel state information CSI of the UE based on the selected feedback mode
or the feedback mode configured by the base station” (paragraph 0116). LIU explains that the BS may
notify through signaling, RRC or DCI, what feedback mode should be use. The UE measures the
reference signals and determines a set of CSI based on the selected feedback mode or feedback mode
configured by the BS.
Claim(s) 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LIU and GUO as applied to claim 20 above, and further in view of CHIANG (US 20190159250 A1, hereinafter, "CHIANG").
Regarding claim 28, LIU and GUO teach the method of claim 20,
LIU and GUO fail to explicitly disclose information regarding “wherein the power threshold is set based at least in part on data relating to previous channel state feedback processing and power levels.”
However, in analogous art, CHIANG teaches wherein the power threshold is set based at least in part on data relating to previous channel state feedback processing and power levels.
CHIANG writes, “...the processing circuit 170 may execute a measurement procedure...via the receiving circuit 120 to obtain the feedback information related to a channel condition (e.g., received signal strength indication (RSSI), received signal reception power, received signal quality, and so on)... The feedback information may also include other information...” (paragraph 0028). CHIANG adds, “...in order to reduce the frequency of modification of the energy detection threshold (for example, considering the power consumption), in some embodiments, the processing circuit 170 increases the energy detection threshold only if the number of times of consecutively receiving the feedback information indicating successful transmissions is greater than a number threshold (e.g., 3 or 5 times)” (paragraph 0030). CHIANG continues, “...by recording the number of times of consecutively receiving the feedback information of the same content, the frequency of modifying the energy detection threshold may be reduced to lower power consumption” (paragraph 0043).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention and method of LIU and GUO to include aspects of the method and apparatus described by CHIANG that "relates to radio resource management and more particularly relates to a transceiving apparatus and a spectrum access controlling method thereof." CHIANG provides motivation for modification of the invention stating, “It is known from the above that the energy detection threshold is an important factor for assessing whether the UE and BS can access the unlicensed spectrum for data transmissions. According to the current technology, however, the UE and BS use only one preset energy detection threshold for evaluating the accessibility of the unlicensed spectrum. As the use or quality of the unlicensed spectrum changes, using one single preset energy detection threshold may result in a long idle time for the spectrum or a data transmission collision. Therefore, the current mechanism for accessing the unlicensed spectrum needs to be improved" (paragraph 0004).
Claim(s) 1-3, 11, and 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LIU, GUO, and KAHN, et al. (US 20110145323 A1, hereinafter, "KAHN").
Regarding claim 18, LIU teaches a first device for wireless communication (paragraph 0147;
figure 6, 100: user equipment), comprising:
one or more memories (paragraph 0177; figure 8, 32: memory);
and one or more processors coupled to the one or more memories (paragraph 0177; figure 8,
31: processor),
the one or more processors (paragraph 0177; figure 8, 31: processor) configured to cause the
first device to:
receive signaling that identifies a second type of channel state feedback processing to which the first device is to switch when a power threshold is satisfied;
LIU writes, “Optionally, the UE may autonomously select a feedback mode by measuring the reference signals, and report the feedback mode to the base station. Optionally, the base station may notify, by using higher layer (RRC) signaling or dynamic signaling (DCI), the UE of a feedback mode that should be used. The UE measures the reference signals, and determines a set of channel state information CSI of the UE based on the selected feedback mode or the feedback mode configured by the base station” (paragraph 0116).
and transition from a first type of channel state feedback processing to the second type of channel state feedback processing based at least in part on the determination that the power threshold is satisfied,
LIU writes, “The UE may determine the feedback mode in a plurality of manners. For example, the UE
may measure received power of the N first reference signal resources. When the UE determines that
there is more than one first reference signal resource whose received power exceeds a predetermined
threshold, the UE may determine to use the first feedback mode to report the CSI. When the UE
determines that there is only one first reference signal resource whose received power exceeds a
predetermined threshold, the UE may determine to use the second feedback mode to report the CSI.
The UE may further determine the feedback mode in other manners, and such manners are not
excluded herein” (paragraph 0133). LIU explains that the UE may determine the feedback mode through
many manners, including received power. Based on the predetermined threshold and state of the RS,
LIU indicates, the feedback may transition from the first to the second feedback mode or vice versa to
report the CSI.
LIU fails to explicitly disclose information regarding “determine that the power threshold is satisfied, wherein the power threshold is for the first device;” and “wherein the second type of channel state feedback processing is associated with less power consumption than the first type of channel state feedback processing.”
However, in analogous art, KAHN teaches determine that the power threshold is satisfied, wherein the power threshold is for the first device;
KAHN writes, “In one embodiment, a user device battery state condition may be detected using a
battery power status value (determined from the user device battery state information) and one or
more associated battery power thresholds. In one such embodiment, for example, in which one battery
power threshold is used, a battery power status value above the battery power threshold may be
identified as satisfying a condition (e.g., where a service should be provided to the user device while
there is sufficient battery power at the user device for performing any processing required for the
service, such that a higher coding rate may be used for content being provided to the user device, and
the like) or a battery power status value below the battery power threshold may be identified as
satisfying a condition (e.g., where a service should be prevented or delayed from being provided to the
user device while there is insufficient battery power at the user device for performing any processing
required for the service, such that a lower coding rate may be used for content being provided to the
user device, and the like)” (paragraph 0067). KAHN indicates the user device using a power status value,
determined by the device, and power thresholds to detect a power state condition.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of
the claimed invention, to modify the invention and method of LIU to include aspects of the method and
apparatus described by KAHN “relates generally to communication networks and, more specifically but
not exclusively, to controlling the delivery of services to user devices via communications networks.”
KAHN provides motivation for modification of the invention stating, “A service delivery control capability
is depicted and described herein. The service delivery control capability improves delivery of services to
a user device of a user” (paragraph 0009). KAHN adds, “...improving the QoE for the user, such as by
controlling the manner in which any remaining battery power is used, such that use of the battery
power of the user terminal may be prioritized” (paragraph 0067).
LIU and KAHN fail to explicitly disclose information regarding “wherein the second type of channel state feedback processing is associated with less power consumption than the first type of channel state feedback processing.”
However, in analogous art, GUO teaches wherein the second type of channel state feedback
processing is associated with less power consumption than the first type of channel state feedback
processing.
GUO writes, “CSI reports are reported to the gNB using the Physical Uplink Shared Channel (PUSCH).
Wideband CSI will have a smaller payload size compared to subband CSI. Therefore, subband CSI will use
more PUSCH resources as compared to wideband CSI” (paragraph 0013). GUO adds, “...selecting the CSI
report configuration for the UE, the PRB bundling configuration for the UE, or both the CSI report
configuration for the UE and the PRB bundling configuration for the UE comprises determining that the
UE is UL power-limited based on the UL power-limited status of the UE; and, upon determining that the
UE is UL power-limited, selecting wideband CSI reporting for the CSI report configuration” (paragraph
0019). GUO indicates the wideband CSI is selected for UL power-limited status. Therefore, the wideband
CSI consumes less power than the subband CSI which uses more PUSCH resources.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention and method of LIU and KAHN to include aspects of the method and apparatus described by GUO that "relates to Channel State Information (CSI) reporting and Physical Resource Block (PRB) bundling in a wireless communication system that includes an Active Antenna System (AAS)." GUO provides motivation for modification of the invention stating, “Embodiments of the present disclosure improve both UL and DL performance by adaptively selecting the best PRB bundling and CSI reporting configuration. A good trade-off is reached between UL and DL, beamforming and channel estimation, and hence overall system performance is improved adaptively." (paragraph 0093).
Regarding claim 19, LIU, KAHN, and GUO teach the first device of claim 18,
Additionally, LIU teaches wherein the one or more processors (paragraph 0177; figure 8, 31:
processor, 32: memory) are further configured to cause the first device to:
transmit, before the determination that the power threshold is satisfied, first channel state feedback processed using the first type of channel state feedback processing;
LIU writes, “In a feasible design, the at least one element in the CSI is an RI that is recently reported
before the UE determines the M pieces of first reference signal resource indication information, and the
determining, by the UE in the first feedback mode, at least one element in the CSI based on the N first
reference signal resources, and determining the M pieces of first reference signal resource indication
information based on the at least one element in the CSI includes: determining, by the UE in the
first feedback mode, the recently reported RI based on the N first reference signal resources, and
determining the M pieces of first reference signal resource indication information based on the recently
reported RI” (paragraph 0010). LIU states that the at least one element in the CSI is an RI that is recently
reported before the UE determines the M pieces of first reference signal resource indication
information, and the determining, by the UE in the first feedback mode. LIU indicates that the CSI is
reported or transmitted by the UE before a determination about the power threshold is satisfied
utilizing the first feedback mode.
and transmit, after the transition from the first type of channel state feedback processing to
the second type of channel state feedback processing, second channel state feedback processed using
the second type of channel state feedback processing.
LIU writes, “In a feasible design, the feedback mode includes a second feedback mode; and
the processing module is specifically configured to determine, by the UE in the second feedback mode,
the M pieces of first reference signal resource indication information based on the N first reference
signal resources, and determine the CSI based on the M first reference signal resources indicated by the
M pieces of first reference signal resource indication information” (paragraph 0042). LIU notes a second
feedback mode that is configured to determine the CSI. LIU indicates that when the second feedback
mode is selected, that the second feedback mode will determine the CSI using the second feedback
processing.
Claims 1 and 2 are method claims corresponding to the apparatus claims 18 and 19 that have
already been rejected above. The applicant’s attention is directed to the rejection of claims 18 and 19.
Claims 1 and 2 are rejected under the same rational as claims 18 and 19.
Regarding claim 3, LIU, KAHN, and GUO teach the method of claim 1, further comprising:
Additionally, LIU teaches determining channel state information, for reporting, using the
second type of channel state feedback processing based at least in part on transitioning from the first
type of channel state feedback processing to the second type of channel state feedback processing.
LIU writes, “The UE may determine the feedback mode in a plurality of manners. For example, the UE
may measure received power of the N first reference signal resources. When the UE determines that
there is more than one first reference signal resource whose received power exceeds a predetermined
threshold, the UE may determine to use the first feedback mode to report the CSI. When the UE
determines that there is only one first reference signal resource whose received power exceeds a
predetermined threshold, the UE may determine to use the second feedback mode to report the CSI.
The UE may further determine the feedback mode in other manners, and such manners are not
excluded herein” (paragraph 0133). LIU explains that the UE may determine the feedback mode through
many manners, including received power. Based on the predetermined threshold and state of the RS,
LIU indicates, the feedback may transition from the first to the second feedback mode or vice versa to
report the CSI.
Regarding claim 11, LIU, KAHN, and GUO teach the method of claim 1,
Additionally, KAHN teaches wherein the power threshold is a first device-defined threshold.
KAHN writes, “In one embodiment, a user device battery state condition may be detected using a
battery power status value (determined from the user device battery state information) and one or
more associated battery power thresholds. In one such embodiment, for example, in which one battery
power threshold is used, a battery power status value above the battery power threshold may be
identified as satisfying a condition (e.g., where a service should be provided to the user device while
there is sufficient battery power at the user device for performing any processing required for the
service, such that a higher coding rate may be used for content being provided to the user device, and
the like) or a battery power status value below the battery power threshold may be identified as
satisfying a condition (e.g., where a service should be prevented or delayed from being provided to the
user device while there is insufficient battery power at the user device for performing any processing
required for the service, such that a lower coding rate may be used for content being provided to the
user device, and the like)” (paragraph 0067). KAHN indicates the user device using a power status value,
determined by the device, and power thresholds to detect a power state condition.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LIU, KAHN, and GUO as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of MAO.
Claim 4 is a method claim corresponding to the method claim 22 that has already been rejected
above. The applicant’s attention is directed to the rejection of claim 22. Claim 4 is rejected under the
same rational as claim 22.
Claim(s) 5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LIU, KAHN, and GUO as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of CHAVVA.
Claims 5-6 are method claims corresponding to the method claims 23-24 that have already been rejected above. The applicant’s attention is directed to the rejection of claims 23-24. Claims 5-6 are rejected under the same rational as claims 23-24.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LIU, KAHN, GUO, and CHAVVA as applied to claim 5 above, and further in view of AKOUM.
Claim 7 is a method claim corresponding to the method claim 25 that has already been rejected
above. The applicant’s attention is directed to the rejection of claim 25. Claim 7 is rejected under the
same rational as claim 25.
Claim(s) 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LIU, KAHN, and GUO as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of LI and CHAVVA.
Regarding claim 8, LIU, KAHN, and GUO teach the method of claim 1, further comprising:
LIU, KAHN, and GUO fail to explicitly disclose information regarding “the first type of channel state feedback processing, the second type of channel state feedback processing, and the power threshold,” and “wherein the first type of channel state feedback processing comprises a first neural network processing technique and the second type of channel state feedback processing comprises a second neural network processing technique.”
However, in analogous art, LI teaches the first type of channel state feedback processing, the second type of channel state feedback processing, and the power threshold,
LI writes, “It is known that channel state indication (CSI) feedback type I may transmit first channel state information to the base station, and the first channel state information may include channel state feedback type indication (CTI), rank (RI), precoding matrix indicator (PMI) and channel quality indication (CQI), and beam information, etc.; and channel state indication (CSI) feedback type II may transmit second channel state information to the base station, the second channel state information may include beam number information (for example, which may be the superior beam number information as described above), PMI, and beam information, etc.” (paragraph 0031). LI adds, “... a beam power threshold may be determined in advance, and the beam power threshold is compared with the power of the plurality of second beams...” (paragraph 0038).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention and method of LIU, KAHN, and GUO to include aspects of the method and apparatus described by LI "relates to the field of wireless communications, and particularly, to a beam feedback method performed by a user equipment and a corresponding user equipment." LI provides motivation for modification of the invention stating, “In order to improve throughput of a communication system, full dimensional multiple input multiple output (Full Dimensional MIMO, FD-MIMO) and massive multiple input multiple output (Massive MIMO) antennas have been proposed. Compared with traditional MIMO systems, a base station can use more beams to perform data transmission with user equipment in FD-MIMO and Massive MIMO systems" (paragraph 0002).
LIU, KAHN, GUO, and LI fail to explicitly disclose information regarding “wherein the first type of channel state feedback processing comprises a first neural network processing technique and the second type of channel state feedback processing comprises a second neural network processing technique.”
However, in analogous art, CHAVVA teaches wherein the first type of channel state feedback processing comprises a first neural network processing technique and the second type of channel state feedback processing comprises a second neural network processing technique.
CHAVVA writes, “A method for generating Channel State Information (CSI) reports, the method comprising: determining, by a User Equipment, a plurality of radio parameters for a connection between the UE and a Next Generation node B (gNB); computing, by a neural network in the UE, values of CSI feedback parameters at a current time instance based on the determined plurality of radio parameters; predicting, by the neural network, probable values of the CSI feedback parameters at a future time instance; generating, by the neural network, a CSI report, by compiling at least one of the computed values of the CSI feedback parameters and the predicted values the CSI feedback parameters; and transmitting, by the UE, the CSI report to the gNB” (paragraph 0007). CHAVVA adds, “The first neural network can predict the CRI based on the contents in the measurement database. The second neural network can predict the RI based on the contents in the measurement database and the predicted value of CRI” (paragraph 0174).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention and method of LIU, KAHN, GUO, and LI to include aspects of the method and apparatus described by CHAVVA "relate to Channel State Information (CSI) reporting in 5.sup.th Generation (5G) New Radio (NR) communication systems, and more particularly to methods and systems for generating a CSI report comprising of parameters estimated and predicted using Machine Learning." CHAVVA provides motivation for modification of the invention stating, “Another object of the embodiments herein is to predict probable values of the feedback parameters at future time instances, using the at least one ML based model, and include the predicted feedback parameters in the CSI report; wherein the at least one ML based model may consider variations in factors such as delay in gNB scheduling PDSCH, channel conditions, block error rate, CSI reporting periodicity, code rate, and so on, for predicting the future values of the feedback parameters, in order to improve the accuracy of prediction and increase the optimality of the CSI report" (paragraph 0086).
Regarding claim 9, LIU, KAHN, GUO, LI and CHAVVA teach the method of claim 8,
Additionally, LIU teaches wherein the signaling includes: radio resource control signaling,
downlink control information signaling, medium access control (MAC) control element (CE) signaling,
or a combination thereof.
LIU writes, “Optionally, the base station may notify, by using higher layer (RRC) signaling or dynamic
signaling (DCI), the UE of a feedback mode that should be used. The UE measures the reference signals,
and determines a set of channel state information CSI of the UE based on the selected feedback mode
or the feedback mode configured by the base station” (paragraph 0116). LIU explains that the BS may
notify through signaling, RRC or DCI, what feedback mode should be use. The UE measures the
reference signals and determines a set of CSI based on the selected feedback mode or feedback mode
configured by the BS.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LIU, KAHN, and GUO as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of CHIANG.
Claim 10 is a method claim corresponding to the method claim 28 that has already been rejected above. The applicant’s attention is directed to the rejection of claim 28. Claim 10 is rejected under the same rational as claim 28.
Claim(s) 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LIU, KAHN, and GUO as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of KIM, et al. (US 20150117355 A1, hereinafter, "KIM").
Regarding claim 12, LIU, KAHN, and GUO teach the method of claim 1, further comprising:
LIU, KAHN, and GUO fail to explicitly disclose information regarding “transmitting information
identifying the second type of channel state feedback processing based at least in part on transitioning from the first type of channel state feedback processing to the second type of channel
state feedback processing.”
However, in analogous art, KIM teaches transmitting information identifying the second type
of channel state feedback processing based at least in part on transitioning from the first type of
channel state feedback processing to the second type of channel state feedback processing.
KIM writes, “In another aspect of the present invention, provided herein is a method for feeding back
Channel State Information (CSI) using a common Rank Indicator (RI) at a user equipment in a wireless
communication system, including transmitting first CSI to at least one base station at a first transmission
time point according to a first CSI feedback configuration, and transmitting second CSI to the at least
one base station at a second transmission time point according to a second CSI feedback configuration,
wherein the second CSI is generated based on the common RI when the second transmission time point
is within a prescribed Subframe Threshold (SFT) from the first transmission time point” (paragraph
0017). KIM indicates feeding back CSI using RI from the UE to the BS including the second CSI when the
second transmission time point is within a prescribed Subframe Threshold (SFT), or possibly other
threshold, from the first transmission time point.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of
the claimed invention, to modify the invention and method of LIU, KAHN, and GUO to include aspects of
the method and apparatus described by KIM "relates to wireless communication systems, and more
particularly, to a method for feeding back channel state information in a wireless communication system
and an apparatus therefor." KIM provides motivation for modification of the invention stating, "According to embodiments of the present invention, channel state information can be effectively
reported in a wireless communication system" (paragraph 0025). KIM adds, "Increase in channel
transmission capacity is proportional to the number of antennas, thereby improving transfer rate and
frequency efficiency" (paragraph 0076).
Regarding claim 13, LIU, KAHN, GUO, and KIM teach the method of claim 12,
Additionally, KIM teaches wherein the information identifying the second type of channel state
feedback processing is included in a physical uplink control channel or a physical uplink shared
channel.
KIM writes, “Meanwhile, control information, transmitted by the UE to the eNB through uplink or
received by the UE from the eNB through downlink, includes a downlink/uplink
ACKnowledgment/Negative ACKnowledgment (ACK/NACK) signal, a Channel Quality Indicator (CQI), a
Precoding Matrix Index (PMI), a Rank Indicator (RI), and the like. In the case of the 3GPP LTE system, the
UE may transmit control information such as CQI/PMI/RI through the PUSCH and/or the PUCCH”
(paragraph 0063). KIM specifies that the UE may transmit control information such as CQI/PMI/RI
through the PUSCH and/or the PUCCH.
Claim(s) 14-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LIU, KAHN, and GUO as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of MATSUMURA, et al. (US 20220360307 A1, hereinafter, "MATSUMURA").
Regarding claim 14, LIU, KAHN, and GUO teach the method of claim 1, further comprising:
LIU, KAHN, and GUO fail to explicitly disclose information regarding “transitioning, after
transitioning to the second type of channel state feedback processing, from the second type of
channel state feedback processing to the first type of channel state feedback processing.”
However, in analogous art, MATSUMURA teaches transitioning, after transitioning to the
second type of channel state feedback processing, from the second type of channel state feedback
processing to the first type of channel state feedback processing.
MATSUMURA writes, “Further, the first wideband feedback type and the second wideband feedback
type may be switched” (paragraph 0204). MATSUMURA adds, “...the UE may receive information (type
information) related to which wideband feedback type is to be applied, separately from the report
quantity information, and control switch of the first or second wideband feedback type, based on the
type information” (paragraph 0206). MATSUMURA continues, “The report quantity information and the
type information may be reported to the UE by using at least one of higher layer signaling (for example,
RRC signaling) and physical layer signaling (for example, DCI). For example, the report quantity
information and the type information may be included in the report configuration information (for
example, the RRC IE “CSI-ReportConfig”) (paragraph 0207). MATSUMURA indicates the first and second
feedback type may be switched. MATSUMURA further explains that the UE may receive information to
which feedback type is to be applied. The type information, relating to the feedback, may be reported to
the UE using at least one of higher layer signaling and physical layer signaling, MATSUMURA informs the
reader.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of
the claimed invention, to modify the invention and method of LIU, KAHN, and GUO to include aspects of
the method and apparatus described by MATSUMURA "relates to a terminal and a radio communication
method in next-generation mobile communication systems." MATSUMURA provides motivation for
modification of the invention stating, “According to an aspect of the present disclosure, reduction of
reliability of CSI can be prevented while reducing increase of UL overhead" (paragraph 0011).
MATSUMURA adds, "In the light of this, the inventors of the present invention came up with the idea of
a method for enhancing reliability in the incremental feedback. Further, the inventors of the present
invention came up with the idea of a report method for the detection failure in the incremental
feedback" (paragraph 0221).
Regarding claim 15, LIU, KAHN, and MATSUMURA teach the method of claim 14,
Additionally, KAHN teaches wherein the transitioning to the first type of channel state
feedback processing is based at least in part on: expiration of a threshold period of time, satisfaction
of the power threshold, satisfaction of another power threshold, a connection of the first device to a
power source, or a combination thereof.
KAHN writes, “In one embodiment, a user device battery state condition may be detected using a
battery power status value (determined from the user device battery state information) and one or
more associated battery power thresholds. In one such embodiment, for example, in which one battery
power threshold is used, a battery power status value above the battery power threshold may be
identified as satisfying a condition (e.g., where a service should be provided to the user device while
there is sufficient battery power at the user device for performing any processing required for the
service, such that a higher coding rate may be used for content being provided to the user device, and
the like) or a battery power status value below the battery power threshold may be identified as
satisfying a condition (e.g., where a service should be prevented or delayed from being provided to the
user device while there is insufficient battery power at the user device for performing any processing
required for the service, such that a lower coding rate may be used for content being provided to the
user device, and the like)” (paragraph 0067).
Regarding claim 16, LIU, KAHN, GUO, and MATSUMURA teach the method of claim 14,
Additionally, MATSUMURA teaches wherein the transitioning to the first type of channel state
feedback processing is based at least in part on: received signaling configuring the transition to the
first type of channel state feedback processing, a first device determination of a satisfaction of a
switching criterion, or a combination thereof.
MATSUMURA writes, “Further, the first wideband feedback type and the second wideband feedback
type may be switched” (paragraph 0204). MATSUMURA adds, “...the UE may receive information (type
information) related to which wideband feedback type is to be applied, separately from the report
quantity information, and control switch of the first or second wideband feedback type, based on the
type information” (paragraph 0206). MATSUMURA continues, “The report quantity information and the
type information may be reported to the UE by using at least one of higher layer signaling (for example,
RRC signaling) and physical layer signaling (for example, DCI). For example, the report quantity
information and the type information may be included in the report configuration information (for
example, the RRC IE “CSI-ReportConfig”) (paragraph 0207). MATSUMURA indicates the first and second
feedback type may be switched. MATSUMURA further explains that the UE may receive information to
which feedback type is to be applied. The type information, relating to the feedback, may be reported to
the UE using at least one of higher layer signaling and physical layer signaling, MATSUMURA informs the
reader.
Regarding claim 17, LIU, KAHN, GUO, and MATSUMURA teach the method of claim 14, further
comprising:
Additionally, LIU teaches transmitting information identifying the first type of channel state
feedback processing based at least in part on transitioning to the first type of channel state feedback
processing.
LIU writes, “In a feasible design, the at least one element in the CSI is an RI that is recently reported
before the UE determines the M pieces of first reference signal resource indication information, and the
determining, by the UE in the first feedback mode, at least one element in the CSI based on the N first
reference signal resources, and determining the M pieces of first reference signal resource indication
information based on the at least one element in the CSI includes: determining, by the UE in the
first feedback mode, the recently reported RI based on the N first reference signal resources, and
determining the M pieces of first reference signal resource indication information based on the recently
reported RI” (paragraph 0010). LIU states that the at least one element in the CSI is an RI that is recently
reported before the UE determines the M pieces of first reference signal resource indication
information, and the determining, by the UE in the first feedback mode. LIU indicates that the CSI is
reported or transmitted by the UE before a determination about the power threshold is satisfied
utilizing the first feedback mode.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER A REYES whose telephone number is (703)756-4558. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 - 5:00 EDT.
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 KASSIM can be reached at (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.
/Christopher A. Reyes/Examiner, Art Unit 2475 2/21/2026
/KHALED M KASSIM/supervisory patent examiner, Art Unit 2475