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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 5/18/2026 has been entered.
Claims 1-20 are pending and presented for examination.
Response to Amendment
Claims 1, 8, 10, 12, 14 & 16 have been amended.
Rejections to claims 1, 12 & 16 under 35 USC 112(b) have been withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see “Remarks”, filed 5/18/2026, with respect to rejections of claims 1, 12 & 16 under 35 USC 112(b) have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections of claims 1, 12 & 16 under 35 USC 112(b) have been withdrawn based on amendments to these claims.
Applicant's arguments filed 1/5/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant submits that claims 1-3, 5, 6 & 8-10 are patentable based on amendments to these claims. Examiner respectfully disagrees noting that a claimed invention may be rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 when the invention is anticipated (or is “not novel”) over a disclosure that is available as prior art that teaches every element required by the claim under its broadest reasonable interpretation (see §MPEP 2131). Applicant submits that claims 4, 7 & 11-20 are patentable based on amendments to these claims and claims on which they depend. Examiner respectfully disagrees noting that, per 35 U.S.C. 103, a patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained 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 (see §MPEP 2141).
Regarding claim 1, applicant argues that Kim is silent as to determining, by a User Equipment (UE), a downlink slot for measuring a reference signal for reporting a Channel State Information (CSI) based on the downlink slot being a slot in which the UE does not perform Uplink (UL) transmission on one or more symbols to be measured for the CSI, and Kim does not determine a downlink slot for CSI measurement based on whether the UE performs UL transmission on one or more symbols to be measured for the CSI, but instead Kim defines slot validity based on network-side scheduling/configuration considerations. Examiner respectfully disagrees noting that for TDD configurations, as disclosed by Kim, UEs are informed of the slot configuration for Downlink, Flexible and Uplink transmissions for each symbol in a slot, and based on this information, the UE determines that it should not transmit on the DL symbols, that may be used to measure CSI.
Applicant argues that Kim’s disclosure that DL and UL transmissions occur on different symbols in a self-contained slot does not teach or suggest determining a downlink slot for CSI measurement based on whether the UE performs UL transmission on symbols to be measured for the CSI. Examiner respectfully disagrees noting that when a UE receives a TDD configuration defining DL, flexible and UL symbols for a slot, the UE uses the configuration to determine a DL slot for measuring a reference signal for reporting CSI, and the UE’s determining of the DL slot for measuring the reference signal is also based on knowing, from the configuration information, that the DL slot is a slot in which the UE does not perform UL transmission on the one or more DL symbols to be measured for CSI. Examiner notes that per [0005] of the current application specification, a DL slot is a slot where UE does not perform UL transmission on symbols to be measured for the CSI. Under this definition, the slot format disclosed by Kim (e.g. fig 6 & [0136]-[0137]) may be interpreted as a DL slot. Thus, examiner maintains that Kim discloses “determining, by a User Equipment (UE), a downlink slot for measuring a reference signal for reporting a Channel State Information (CSI) based on the downlink slot being a slot in which the UE does not perform Uplink (UL) transmission on one or more symbols to be measured for the CSI; measuring, by the UE, the reference signal in the downlink slot; and reporting, by the UE, the CSI to a base station based on the measurement of the reference signal in the downlink slot”.
Based on the above discussion, examiner maintains rejection of claim 1 under 35 USC 102.
Regarding claim 8, applicant submits that this claim is patentable based on similar amendments and arguments as made above for claim 1. Examiner respectfully disagrees and for the same reasons as discussed above maintains rejection of claim 8 under 35 USC 102.
Regarding claims 2, 3, 5, 6, 9 & 10, applicant submits that these claims are patentable based on amendments to these claims and based on amendments and arguments as made above for claims 1 & 8 and due to their dependency on claims 1 or 8. Examiner respectfully disagrees and for the same reasons as discussed above maintains rejection of these claims under 35 USC 102.
Regarding claims 4, 7 & 11, applicant submits that these claims are patentable based on amendments to these claims and based on amendments and arguments as made above for claims 1 & 8 and due to their dependency on claims 1 or 8. Examiner respectfully disagrees and for the same reasons as discussed above maintains rejection of these claims under 35 USC 103.
Regarding claim 14, applicant submits that this claim is patentable based on similar amendments and arguments as made above for claim 1. Examiner respectfully disagrees and for the same reasons as discussed above maintains rejection of claim 14 under 35 USC 103.
Regarding claims 12, 13 & 15-20, applicant submits that these claims are patentable based on amendments to these claims and based on amendments and arguments as made above for claims 8 and 14, and due to their dependency on claims 8 or 14. Examiner respectfully disagrees and for the same reasons as discussed above maintains rejection of these claims under 35 USC 103.
Claim Interpretation
Claim 9 recites the limitation "wherein the slot is a slot that all symbols to be measured for the CSI in the first slot is not used for UL transmission". Examiner is interpreting "a slot" as defining "the slot" and not a different slot. For the purpose of this review, examiner is interpreting this claim as "wherein the first slot consists of all symbols to be measured for the CSI and no symbols used for UL transmission".
Claim 10 recites "wherein the first slot is a slot that at least part of symbols to be measured for the CSI in the slot is not used for UL transmission". Examiner is interpreting "a slot" as defining "the slot" and not a different slot. For the purpose of this review, examiner is interpreting this claim as "wherein the first slot consists of certain symbols to be measured for the CSI and the certain symbols not used for UL transmission".
Claim 11 recites "a slot". Examiner is interpreting "a slot" in claim 11 as defining "the first slot" and not a different slot. For the purpose of this review, examiner is interpreting this claim as "The method of claim 1, wherein the first slot consists of no UL transmission.".
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 5, 6 & 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim et al. (US 2020/0196179)(herein after “Kim”) .
Regarding claim 1, a method, comprising:
Determining, by a User Equipment (UE), a downlink slot for measuring a reference signal for reporting a Channel State Information (CSI) based on the downlink slot being a slot in which the UE does not perform Uplink (UL) transmission on one or more symbols to be measured for the CSI ([0045] discloses that a terminal may be configured by a base station to allocate or assign one or more CSI reportings. Fig 8 & [0235] disclose that the base station may transmit a channel state information-reference signal (CSI-RS) to the terminal for the CSI reportings. [0049] discloses that communication from a base station to a terminal means downlink (DL) communication. [0159] discloses that CSI reportings may be triggered in a slot. Thus, the terminal (i.e. a UE) may determine to allocate CSI reporting by measuring the CSI-RS in a downlink slot for reporting the CSI, based on configuration information from a base station. Tables 7 & 8 and [0322] disclose that the CSI-RS may be configured in a valid downlink slot, where a valid downlink slot is composed of at least one downlink or flexible symbol, does not fall within a configured measurement gap for that UE and there is at least one CSI-RS transmission occasion for channel measurement. Fig 6 & [0136]-[0138] disclose a TDD slot structure where downlink (DL) control and data transmission must occur on different symbols than uplink (UL) control and data transmissions. Thus, the UE cannot perform UL transmission on symbols to be measured for CSI because the UE is not capable of transmitting on the UL while receiving the CSI-RS on the DL due to the TDD slot structure. In this TDD slot structure scenario, the UE would measure the CSI-RS in a DL symbol in a slot based on knowing that the UE will not be performing UL transmission on the DL symbol carrying CSI-RS in the slot.);
measuring, by the UE, the reference signal in the downlink slot ([0284] discloses a terminal receiving a CSI-RS from a base station (i.e. a reference signal in a downlink slot) that is used to measure, calculate and report CSI to the base station.); and
Reporting, by the UE, the CSI to a base station based on the measurement of the reference signal in the downlink slot ([0284] discloses a terminal transmitting CSI to a base station (i.e. reporting the CSI) based on measuring a CSI-RS (i.e. reference signal).
Regarding claim 2, Kim discloses wherein a slot is not the downlink slot if the UE performs UL transmission on symbols to be measured for the CSI (Tables 7 & 8 and [0322] disclose that a CSI-RS may be configured in a valid downlink slot (i.e. a downlink slot), where a valid downlink slot is composed of at least one downlink or flexible symbol, does not fall within a configured measurement gap for that UE and there is at least one CSI-RS transmission occasion for channel measurement. The UE is not capable of transmitting on a symbol where the UE is receiving the CSI-RS due to the TDD slot structure. Thus, if the UE were to perform UL transmission on symbols configured for CSI-RS to be measured for CSI, the slot in which the UE is transmitting would not be the valid downlink slot.).
Regarding claim 3, Kim discloses wherein the slot comprise at least one symbol configured with Downlink (DL) or flexible (Tables 7 & 8 and [0322] disclose that a valid downlink slot (i.e. a slot) is composed of at least one downlink or flexible symbol and there is at least one CSI-RS transmission occasion for channel measurement.).
Regarding claim 5, Kim discloses wherein the UE does not perform UL transmission on all symbols to be measured for the CSI (Tables 7 & 8 and [0322] disclose that a CSI-RS may be configured in a valid downlink slot (i.e. a downlink slot) where there is at least one CSI-RS transmission occasion for channel measurement. The UE is not capable of transmitting on a symbol where the UE is receiving the CSI-RS due to the TDD half-duplex structure of the UE. Thus, the UE cannot perform UL transmission on all CSI-RS symbols to be measured for CSI.).
Regarding claim 6, Kim discloses wherein the UE does not perform UL transmission on any symbols to be measured for the CSI (Tables 7 & 8 and [0322] disclose that a CSI-RS may be configured in a valid downlink slot (i.e. a downlink slot) where there is at least one CSI-RS transmission occasion for channel measurement. The UE is not capable of transmitting on a symbol where the UE is receiving the CSI-RS due to the TDD half-duplex structure of the UE. Thus, the UE cannot perform UL transmission on any CSI-RS symbols to be measured for CSI.).
Regarding claim 8, Kim discloses a method, comprising:
determining, by a User Equipment (UE), a first slot for measuring a reference signal for reporting a Channel State Information (CSI) based on the first slot being a slot in which the UE does not perform Uplink (UL) transmission on one or more symbols to be measured for the CSI, wherein the first slot comprises at least one symbol configured with Downlink or flexible ([0045] discloses that a terminal may be configured by a base station to allocate or assign one or more CSI reportings. [0159] discloses that CSI reportings may be triggered in a slot (i.e. a first slot). Fig 6 & [0134]-[0138] disclose a TDD structure wherein the slot may consist of a DL control and data region and an UL control and data region. Thus, the terminal (i.e. a UE) may determine to measure the CSI-RS in a DL symbol in the DL control region of the slot based on knowing that the UE will not be performing UL transmission on the DL symbol carrying CSI-RS in the slot.); and
measuring, by the UE, a reference signal in the first slot for reporting the CSI ([0284] discloses that a terminal receiving a CSI-RS from a base station (i.e. a reference signal in the first slot) may measure, calculate and report CSI to the base station based on the CSI-RS.).
Regarding claim 9, Kim discloses wherein the slot is a slot that all symbols to be measured for the CSI in the first slot is not used for UL transmission (Tables 7 & 8 and [0322] disclose that a CSI-RS may be configured in a valid downlink slot (i.e. a first slot) where there is at least one CSI-RS transmission occasion for channel measurement. The UE is not capable of transmitting on a symbol where the UE is receiving the CSI-RS due to the TDD half-duplex structure of the UE. Thus, all symbols in the valid downlink slot transmitting CSI-RS and to be measured by the UE are not used for UL transmission.)
Regarding claim 10, Kim discloses wherein the first slot is a slot that at least some symbols to be measured for the CSI in the slot is not used for UL transmission (Fig 6 & [0135]-[0138] disclose a slot (i.e. a first slot) where a UE performs UL transmission in a region 604 and has symbol 0 configured for downlink reception. Because of the TDD structure of the UE, the UE cannot use symbol 0 for UL transmission.).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 4, 7 & 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 2020/0196179)(herein after “Kim”) in view of 3GPP et al. (3GPP TS 38.213, “NR; Physical layer procedures for control”, Technical Specification Group Radio Access Network, Release 16, V16.9.0, 4/1/2022)(herein after “3GPP”).
Regarding claim 4, Kim discloses the method of claim 1.
Kim fails to disclose wherein a slot is not the downlink slot if the UE performs UL transmission on any symbol in the slot.
However, 3GPP teaches wherein a slot is not the downlink slot if the UE performs UL transmission on any symbol in the slot (Pages 134-135, Table 11.1.1-1 & Section 11.1.1 disclose a slot format 0 where all symbols in the slot are configured for Downlink (D). When one of the symbols in slot format 0 is used for CSI-RS, the slot is considered a valid downlink slot (i.e. a downlink slot) as disclosed by Kim. Thus, if the UE were to perform UL transmission on any symbol during a valid downlink slot using slot format 0, the slot in which the UE is transmitting would not be the valid downlink slot configured for slot format 0.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art prior to the claimed invention to have the method of claim 1, as disclosed by Kim, wherein a slot is not the valid downlink slot if the UE performs UL transmission on any symbol in the slot, as taught by 3GPP. The motivation to do so would be to have a method where a base station can recognize that a UE, that is performing an UL transmission during a symbol period of a valid downlink slot duration preconfigured for slot format 0, is not transmitting on the valid downlink slot so that the base station can ignore the UL transmission from the UE.
Regrading claim 7, Kim discloses the method of claim 1
Kim fails to disclose wherein the UE does not perform UL transmission on any symbol in the downlink slot.
However, 3GPP teaches wherein the UE does not perform UL transmission on any symbol in the downlink slot (Pages 134-135, Table 11.1.1-1 & Section 11.1.1 disclose a slot format 0 where all symbols in the slot are configured for Downlink (D). When one of the symbols in slot format 0 is used for CSI-RS, the slot is considered a valid downlink slot (i.e. a downlink slot) as disclosed by Kim. Thus, the UE cannot perform UL transmission on any symbol of the valid downlink slot using slot format 0.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art prior to the claimed invention to have the method of claim 1, as disclosed by Kim, wherein the UE does not perform UL transmission on any symbol in the downlink slot, as taught by 3GPP. The motivation to do so would be to have a method where a base station can configure a UE to not transmit on any symbol of a valid downlink slot to maximize downlink channel resources for maximizing DL throughput performance.
Regarding claim 11, Kim discloses the method of claim 8.
Kim fails to disclose wherein the first slot is a slot that there is no UL transmission in the slot.
However, 3GPP teaches wherein the first slot is a slot that there is no UL transmission in the slot (Pages 134-135, Table 11.1.1-1 & Section 11.1.1 disclose a slot format 0 where all symbols in the slot are configured for Downlink (D). The UE is not capable of transmitting and receiving on the same symbol due to the TDD half-duplex structure of the UE. Thus, the UE cannot perform UL transmission on any symbol of the valid downlink slot using slot format 0.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art prior to the claimed invention to have the method of claim 8, as disclosed by Kim, wherein the UE does not perform UL transmission on any symbol in a first slot, as taught by 3GPP. The motivation to do so would be to have a method where a base station can configure a UE to not transmit on any symbol of a valid downlink slot to maximize downlink channel resources for maximizing DL throughput performance.
Claims 12-18 & 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 2020/0196179)(herein after “Kim”) in view of Bae et al. (US 2022/0124707)(herein after “Bae”).
Regarding claim 12, Kim discloses the method of claim 8.
Kim fails to disclose comprising skipping by the UE, a second slot as reference resource if the UE performs UL transmission on one or more symbols associated with the second slot.
However, Bae teaches comprising skipping by the UE, a second slot as reference resource if the UE performs UL transmission on one or more symbols associated with the second slot (Fig 14 & [0243] discloses a slot format consisting of 5 DL symbols followed by 4 flexible symbols followed by 5 UL symbols. [0245] discloses that in a process of performing an UL transmission in resources indicated or configured by a BS at the UE (i.e. in the one or more UL symbols associated with the slot having the slot format of DL symbols followed by 4 flexible symbols followed by 5 UL symbols), the UE may skip a corresponding scheduled DL CSI-RS measurement in one or more of the DL symbols.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art prior to the claimed invention to have the method of claim 8, as disclosed by Kim, comprising skipping by the UE, a second slot as reference resource if the UE performs UL transmission on one or more symbols associated with the second slot, as taught by Bae. The motivation to do so would be to have a method where UE skips CSI-RS measurements when there is not a sufficient time gap for the UE to transition from receiving the CSI-RS to transmitting on the UL in order to avoid loss UL data that cannot be sent while the UE is transitioning the an UL transmission state.
Regarding claim 13, Kim in view of Bae disclose the method of claim 12.
Kim discloses wherein the second slot comprises at least one symbol configured with DL or flexible (Fig 6 & [0135]-[0138] disclose a slot (i.e. a second slot) that has symbol 0 configured for downlink reception.).
Regarding claim 14, Kim discloses a method, comprising:
determining, by a User Equipment (UE), a slot, in a reference resource, for reporting Channel State Information (CSI) to a base station ([0045] discloses that a terminal may be configured by a base station to allocate or assign one or more CSI reportings. Fig 8 & [0235] disclose that the base station may transmit a channel state information-reference signal (CSI-RS) to the terminal for the CSI reportings. [0159] discloses that CSI reportings may be triggered in a slot (i.e. a slot including a CSI-RS may be interpreted as a reference resource). Thus, the terminal (i.e. a UE) would determine to allocate CSI reporting by measuring the CSI-RS in a slot for reporting the CSI to a base station, based on configuration information from the base station.).
Kim fails to disclose wherein symbols to be measured for the CSI are used for Uplink (UL) transmission in the slot in the reference resource, wherein the UE does not perform UL transmission on one or more symbols, associated with a downlink slot, to be measured for the CSI; and at least one of skipping or reporting by the UE a predefined value for the CSI.
However, Bae teaches wherein symbols to be measured for the CSI are used for Uplink (UL) transmission in the slot in the reference resource, wherein the UE does not perform UL transmission on one or more symbols, associated with a downlink slot, to be measured for the CSI (Fig 14 & [0243]-[0245] discloses a slot with a slot format consisting of 5 DL symbols followed by 4 flexible symbols followed by 5 UL symbols, and a scenario where UL transmission is indicated for some symbols overlapping with DL symbols in the slot, and the UE excludes from transmitting on the UL during symbols associated with the opposite link direction (i.e. Downlink symbols) in the slot that may be used for CSI-RS measurement.); and
at least one of skipping, by the UE, the CSI ([0245] discloses that in a process of performing an UL transmission in resources indicated or configured by a BS at the UE (i.e. on one or more symbols associated with a downlink slot to be measured for the CSI), the UE may skip a corresponding scheduled DL CSI-RS measurement.) or reporting, by the UE a predefined value for the CSI (optional).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art prior to the claimed invention to have a method where a UE is scheduled to report CSI to a base station, as disclosed by Kim, wherein the UE is to performs UL transmission on symbols to be measured for the reporting of CSI in a slot with a CSI-RS and skips reporting of the CSI, as taught by Bae. The motivation to do so would be to have a method where UE excludes from transmitting on DL symbols in a slot, in order to avoid interference in measuring CSI-RS on DL symbols in the slot, and skips CSI-RS measurements when there is not a sufficient time gap for the UE to transition from receiving the CSI-RS to transmitting on the UL in order to avoid loss UL data that cannot be sent while the UE is transitioning the an UL transmission state.
Regarding claim 15, Kim in view of Bae disclose the method of claim 14.
Kim discloses wherein the symbols to be measured for the CSI are all symbols to be measured for the CSI in the slot ([0183] discloses that reference signals with CSI-RS (i.e. symbols to be measured for CSI) are used for channel measurement and CSI reporting. Thus, all symbols to be measured for CSI in a slot (i.e. symbols with a CSI-RS) are symbols that the UE can make measurements of CSI and report CSI.).
Regarding claim 16, Kim in view of Baie disclose the method of claim 14.
Kim discloses wherein the symbols to be measured for the CSI are some but not all symbols to be measured for the CSI in the slot ([0183] discloses that reference signals with CSI-RS (i.e. symbols to be measured for CSI) are used for channel measurement and CSI reporting. [0243] discloses a slot with a slot format consisting of 5 DL symbols followed by 4 flexible symbols followed by 5 UL symbols. Thus, some but not all symbols (i.e. only DL symbols) to be measured for CSI in a slot (i.e. DL symbols with a CSI-RS) are symbols that the UE is to make measurements of CSI and report CSI.).
Regarding claim 17, Kim in view of Bae disclose the method of claim 14.
Kim discloses the UE does not perform UL transmission on all symbols to be measured for the CSI (Tables 7 & 8 and [0322] disclose that a CSI-RS may be configured in a valid downlink slot (i.e. a slot) where there is at least one CSI-RS transmission occasion for channel measurement. The UE is not capable of transmitting on a symbol where the UE is receiving the CSI-RS due to the TDD structure. Thus, the UE cannot perform UL transmission on all CSI-RS symbols to be measured for CSI.).
Regarding claim 18, Kim in view of Bai disclose the method of claim 14.
Kim discloses the UE does not perform UL transmission on any symbols to be measured for the CSI (Tables 7 & 8 and [0322] disclose that a CSI-RS may be configured in a valid downlink slot (i.e. a slot) where there is at least one CSI-RS transmission occasion for channel measurement. The UE is not capable of transmitting on a symbol where the UE is receiving the CSI-RS due to the TDD half-duplex structure of the UE. Thus, the UE cannot perform UL transmission on any CSI-RS symbols to be measured for CSI.).
Regarding claim 20, Kim in view of Bae disclose the method of claim 14.
comprising skipping, by the UE, a second slot as reference resource if the UE performs UL transmission on all or some of symbols to be measured for the CSI in the second slot.
However, Bae teaches comprising skipping, by the UE, a second slot as reference resource if the UE performs UL transmission on all or some of symbols to be measured for the CSI in the second slot ([0245] discloses that in a process of performing an UL transmission in resources indicated or configured by a BS at the UE (i.e. on all or some of the symbols in a second slot to be measured for the CSI in the second slot), the UE may skip a corresponding scheduled DL CSI-RS measurement.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art prior to the claimed invention to have the method of claim 14, as disclosed by Kim in view of Bae, wherein the UE skips a second slot as reference resource if the UE performs UL transmission on all or some of symbols to be measured for the CSI in the second slot, as taught by Bae. The motivation to do so would be to have a method where UE skips CSI-RS measurements when there is not a sufficient time gap for the UE to transition from receiving the CSI-RS to transmitting on the UL.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 2020/0196179)(herein after “Kim”) in view of Bae et al. (US 2022/0124707)(herein after “Bae”), as applied to claim 14, and further in view of 3GPP et al. (3GPP TS 38.213, “NR; Physical layer procedures for control”, Technical Specification Group Radio Access Network, Release 16, V16.9.0, 4/1/2022)(herein after “3GPP”).
Regarding claim 19, Kim in view of Bae disclose the method of claim 14.
Kim fails to disclose the UE does not perform UL transmission on any symbol in the slot.
However, 3GPP further teaches wherein the UE does not perform UL transmission on any symbol in the slot (Pages 134-135, Table 11.1.1-1 & Section 11.1.1 disclose a slot format 0 where all symbols in the slot are configured for Downlink (D). When one of the symbols in slot format 0 is used for CSI-RS, the slot is considered a valid downlink slot (i.e. a slot) as disclosed by Kim. Thus, the UE cannot perform UL transmission on any symbol of the valid downlink slot using slot format 0.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art prior to the claimed invention to have the method of claim 14, as disclosed by Kim in view of Bae, wherein the UE does not perform UL transmission on any symbol in the slot, as further taught by 3GPP. The motivation to do so would be to have a method where a base station can configure a UE to not transmit on any symbol of a valid downlink slot to maximize downlink channel resources for maximizing DL throughput performance.
Conclusion
The following prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Lin et al. (US 2014/0204869) discloses a Method and Apparatus for Channel State Information Measurement in a Wireless Communication System.
Cui et al. (US 2024/0172018) discloses Radio Resource Management Measurement Prioritization for Reduced Capacity User Equipment.
Zhang et al. (US 2020/0119893) discloses Multiplexing of Channel State Information Reference Signals (CSI-RS).
Bagheri et al. (US 2020/0107319) discloses a Method and Apparatus for Generating a CSI Report. Lin et al. (TW 1721201 B) discloses a Method and Apparatus for Channel State Information Report for Beam Operation in a Wireless Communication System.
3GPP et al. (3GPP TS 38.214, "NR; Physical layer procedures for data", Technical Specification Group Radio Access Network, Release 16, V16.9.0, 4/1/2022.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES P SEYMOUR whose telephone number is (571)272-7654. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5 EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Nishant Divecha can be reached at 571-270-3125. 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.
/JAMES P SEYMOUR/Examiner, Art Unit 2419
/Nishant Divecha/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2419
Prosecution Insights