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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims filed on 04/30/2026 have been considered but are moot because the arguments are related solely to newly added limitations addressed in the instant Office Action with newly identified prior art, thus rendering the applicant’s arguments moot.
The applicant also presented other arguments drawn to the various dependent claims. However, said other arguments are all dependency based, depending from the arguments drawn to the independent claims’ limitations discussed above.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 6-8 and 10-14 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oteri et al. (US 2022/0330337, “Oteri”) in view of Tang (US 2021/0014896) and Venugopal et al. (US 2021/0194558, “Venugopal”, provisional application 62951954 (“954”)).
Examiner’s note: in what follows, references are drawn to Oteri unless otherwise mentioned.
Oteri comprises the following features:
With respect to independent claims:
Regarding claim 1, a method of operating a first node (gNB) of a communications network, the method comprising
transmitting, to a user equipment (UE), at least one beam configuration indicating information comprising multiple Reception (RX) beams ([0128] “the WTRU may receive, at 610, signaling from the gNB or other Network entity (either RRC (Radio Resource Control), MAC CE (MAC Control Element) or L1 (e.g., physical layer) signaling) that may indicate or explicitly include: (1) the number of LBT processes the WTRU may implement, (2) the WTRU transmit beam and WTRU receive beam for one or more LBT processes (e.g., each process)”. Note that multiple RX beams will be discussed in view of Venugopal.),
wherein a Listen Before Talk (LBT) procedure for accessing an open spectrum is performed by the UE ([0129 and Fig. 6] “At 620, the WTRU may identify, from the received signaling, the receive beam for the LBT process.”) based on the information indicated by the at least one beam configuration comprising the multiple RX beams (See Fig. 6; 610 “WTRU Receives Configuration to Enable Multiple Independent LBT processes for each Transmit Beam. This may include the LBT Receive Beam” and 620 “WTRU Identifies Receive Beam for LBT Process”), the LBT procedure being for at least one RX beam from among the multiple RX beams indicated by the at least one beam configuration (See aforesaid Fig. 6; 620.),
wherein the open spectrum is accessed by the UE using the at least one RX beam, as at least one Transmit (TX) beam, based on the LBT procedure ([0131 and Fig. 6] “At 660, the WTRU may determine if the medium is free based on the power measurement and the adjusted threshold. If the CCA succeeds (e.g., the medium is free), the WTRU may transmit its data at 670.”, and [0040] “beamforming may be used to transmit and/or receive signals in desired spatial directions.”),
wherein the LBT procedure comprises:
LBT using a random back-off duration with a contention window of fixed size ([0096] “In Category 3: LBT with random back-off is performed with a contention window of a fixed size”); and
an energy detection during a LBT duration over a bandwidth of the open spectrum ([0093] “a transmitting entity, prior to a transmission, may perform a clear channel assessment (CCA) based on an energy detection (ED) over a time duration and may compare measured energy with an energy threshold to determine if the channel is occupied or clear.”),
wherein the accessing the open spectrum using the at least one TX beam is done when a detected energy during the LBT duration is lower than an energy detection threshold ([0130 and Fig. 6] “For the LBT CCA measurement, the WTRU may adjust, at 650, the CCA threshold for 0 dB gain compensation and for the difference in gains between the receive and transmit beams.”, and [0099] “Assuming that the receive antenna gain G=0 dBi, if the Effective Isotropic Radiated Power EIRP=23 dBm at the transmitter, then the CCA energy detection threshold≤−73 dBm/MHz” See also aforesaid [0131] and [0040].),
wherein the at least one TX beam is associated with the at least one RX beam that has corresponding spatial characteristics ([0103 and Fig. 3] “In an LBT operation, a beam correspondence or reciprocity is assumed. For example, the listen (e.g., for a beam reception beamforming direction and gain) may be assumed to be the same as the talk (e.g., for a beam transmission).”).
It is noted that while disclosing LBT procedures, Oteri does not specifically teach about periodic SSBs. It, however, had been known in the art before the effective date of the instant application as shown by Tang as follows;
wherein the beam configuration used for the LBT is associated with one or more Synchronization Signal Blocks (SSBs) ([Tang, 0040] “Since different SSBs may correspond to the same or different beams, before transmitting the SSB, the access network device 10 needs to execute directional LBT for channel listening.”) that are periodically broadcast by the gNB ([Tang, 0041] “To support beam scanning, the SSB is organized into a series of bursts and transmitted periodically.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of instant application to modify Oteri by using the features of Tang in order to increase an appropriate quality of service such that “to execute one CCA on a channel of an unlicensed spectrum before transmitting the signal blocks included in the signal block set” [Tang, 0012].
It is noted that while disclosing LBT procedures, Oteri does not specifically teach about configuration indicating multiple RX beams. It, however, had been known in the art before the effective date of the instant application as shown by Venugopal as follows;
configuration comprising multiple Reception (RX) beams ([Venugopal, 0084] “in association with group-based beam reporting for simultaneous transmission/reception and/or configuration of multiple beam pairs to improve throughput.”, and [Venugopal, 0072 and Fig. 4] “A beam pair may include one of TX beams 412 for the base station 402 and one of RX beams 414 for the UE 404.” See [954, 0059-0060]. ).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of instant application to modify Oteri by using the features of Venugopal in order to increase an appropriate quality of service such that “The use of multiple beams may provide macro-diversity as well as higher rates using multiple-input and multiple-output (MIMO) techniques. Beam grouping and group-based beam reporting may support simultaneous reception at a UE, e.g., using the same spatial filters or different spatial filters at the receiver (e.g., of the UE)..” [Venugopal, 0006].
Regarding claim 13, it is a method claim operating a UE corresponding to the method claim 1, and is therefore rejected for the similar reasons set forth in the rejection of claim 1.
With respect to dependent claims:
Regarding claim 2, the method of claim 1, wherein the information indicated by the at least one beam configuration is selected from a group comprising: a directional beam configuration ([0128] “FIG. 6 illustrates directional LBT for beam based transmission.”), a unidirectional beam configuration, a multidirectional beam configuration, and an omnidirectional beam configuration (These alternatives are not examined.).
Regarding claim 3, the method of claim1, wherein the information indicated by the at least one beam configuration is indicative of a subset of beams of a group of beams ([0132] “Additional parameters such as the schedule with which the gNB (and/or other access point and/or network entity) may be switching its own receive beams for a time duration, for example a slot, a mini-slot, a symbol and/or a group of symbols, may also be sent. In one example, a gNB with three beams may send a beam schedule {b1, b1, b2, b2, b3, b3, b1, b1, b1, b2, b2, b3, b3, b1}.”).
Regarding claim 6, the method of claim1, wherein the information indicated by the at least one beam configuration is determined based on at least one decision criterion; and the at least one decision criterion comprises a measurement report received from at least one of the UE or a third node ([0331] “a Channel State Information (CSI) reporting method performed by a wireless transmit/receive unit (WTRU). The method may comprise any of: [0332] receiving 2902 a Radio Resource Control (RRC) configuration identifying a plurality of Channel State Information Reference Signal (CSI-RS) reporting parameters”), the measurement report being indicative of an energy on the open spectrum ([0255] “the measuring of the energy may comprise determining any of: a signal to noise ratio (SNR), a signal to interference plus noise ratio (SINR), a received signal strength indication (RSSI), a reference signal received power (RSRP), or a received channel power indicator (RCPI)”).
Regarding claim 7, the method of claim1, wherein the information indicated by the at least one beam configuration is determined based on at least one decision criterion; and the at least one decision criterion comprises a spatially resolved traffic density on the open spectrum ([0140] “the LBT power configuration may measure three different levels. (a) over all time (e.g., over all of the symbols) (b) over even symbols (e.g., just even symbols) or (c) over odd symbols (e.g., just odd symbols). From the measurement results, when a measurement is taken using configuration (a) only (e.g., over all symbols), the channel may be set as clear even though the channel may not be clear. For example, when configuration (b) is used (e.g., the power measured over even symbols s0 and s2), the channel may be set as busy while when configuration (c) is used (e.g., the power measured over odd symbols s1 and s3), the channel may be set as clear. In certain representative embodiments, the WTRU may use a combination of measurements (e.g., measurement criteria and/or time averaging criteria) to make the CCA decision.”).
Regarding claim 8, the method of claim 7, further comprising:
determining the spatially resolved traffic density ([0140] “the gNB may specify a duration over which a CCA measurement is taken and/or a set of measurements that may be compared with the threshold to identify if a beam based interferer is in the vicinity.”) based on at least one of a number of wireless communication devices connected to one or more access nodes of the communications network (This alternative is not examined.), an energy on the open spectrum (See aforesaid [0140] “a beam based interferer”), or measurement reports received from one or more further nodes of the communications network (This alternative is not examined.).
Regarding claim 10, the method of claim1,
wherein the information indicated by the at least one beam configuration is transmitted to multiple second nodes that are located at different positions with respect to the gNB ([0169 and Fig. 2] “The gNB may send a signal to indicate the beams to be used in the slots… This may be sent in an RRC signal, a dedicated signal and/or as part of a broadcast DCI (e.g. the group common DCI) and/or may be sent individually to the WTRUs.”).
Regarding claim 11, the method of claim1,
wherein the information indicated by the at least one beam configuration comprises multiple beam configurations that are different from each other ([0137] “the measurement times for a first LBT process 1 associated with a first beam B1 and the measurement times for a second LBT process 2 associated with a second beam B2 may be such that two or more measurement intervals for beam B1 may be contiguous followed by two or more measurement intervals for beam B2.”); and different beam configurations of the multiple beam configurations are transmitted to multiple second nodes ([0169] “This may be sent in an RRC signal, a dedicated signal and/or as part of a broadcast DCI (e.g. the group common DCI) and/or may be sent individually to the WTRUs.”) that are located at different positions with respect to the gNB (See Fig. 17).
Regarding claim 12, the method of claim1, wherein the information indicated by the at least one beam configuration is included in the one or more SSBs periodically broadcast by the gNB ([0111] “In LAA, a Discovery Reference Signal (DRS), may consist of and/or may include synchronization signals and reference signals for cell detection, synchronization and/or radio resource management. The DRS may include one or more CSI-Reference Signals (CSI-RSs) (e.g., if the CSI-RSs are configured). LAA DRS may be transmitted within a time window (e.g., periodically occurring time window)”).
Regarding claim 14, the method of claim 13, further comprising: measuring an energy on the open spectrum ([0130] “At 640, the WTRU may measure the power for the LBT process based on the received configuration.”); adjusting the beam configuration based on said measuring ([0130] “For the LBT CCA measurement, the WTRU may adjust, at 650, the CCA threshold for 0 dB gain compensation and for the difference in gains between the receive and transmit beams.”).
Claim(s) 4 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oteri et al. (US 2022/0330337, “Oteri”) in view of Tang (US 2021/0014896) and Venugopal et al. (US 2021/0194558, “Venugopal”, provisional application 62951954 (“954”)) and further in view of El Hamss et al. (US 2023/0072340, “El Hamss”).
Examiner’s note: in what follows, references are drawn to Oteri unless otherwise mentioned.
Regarding claim 4, it is noted that while disclosing LBT procedures, Oteri does not specifically teach about a beam width. It, however, had been known in the art before the effective date of the instant application as shown by El Hamss as follows;
the method of claim1,
wherein the information indicated by the at least one beam configuration is indicated by an information element indicative of a beam width of one or more beams with respect to a reference beam width associated with at least one second node ([El Hamss, 0096] “A WTRU may be configured with a reference signal (e.g., SSB, CSI-RS) configuration for a given beam. A WTRU may be configured with a (e.g., one) reference signal configuration assigned to a plurality of beam widths. A beam reference signal configuration may be associated with a plurality of beam width indices. A (e.g., each) index may correspond to (e.g., at most) one beam width. A beam (e.g. in such a scenario) may be defined, for example, based on the beam's reference signal configuration, e.g., where control thereof may be associated with changes in the beam width index. A beam width index may correspond to a beam ID.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of instant application to modify Oteri by using the features of El Hamss in order to effectively evaluate unlicensed spectrums such that “Channel access in (e.g., high frequency) unlicensed spectrum may be implemented, for example, as a function of the type of physical channel and/or a procedure that initiated a transmission.” [El Hamss, 0004].
Claim(s) 5 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oteri et al. (US 2022/0330337, “Oteri”) in view of Tang (US 2021/0014896) and Venugopal et al. (US 2021/0194558, “Venugopal”, provisional application 62951954 (“954”)) and further in view of Cao (US 2020/0136711).
Examiner’s note: in what follows, references are drawn to Oteri unless otherwise mentioned.
Regarding claim 5, it is noted that while disclosing LBT procedures, Oteri does not specifically teach about a number of antenna panels. It, however, had been known in the art before the effective date of the instant application as shown by Cao as follows;
the method of claim1, wherein the information indicated by the at least one beam configuration is indicated by an information element indicative of a count of antenna panels ([Cao, 0073] “one or more of the number of beams transmitted by respective antenna panels in a group of antenna panels, the direction of a beam, time-frequency resources occupied by reference signals, and the index of a port used may be included in the beam configuration information.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of instant application to modify Oteri by using the features of Cao in order to overcome negative effects of path loss in mmWave communications such that “determine one or more antenna panels serving the target communication apparatus in a group of antenna panels comprising an antenna panel corresponding to the beam state indication.” [Cao, 0009].
Claim(s) 9 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oteri et al. (US 2022/0330337, “Oteri”) in view of Tang (US 2021/0014896) and Venugopal et al. (US 2021/0194558, “Venugopal”, provisional application 62951954 (“954”)) and further in view of Yang et al. (US 2023/0007522, “Yang”).
Examiner’s note: in what follows, references are drawn to Oteri unless otherwise mentioned.
Regarding claim 9, it is noted that while disclosing LBT procedures, Oteri does not specifically teach about adjusting a beam configuration. It, however, had been known in the art before the effective date of the instant application as shown by Yang as follows;
the method of claim1,
wherein the information indicated by the at least one beam configuration is determined based on at least one decision criterion ([Yang, 0147] “When a beam of the neighboring cell changes, a beam set of the neighboring cell changes, and the serving cell notifies a beam change in the neighboring cell, to update a configuration of interference measurement.”); and
the method further comprises:
monitoring for changes of the at least one decision criterion ([Yang, 0148] “The base station of the serving cell obtains information about the beam change in the neighboring cell.”);
adjusting the at least one beam configuration based on said monitoring ([Yang, 0156] “Step S32: The base station of the serving cell base station updates an RRM parameter for a terminal in the serving cell.”); and
transmitting at least one adjusted beam configuration upon said adjusting ([Yang, 0157] “The serving cell notifies the information about the beam change”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of instant application to modify Oteri by using the features of Yang in order to efficiently change resource configurations such that “receiving indication information transmitted by a first network side device, where the indication information is used to indicate a signal that change” [Yang, 0006].
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Harry H. Kim whose telephone number and email address are as follows; 571-272-5009, harry.kim2@uspto.gov.
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, Derrick Ferris can be reached at 571-272-3123.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from www.uspto.gov. For questions or assistance, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (in USA or Canada) or 571-272-1000.
/HARRY H KIM/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2411
Prosecution Insights