CTNF 18/019,457 CTNF 97059 DETAILED ACTION 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 04/07/2026 has been entered. Claim(s) 1 and 20 have been amended; Claim(s) 5, 13, 15, 17-19, and 21-22 have been canceled; Claim(s) 27 have been added. Claim(s) 1-4, 6-12, 14, 16, 20, and 23-27 are subject to examination. Acknowledgement is made to the applicant’s amendment to claims 1 and 20 to obviate the previous claim objection and 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection to claims 1 and 20. The previous claim objection and 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection to claims 1 and 20 is/are hereby withdrawn. Acknowledgement is made to the applicant’s amendment to claims 1 and 20 to obviate the previous 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection to claims 1-4, 6-12, 14, 16, 20, and 23-27. The previous 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection to claims 1-4, 6-12, 14, 16, 20, and 23-27 is/are hereby withdrawn. Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-fti AIA The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-4, 6-12, 14, 16, 20, and 23-27 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. 07-34-01 Claims 20, 24, and 26 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. 07-34-12 AIA Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential steps, such omission amounting to a gap between the steps. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted steps are: “reporting the CQI”. Claim 20 recites the limitation “reporting the CQI based on the first CQI set includes…reporting the CQI and reporting another repetition number…” in a receiving method. For the purpose of examination, the examiner will interpret the claim as “receiving the CQI based on the first CQI set includes…receiving the CQI and receiving another repetition number…”. Claim 24 and 26 are rejected as being dependent on claim 20 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-fti The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: (a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. 07-21-fti Claim 1, 16, 20, and 23-27 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over CHEN et al. (US 20090274204 A1) (see 892 01/08/2026), hereby referred to as CHEN, in view of SU et al. (US 20220141828 A1), hereby referred to as SU . Claim 1: CHEN teaches a channel quality reporting method, comprising: determining a first channel quality indicator (CQI) set (CHEN: para 7 (“…table of channel quality information (CQI) values that may be reported by a mobile station…”) and para 12 (“…(CQI) values that may be reported by a mobile station…”) wherein tables are determined for reporting ) , the first CQI set including association relationships between CQI indexes (CHEN: FIG. 1 item (“CQI (dB)”) or FIG. 6 item (“Mapping”) these being CQI indexes to the table ) and a channel quality parameter (CHEN: FIG. 1 item (“Mod”), item (“Code Rate”), and item (“Rep Rate”)) , and the channel quality parameter including at least one of a modulation mode (CHEN: FIG. 1 item (“Mod”)) , a code rate (CHEN: FIG. 1 item (“Code Rate”)) , or a repetition number (CHEN: FIG. 1 item (“Rep Rate”)) , wherein the modulation mode includes a first modulation mode and a second modulation mode (CHEN: FIG. 1 item (“QPSK”) a first modulation mode and item (“16-QAM”) or item (“64-QAM”) a second modulation mode ) ; and reporting a CQI based on the first CQI set (CHEN: para 7 (“…table of channel quality information (CQI) values that may be reported by a mobile station…”) and para 12 (“…(CQI) values that may be reported by a mobile station…”) wherein tables are determined for reporting ) , wherein reporting the CQI based on the first CQI set, includes: in a case where a channel quality reporting instruction is received, reporting the CQI based on the first CQI set (CHEN: para 19 (“…a mobile station (MS) that is configured to report a channel quality…”)) . However, CHEN does not explicitly disclose the repetition number is a repetition number of a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH); and reporting another repetition number of a physical downlink control channel (PDDCH) based on the first CQI. SU, in the same field of endeavor, teaches the repetition number is a repetition number of a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) (SU: Table 16 wherein repetition is for PDSCH ) ; and reporting another repetition number of a physical downlink control channel (PDDCH) based on the first CQI (SU: FIG. 9 item S901, para 138 (“The first index is an index in an index set corresponding to a case in which a repetition number of a PDCCH and/or a PDSCH is a first repetition number.”), and para 140 (“…the first field can be occupied by the repetition number of the PDCCH or an index corresponding to the first repetition number…”) wherein CQI index of a first CQI table can indicate both repetition number of PDSCH and PDCCH ) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified CHEN with SU, the combination hereby referred to as CHEN-SU, for the benefit of improve resource utilization (SU: para 6) . Claim 16: CHEN-SU teaches The method according to claim 1, wherein in the first CQI set, there are at least two CQI indexes that satisfy at least one of: the at least two CQI indexes are in negative correlation with code rates associated with the at least two CQI indexes (CHEN: FIG. 1 or see below wherein as cqi increases, code rates decreases in at least two areas ) . PNG media_image1.png 523 244 media_image1.png Greyscale Claim 20: CHEN teaches a channel quality reporting method, comprising: determining a first channel quality indicator (CQI) set (CHEN: para 7 (“…table of channel quality information (CQI) values that may be reported by a mobile station…”) and para 12 (“…(CQI) values that may be reported by a mobile station…”) wherein tables are determined for reporting ) , the first CQI set including association relationships between CQI indexes (CHEN: FIG. 1 item (“CQI (dB)”) or FIG. 6 item (“Mapping”) these being CQI indexes to the table ) and a channel quality parameter (CHEN: FIG. 1 item (“Mod”), item (“Code Rate”), and item (“Rep Rate”)) , and the channel quality parameter including at least one of a modulation mode (CHEN: FIG. 1 item (“Mod”)) , a code rate (CHEN: FIG. 1 item (“Code Rate”)) , or a repetition number (CHEN: FIG. 1 item (“Rep Rate”)) , wherein the modulation mode includes a first modulation mode and a second modulation mode (CHEN: FIG. 1 item (“QPSK”) a first modulation mode and item (“16-QAM”) or item (“64-QAM”) a second modulation mode ) ; and receiving a CQI based on the first CQI set (CHEN: para 7 (“…table of channel quality information (CQI) values that may be reported by a mobile station…”) and para 12 (“…(CQI) values that may be reported by a mobile station…”) wherein tables are determined for reporting which will be received ) , wherein reporting the CQI based on the first CQI set, includes: in a case where a channel quality reporting instruction is received, reporting the CQI based on the first CQI (CHEN: para 19 (“…a mobile station (MS) that is configured to report a channel quality…”)) . However, CHEN does not explicitly disclose the repetition number is a repetition number of a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH); and reporting another repetition number of a physical downlink control channel (PDDCH) based on the first CQI. SU, in the same field of endeavor, teaches the repetition number is a repetition number of a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) (SU: Table 16 wherein repetition is for PDSCH ) ; and reporting another repetition number of a physical downlink control channel (PDDCH) based on the first CQI (SU: FIG. 9 item S901, para 138 (“The first index is an index in an index set corresponding to a case in which a repetition number of a PDCCH and/or a PDSCH is a first repetition number.”), and para 140 (“…the first field can be occupied by the repetition number of the PDCCH or an index corresponding to the first repetition number…”) wherein CQI index of a first CQI table can indicate both repetition number of PDSCH and PDCCH ) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified CHEN with SU, the combination hereby referred to as CHEN-SU, for the benefit of improve resource utilization (SU: para 6) . Claim 27: CHEN-SU teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein in the first CQI set, there is at least one CQI subset, MCS indexes or TBS indexes or code rates that respective CQI indexes in the CQI subset are associated with are the same, and repetition number that the respective CQI indexes in the CQI subset are associated with are different (CHEN: FIG. 1 wherein CQI indexes that have the same code rates “1/2” can have different repetition number “2” or “1” ) . PNG media_image2.png 694 319 media_image2.png Greyscale 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 2-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CHEN in view of SU, the combination hereby referred to as CHEN-SU, and in further view of TANG et al. (EP 3410619 A1) (see IDS 10/09/2024), hereby referred to as TANG . Claim 2: CHEN teaches the method of according to claim 1, wherein there is at least one CQI index in the first CQI set, and a code rate associated with each of the at least one CQI index (CHEN: FIG. 1) , but does not explicitly disclose, and the code rate is equal to an average value of code rates corresponding to two adjacent CQI indexes in a predefined second CQI set. TANG, in the same field of endeavor, teaches the code rate is equal to an average value of code rates corresponding to two adjacent CQI indexes in a predefined second CQI set (TANG: para 106 (“The new coding rate Cnew in the case of another CQI index is an average value of new coding rates Cnew of adjacent CQI indexes…”) and equation 6 wherein the first CQI set can be the CQI set with the new code rate ) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified CHEN-SU with TANG for the benefit of improving communication capability (TANG: para 3) . Claim 3: CHEN-SU teaches the method according to claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose wherein a difference between code rates corresponding to any two adjacent CQIs associated with a second modulation mode in the first CQI set is less than a difference between code rates corresponding to any two adjacent CQIs associated with the second modulation mode in a predefined second CQI set TANG, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein a difference between code rates corresponding to any two adjacent CQIs associated with a second modulation mode in the first CQI set is less than a difference between code rates corresponding to any two adjacent CQIs associated with the second modulation mode in a predefined second CQI set (TANG: Table 2 wherein the current code rate difference between CQI 1-2 is 0.051028 and wherein the new code rate difference between CQI 1-2 is 0.016828 and wherein the first set/new code rate is less than the second set/current code rate ) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified CHEN-SU with TANG for the benefit of improving communication capability (TANG: para 3) . Claim 4: CHEN-SU teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein in the first CQI set, there is at least one CQI index k, and a code rate associated with the CQI index k (CHEN: FIG. 1 and FIG. 6) , but does not explicitly disclose wherein the code rate is equal to an average value of code rates corresponding to a CQI index k-1 and a CQI index k+1 in the first CQI set, wherein k is greater than 0 and less than 31; or in the first CQI set, there is at least on CQI index h, and a code rate associated with the CQI index h is equal to an average value of code rates corresponding to a CQI index h-1 and a CQI index h+2 in the first CQI set, where h is greater than 0 and less than 29; or in the first CQI set, there is at least one CQI index h, and a code rate associated with the CQI index h is equal to an average value of code rates corresponding to a CQI index h-2 and a CQI index h+1 in the first CQI set, where h is greater than 1 and less than 30. TANG, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the code rate is equal to an average value of code rates corresponding to a CQI index k-1 and a CQI index k+1 in the first CQI set, wherein k is greater than 0 and less than 31 (TANG: Table 3 wherein CQI index in the first set has CQI index greater than 0 and/or 1 and less than 29, 30, and/or 31 ; and para 106 (“The new coding rate Cnew in the case of another CQI index is an average value of new coding rates Cnew of adjacent CQI indexes…”) and Equation 6 wherein code rate is an average value of adjacent CQI indexes ) ; or in the first CQI set, there is at least on CQI index h, and a code rate associated with the CQI index h is equal to an average value of code rates corresponding to a CQI index h-1 and a CQI index h+2 in the first CQI set, where h is greater than 0 and less than 29 (TANG: Table 3 wherein CQI index in the first set has CQI index greater than 0 and/or 1 and less than 29, 30, and/or 31 ; and para 106 (“The new coding rate Cnew in the case of another CQI index is an average value of new coding rates Cnew of adjacent CQI indexes…”) and Equation 6 wherein code rate is an average value of adjacent CQI indexes ) ; or in the first CQI set, there is at least one CQI index h, and a code rate associated with the CQI index h is equal to an average value of code rates corresponding to a CQI index h-2 and a CQI index h+1 in the first CQI set, where h is greater than 1 and less than 30 (TANG: Table 3 wherein CQI index in the first set has CQI index greater than 0 and/or 1 and less than 29, 30, and/or 31 ; and para 106 (“The new coding rate Cnew in the case of another CQI index is an average value of new coding rates Cnew of adjacent CQI indexes…”) and Equation 6 wherein code rate is an average value of adjacent CQI indexes ) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified CHEN-SU with TANG for the benefit of improving communication capability (TANG: para 3) . Claim 23: CHEN teaches a terminal, comprising: one or more processors (CHEN: FIG. 3 item 302 (“Processor”)) ; and a storage device configured to store one or more programs (CHEN: FIG. 3 item 304 (“Memory”)) ; and when the one or more programs are executed by the one or more processors, the one or more processors implementing the channel quality reporting method according to claim 1 (See rejection for claim 1 above) . Claim 24: CHEN teaches a service node, comprising: one or more processors (CHEN: FIG. 4 item 402 (“Processor”)) ; and a storage device configured to store one or more programs (CHEN: FIG. 4 item 404 (“Memory”)) ; and when the one or more programs are executed by the one or more processors, the one or more processors implementing the channel quality receiving method according to claim 20 (See rejection for claim 20 above) . Claim 25: CHEN teaches a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a computer program therein (CHEN: FIG. 3 item 304 (“Memory”)) . For further limitations, see rejection for claim 1 above. Claim 26: CHEN teaches a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a computer program therein (CHEN: FIG. 4 item 404 (“Memory”)) . For further limitations, see rejection for claim 20 above . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 6-7, 10, and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CHEN in view of SU, the combination hereby referred to as CHEN-SU, and in further view of YANG et al. (US 20220021474 A1) (see 892 06/04/2025), hereby referred to as YANG . Claim 6: CHEN-SU teaches the method according to claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose wherein in the first CQI set, a difference between TBS indexes corresponding to every two adjacent CQI indexes associated with a first modulation mode is 2. YANG, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein in the first CQI set, a difference between TBS indexes corresponding to every two adjacent CQI indexes associated with a first modulation mode is 2 (YANG: para 280 (“I TBS in Table 2 is 14 rows of even numbers 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12,…which are in a one-to-one correspondence with 14 rows of CQI indexes 2, 3, 4, 5, 6…in Table 10.”) wherein the difference between TBS indexes for each CQI Index is 2 for any/a first modulation mode ) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified CHEN-SU with YANG, the combination hereby referred to as CHEN-SU-YANG, for the benefit of improving signal transmission rate (YANG: para 22) . Claim 7: CHEN-SU-YANG teaches the method according to claim 6, wherein in the first CQI set, each CQI is associated with an MCS index, and each MCS index is associated with a TBS index (YANG: TABLE 2 and para 280 (“I TBS in Table 2 is 14 rows of even numbers 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12,…which are in a one-to-one correspondence with 14 rows of CQI indexes 2, 3, 4, 5, 6…in Table 10.”) wherein each CQI is associated with a TBS which is associated with an MCS ) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified CHEN-SU with YANG for the benefit of improving signal transmission rate (YANG: para 22) . Claim 10: CHEN-SU teaches the method according to claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose wherein in the first CQI set, a TBS index associated with a CQI with a largest index is 21 or 22. YANG, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein in the first CQI set, a TBS index associated with a CQI with a largest index is 21 or 22 (YANG: TABLE 2 and (YANG: para 280 (“I TBS in Table 2 is 14 rows of even numbers 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 26…which are in a one-to-one correspondence with 14 rows of CQI indexes 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15 in Table 10.”) wherein TBS index 22 is associated with a largest index/CQI 13 ) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified CHEN-SU with YANG for the benefit of improving signal transmission rate (YANG: para 22) . Claim 14: CHEN-SU teaches the method according to claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose wherein for an in-band deployment, the reported C0 is less than or equal to a C0 index associated with a TBS index L, where L is equal to 16 or 17. YANG, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein for an in-band deployment (YANG: FIG. 2 and para 3 (“…LTE-based 5 th generation…”) method directed within a network/in-band deployment ) , the reported CQI is less than or equal to a CQI index associated with a TBS index L, where L is equal to 16 or 17 (YANG: TABLE 2 and para 280 (“I TBS in Table 2 is 14 rows of even numbers 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 26…which are in a one-to-one correspondence with 14 rows of CQI indexes 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15in Table 10.”) wherein a CQI index can be associated with TBS index 17 or lower ) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified CHEN-SU with YANG for the benefit of improving signal transmission rate (YANG: para 22) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CHEN in view of SU, the combination hereby referred to as CHEN-SU, and in further view of YOKOYAMA (US 20140321292 A1) (see IDS 03/01/2024) . Claim 12: CHEN-SU teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the first CQI set includes M CQI indexes, where M is greater than or equal to 8 (CHEN: FIG. 1 and FIG. 6) ; but does not explicitly disclose in the M CQI indexes, M-1 CQI indexes are respectively associated with M-1 MCS indexes in MCS index 0 to MCS index M-1; or, in M CQI Indexes, M-1 CQI indexes are respectively associated with MCS index 0 to MCS index M-2. YOKOYAMA, in the same field of endeavor, teaches in the M CQI indexes, M-1 CQI indexes are respectively associated with M-1 MCS indexes in MCS index 0 to MCS index M-1 (YOKOYAMA: para 98 (“The CQI index is, for example, any of ID numbers of 0 to 15…The CQI index corresponds to the MCS index…”) wherein M is 16 and CQI 0 to 15 is associated with MCS 0-15 ) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified CHEN-SU with YOKOYAMA for the benefit adapting to faster communication speeds (YOKOYAMA: para 28) . Allowable Subject Matter 12-151-08 AIA 07-43 12-51-08 Claim 8-9 and 11 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. ZHANG et al. (US 20230123975 A1) FIG. 4 teaches determining CQI reporting based on receiving instructions. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANGELIE T NGO whose telephone number is (571)272-0180. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Thur: 8am - 5pm; 2nd Fri: 8am - 3pm. 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, Noel Beharry can be reached at (571) 270-5630. 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. /A.T.N./Examiner, Art Unit 2416 /NOEL R BEHARRY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2416 Application/Control Number: 18/019,457 Page 2 Art Unit: 2416 Application/Control Number: 18/019,457 Page 3 Art Unit: 2416 Application/Control Number: 18/019,457 Page 4 Art Unit: 2416 Application/Control Number: 18/019,457 Page 5 Art Unit: 2416 Application/Control Number: 18/019,457 Page 6 Art Unit: 2416 Application/Control Number: 18/019,457 Page 7 Art Unit: 2416 Application/Control Number: 18/019,457 Page 8 Art Unit: 2416 Application/Control Number: 18/019,457 Page 9 Art Unit: 2416 Application/Control Number: 18/019,457 Page 10 Art Unit: 2416 Application/Control Number: 18/019,457 Page 11 Art Unit: 2416 Application/Control Number: 18/019,457 Page 12 Art Unit: 2416 Application/Control Number: 18/019,457 Page 13 Art Unit: 2416 Application/Control Number: 18/019,457 Page 14 Art Unit: 2416 Application/Control Number: 18/019,457 Page 15 Art Unit: 2416 Application/Control Number: 18/019,457 Page 16 Art Unit: 2416
Prosecution Insights