DETAILED ACTION
This office action is responsive to communications filed on April 9, 2026. Claims 10 and 13-15 have been amended. Claim 12 has been canceled. Claims 10, 11, and 13-15 are pending in the application.
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 .
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.
Claims 10, 11, and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheng et al. (US 2022/0239417) in view of Manolakos et al. (US 2022/0417776).
Regarding Claim 10, Cheng teaches a terminal (“The node 700 may be a UE or a BS that performs various functions disclosed with reference to FIGS. 1 through 6” – See [0386]) comprising:
a transmitter that transmits capability information indicating a maximum number of prediction times (“the node 700 may include a transceiver 720” – See [0385]; “The transceiver 720 has a transmitter 722 (e.g., transmitting/transmission circuitry)” – See [0387]; “a UE may perform a capability report to indicate the duration or the length of the measurement window and the prediction window. The capability report may include UE radio access capability parameters, which may include a new parameter measurement-length and/or a new parameter prediction-length, indicating the maximum number of supporting duration or length” – See [0209]; The UE (terminal) transmits capability information indicating a maximum number of prediction duration/times);
a receiver that receives a first higher layer signaling indicating a number of the prediction times (“the node 700 may include a transceiver 720” – See [0385]; “The transceiver 720 has … a receiver 724 (e.g., receiving/reception circuitry)” – See [0387]; “a UE is configured with higher layer parameter timeRestrictionForChannelMeasurements with a new higher layer parameter Prediction-Window … The new higher layer parameter Prediction-Window may be set to ‘sl1’, ‘sl2’, ‘sl4’, where all values are in a number of slots, or set to ‘ms10’, ‘ms20’, ‘ms40’, where all values are in a number of milliseconds” – See [0197]-[0200]; The UE receives higher layer signaling indicating a configured number of prediction duration/times); and
a processor that determines, based on the first higher layer signaling, one or more prediction times corresponding to a predicted channel state information (CSI) report (“the node 700 may include a … a processor 728” – See [0385]; “UE is Provided with a Prediction Window in Time. CSI Report May be Calculated Specifically for the Indicated Prediction Window” – See [0185]; The UE determines the CSI predictions for a corresponding CSI report based on the configured window).
Cheng does not explicitly teach that the receiver receives a second higher layer signaling indicating a time offset between the predicted CSI report and the one or more prediction times.
However, Manolakos teaches that the receiver receives a second higher layer signaling indicating a time offset between the predicted CSI report and the one or more prediction times (“CSI reporting configuration message 361 may be a RRC message” – See [0079]; “In an aspect, the first time offset may be calculated from the end of CSI reference resource 403 to radio resource unit of the CSI report transmission 405 as shown with 406” – See [0094]; “In an aspect, the second time offset may be calculated from the end of CSI reference resource 403 to CSI target resource 404 as shown with 408” – See [0095]; See also Fig. 4A; The offset between report 405 and the one or more prediction times 404 depends on the offsets 406 and 408 that are configured by RRC (higher layer) signaling).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Cheng such that the receiver receives a second higher layer signaling indicating a time offset between the predicted CSI report and the one or more prediction times. Motivation for doing so would be to additionally ensure that the timing of the CSI reports is configured in accordance with the capabilities of the terminal (See Manolakos, [0073] and [0080]).
Regarding Claim 11, Cheng in view of Manolakos teaches the terminal of Claim 10. Cheng further teaches that the predicted CSI report includes a precoding matrix indicator (PMI) in the one or more prediction times (“If the UE is configured with a CSI-ReportConfig with the higher layer parameter reportQuantity set to a new value ‘cri-RI-PMI-CQI-PCQI’, the UE may report a predicted CQI (PCQI) index for the entire reporting band, or per sub-band, depending on CQI configuration” – See [0211]; The CSI report includes a PMI associated with the prediction window).
Claim 13 is rejected based on reasoning similar to Claim 10.
Regarding Claim 14, Cheng teaches a base station (“The node 700 may be a UE or a BS that performs various functions disclosed with reference to FIGS. 1 through 6” – See [0386]) comprising:
a receiver that receives, from a terminal, capability information indicating a maximum number of prediction times (“the node 700 may include a transceiver 720” – See [0385]; “The transceiver 720 has … a receiver 724 (e.g., receiving/reception circuitry)” – See [0387]; “a UE may perform a capability report to indicate the duration or the length of the measurement window and the prediction window. The capability report may include UE radio access capability parameters, which may include a new parameter measurement-length and/or a new parameter prediction-length, indicating the maximum number of supporting duration or length” – See [0209]; The BS (base station) receives, from the UE (terminal), capability information indicating a maximum number of prediction duration/times);
a transmitter that transmits, to the terminal, a first higher layer signaling indicating a number of the prediction times (“the node 700 may include a transceiver 720” – See [0385]; “The transceiver 720 has a transmitter 722 (e.g., transmitting/transmission circuitry)” – See [0387]; “a UE is configured with higher layer parameter timeRestrictionForChannelMeasurements with a new higher layer parameter Prediction-Window … The new higher layer parameter Prediction-Window may be set to ‘sl1’, ‘sl2’, ‘sl4’, where all values are in a number of slots, or set to ‘ms10’, ‘ms20’, ‘ms40’, where all values are in a number of milliseconds” – See [0197]-[0200]; The BS transmits, to the UE, higher layer signaling indicating a configured number of prediction duration/times); and
a processor that controls to receive, from the terminal, a predicted channel state information (CSI) report corresponding to one or more prediction times that are determined by the terminal based on the first higher layer signaling (“the node 700 may include a … a processor 728” – See [0385]; “UE is Provided with a Prediction Window in Time. CSI Report May be Calculated Specifically for the Indicated Prediction Window” – See [0185]; The BS receives, from the UE, a CSI report corresponding to the CSI predictions based on the configured window).
Cheng does not explicitly teach that the transmitter transmits, to the terminal, a second higher layer signaling indicating a time offset between the predicted CSI report and the one or more prediction times.
However, Manolakos teaches that the transmitter transmits, to the terminal, a second higher layer signaling indicating a time offset between the predicted CSI report and the one or more prediction times (“CSI reporting configuration message 361 may be a RRC message” – See [0079]; “In an aspect, the first time offset may be calculated from the end of CSI reference resource 403 to radio resource unit of the CSI report transmission 405 as shown with 406” – See [0094]; “In an aspect, the second time offset may be calculated from the end of CSI reference resource 403 to CSI target resource 404 as shown with 408” – See [0095]; See also Fig. 4A; The offset between report 405 and the one or more prediction times 404 depends on the offsets 406 and 408 that are configured by RRC (higher layer) signaling).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Cheng such that the transmitter transmits, to the terminal, a second higher layer signaling indicating a time offset between the predicted CSI report and the one or more prediction times for the same reasons as those given with respect to Claim 10.
Regarding Claim 15, Cheng teaches a system comprising a terminal and a base station (“The node 700 may be a UE or a BS that performs various functions disclosed with reference to FIGS. 1 through 6” – See [0386]), wherein the terminal comprises:
a transmitter that transmits capability information indicating a maximum number of prediction times (“the node 700 may include a transceiver 720” – See [0385]; “The transceiver 720 has a transmitter 722 (e.g., transmitting/transmission circuitry)” – See [0387]; “a UE may perform a capability report to indicate the duration or the length of the measurement window and the prediction window. The capability report may include UE radio access capability parameters, which may include a new parameter measurement-length and/or a new parameter prediction-length, indicating the maximum number of supporting duration or length” – See [0209]; The UE (terminal) transmits capability information indicating a maximum number of prediction duration/times);
a receiver that receives a first higher layer signaling indicating a number of the prediction times (“the node 700 may include a transceiver 720” – See [0385]; “The transceiver 720 has … a receiver 724 (e.g., receiving/reception circuitry)” – See [0387]; “a UE is configured with higher layer parameter timeRestrictionForChannelMeasurements with a new higher layer parameter Prediction-Window … The new higher layer parameter Prediction-Window may be set to ‘sl1’, ‘sl2’, ‘sl4’, where all values are in a number of slots, or set to ‘ms10’, ‘ms20’, ‘ms40’, where all values are in a number of milliseconds” – See [0197]-[0200]; The UE receives higher layer signaling indicating a configured number of prediction duration/times); and
a processor that determines, based on the first higher layer signaling, one or more prediction times corresponding to a predicted channel state information (CSI) report (“the node 700 may include a … a processor 728” – See [0385]; “UE is Provided with a Prediction Window in Time. CSI Report May be Calculated Specifically for the Indicated Prediction Window” – See [0185]; The UE determines the CSI predictions for a corresponding CSI report based on the configured window), and
the base station comprises: a receiver that receives the capability information (“the node 700 may include a transceiver 720” – See [0385]; “The transceiver 720 has … a receiver 724 (e.g., receiving/reception circuitry)” – See [0387]; “the UE may transmit a UE capability message to the BS” – See [0145]; The base station receives the capability report from the UE).
Cheng does not explicitly teach that the receiver of the terminal receives a second higher layer signaling indicating a time offset between the predicted CSI report and the one or more prediction times.
However, Manolakos teaches that the receiver of the terminal receives a second higher layer signaling indicating a time offset between the predicted CSI report and the one or more prediction times (“CSI reporting configuration message 361 may be a RRC message” – See [0079]; “In an aspect, the first time offset may be calculated from the end of CSI reference resource 403 to radio resource unit of the CSI report transmission 405 as shown with 406” – See [0094]; “In an aspect, the second time offset may be calculated from the end of CSI reference resource 403 to CSI target resource 404 as shown with 408” – See [0095]; See also Fig. 4A; The offset between report 405 and the one or more prediction times 404 depends on the offsets 406 and 408 that are configured by RRC (higher layer) signaling).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Cheng such that the receiver of the terminal receives a second higher layer signaling indicating a time offset between the predicted CSI report and the one or more prediction times for the same reasons as those given with respect to Claim 10.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on April 9, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On pages 7-8 of the remarks, Applicant argues “Cited paragraphs [0094]-[0095] of Manolakos state that ‘the first time offset may be calculated from the end of CSI reference resource 403 to radio resource unit of the CSI report transmission 405 as shown with 406 … [T]he second time offset may be calculated from the end of CSI reference resource 403 to CSI target resource 404 as shown with 408.’ Accordingly, the two time offsets of Manolakos are considered from the resource of the CSI-RS. However, Manolakos fails to teach that either of the time offsets are considered from one or more prediction times. Put differently, the time offsets of the Manolakos are the offset between the CSI-RS and the CSI report, but not between a prediction time indicated by a base station and the CSI report. Additionally, Manolakos fails to teach receiving RRC signaling indicating such an offset (i.e., a time offset between the predicted CSI report and the one or more prediction times). Thus, Manolakos fails to teach the above-referenced limitation of amended independent claim 10.
In view of the above, neither Cheng nor Manolakos can teach at least above-referenced limitation of amended independent claim 10, which is similarly recited in the other amended independent claims.”
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
In [0199], Cheng discloses “the start timing of the prediction window is no earlier than the CSI reference resource, e.g., the start timing of the prediction window may be contiguous with the last OFDM symbol of the valid DL slot including the CSI reference resource.” Cheng’s “prediction time” starts immediately after (contiguous with) the last CSI reference resource. In [0094], Manolakos discloses “the first time offset may be calculated from the end of CSI reference resource 403 to radio resource unit of the CSI report transmission 405 as shown with 406.” Manolakos’ offset 406 is from the last CSI reference resource 403 to the transmission time of the CSI report. Since the start of Cheng’s “prediction time” coincides with the end of the CSI reference resource, modifying Cheng to include Manolakos’ offset from the end of the CSI reference resource to the transmission time of the CSI report would also mean that the offset is from the start of the “prediction time” to the transmission time of the CSI report. Thus, the combined Cheng and Manolakos teaches “a time offset between the predicted CSI report and the one or more prediction times.”
On page 8 of the remarks, Applicant argues “Further, even assuming arguendo a skilled person were to combine Cheng and Manolakos in the manner suggested by the Examiner, the combination would still fail to render amended independent claims 10 and 13-15 obvious, because a person of ordinary skill in the art would have had no motivation to supply the missing elements without the benefit of Applicant’s own disclosure as a guide.”
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Based on the disclosure of Manolakos, an offset can be configured based on capability information reported by the UE (“the capability information may include a minimum duration of a CSI reference resource for CSI RS monitoring, a maximum time offset between the CSI reference resource and the CSI target resource for which channel state information is to be estimated, a minimum time offset between the CSI reference resource and transmission of a CSI report, or combination thereof, as illustrative, non-limiting examples” – See [0073]; “the configuration information in CSI reporting configuration message 361 may indicate the CSI reference resource and may further indicate a time offset between the CSI reference resource and transmission of the CSI report” – See [0081]; “Base station 105 may receive CSI reporting capability message 360 and base station 105 may transmit CSI reporting configuration message 361 based on the capability information indicated in the CSI reporting capability message 360” – See [0084]). Accordingly, the base station can configure the UE with an appropriate offset for the transmission of the predicted CSI report that takes into account particular timing requirements/capabilities of the UE. Thus, the motivation to combine the references is taken from the disclosure of Manolakos, and not from Applicant’s own disclosure.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Scott M Sciacca whose telephone number is (571)270-1919. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday, 7:30 A.M. - 5:00 P.M. EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Joseph Avellino can be reached at (571) 272-3905. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/SCOTT M SCIACCA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2478
Prosecution Insights