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
1. Applicant’s arguments filed on 12/22/2025 regarding claims 1-18 and 20-30 in the remarks are fully considered but moot in view of new ground(s) of rejection.
Claim 31 is added.
Response to Amendments
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
2. 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.
3. Claim(s) 1, 12, 13, 15, 26, 28, 29, 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maatanen (US PG Pub. No. 2015/0016288) in view of Zhang (US PG Pub. No. 2026/0025688) and further in view of Bala (US PG Pub. No. 2009/0116570).
As per claim 1:
Maatanen teaches a method of wireless communication at a user equipment (UE) (see paragraph [0011], teaches a method for controlling a UE to provide feedback about channel conditions), comprising:
receiving, at the UE, a configuration of a first plurality of subbands having different sizes for channel state information (CSI) reporting (see paragraph [0037], the UE receives from the eNB additional requests (construed as said configuration) for identifying the primary sub-bands for which finer granularity CSI is to be reported. As a consequence, the UE will first be reporting the coarser granularity CQIs which are measured across larger frequency bandwidths of the primary sub-bands 110a-110e and then will separately report the finer granularity CQIs which are measured across the smaller frequency bandwidths of the secondary sub-bands, the latter being in response to the network’s further request for finer granularity CQI).
Maattanen does not clearly disclose the configuration including a condition for reduced CSI report payload transmission;
and transmitting, from the UE based on a determination of the condition being satisfied, a reduced CSI report payload including a plurality of CSI values.
Zhang teaches the configuration including a condition for reduced CSI report payload transmission (see paragraph [0076], the network entity 104 may send configuration (i.e., configuration 302 as shown in figure 3A) to the UE 102. Said configuration 302 may indicate that the UE 102 omit a portion of or all of, an ML-based CSI report or a non-ML based CSI report when the total payload size of a CSI report transmission from the UE exceeds a threshold for the maximum payload size);
and transmitting, from the UE based on a determination of the condition being satisfied, a reduced CSI report payload including a plurality of CSI values (see paragraph [0078], after performing 308a a CSI measurement of the CSI-RS(s), the UE 102 may implement an omission procedure to omit 308 CSI reports or portions of the CSI reports from the CSI report transmission 310 to the network entity 304 if the multiple CSI reports with a total payload size exceeds the maximum payload size for the PUCCH/PUSCH used for the CSI report).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to implement the omission of portion(s) of CSI report when the total payload size exceeds the maximum payload size for the PUCCH/PUSCH used for CSI report (as disclosed in Zhang) into Maattanen as a way of reducing overhead associated with the CSI report transmission (please see paragraphs [0007] and [0075] of Zhang).
The combination of Maattanen and Zhang do not clearly teach the reduced CSI report payload having fewer bits than a size of an absolute CSI value times a number of subbands in the first plurality of subbands.
Bala teaches the reduced CSI report payload having fewer bits than a size of an absolute CSI value times a number of subbands in the first plurality of subbands (see paragraph [0034], to reduce the feedback overhead, it is possible to represent the CQIs of some of the sub-bands with smaller resolution, that is fewer than 5 bits per sub-band, where the CQI values are computed with respect to a given reference value and denote the differential between the reference point and the original CQI value. Paragraph [0063] discloses to reduce overhead, the wideband CQI is computed based on the differential CQI and either the odd numbered or even numbered subbands (i.e., indicated as 1-bit indicators) and thus time the number of subbands in the plurality of subbands. Note: Examiner is reading said differential CQI as said absolute CQI value and the selected subbands (i.e., even or odd) as the plurality of subbands. Paragraphs [0081]-[0083], equations (1)-(3) shows the overhead is calculated based on the difference in number of subbands times said differential CQI).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate the differential CQI computed for each subband (as disclosed in Bala) into both Maattanen and Zhang as a way of representing the CQIs of some of the sub-bands with smaller resolution, thereby reducing feedback overhead (please see paragraph [0034] of Bala). Therefore, implementing the differential CQI may provide a more accurate representation of the channel (please see paragraph [0028] of Bala).
As per claim 12:
Maattanen in view of Zhang and further in view of Bala teaches the method of claim 1.
Maattanen and Zhang do not clearly teach wherein the plurality of CSI values are channel quality indicator (CQI) values.
Bala teaches wherein the plurality of CSI values are channel quality indicator (CQI) values (see paragraph [0111], discloses CQI, PMI can be the same or different for each sub-band).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate the differential CQI computed for each subband (as disclosed in Bala) into Maattanen and Zhang as a way of representing the CQIs of some of the sub-bands with smaller resolution, thereby reducing feedback overhead (please see paragraph [0034] of Bala). Therefore, implementing the differential CQI may provide a more accurate representation of the channel (please see paragraph [0028] of Bala).
As per claim 13:
Maattanen in view of Zhang and further in view of Bala teaches the method of claim 1.
Maattanen does not clearly teach wherein the plurality of CSI values are precoding matrix indicator (PMI) values.
Zhang teaches wherein the plurality of CSI values are precoding matrix indicator (PMI) values (see paragraph [0108], said CSI reports may include first and second PMIs respectively).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to implement the omission of portion(s) of CSI report when the total payload size exceeds the maximum payload size for the PUCCH/PUSCH used for CSI report (as disclosed in Zhang) into Maattanen as a way of reducing overhead associated with the CSI report transmission (please see paragraphs [0007] and [0075] of Zhang).
Similarly, Bala teaches wherein the plurality of CSI values are precoding matrix indicator (PMI) values (see paragraph [0111], discloses CQI, PMI can be the same or different for each sub-band).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate reporting of multiple PMI values (as disclosed in Bala) into Maattanen as a way of supporting precoding purposes for each sub-band index (please see paragraph [0112] of Bala).
As per claim 15:
Maattanen teaches a method of wireless communication at a network node (see paragraph [0014], teaches a method for controlling a network access node), comprising:
transmitting, to a user equipment (UE), a configuration of a first plurality of subbands having different sizes for channel state information (CSI) reporting (see paragraph [0037], the UE receives from the eNB additional requests (construed as said configuration) for identifying the primary sub-bands for which finer granularity CSI is to be reported. As a consequence, the UE will first be reporting the coarser granularity CQIs which are measured across larger frequency bandwidths of the primary sub-bands 110a-110e and then will separately report the finer granularity CQIs which are measured across the smaller frequency bandwidths of the secondary sub-bands, the latter being in response to the network’s further request for finer granularity CQI).
Maattanen does not clearly teach the configuration including a condition for reduced CSI report payload transmission;
and receiving, from the UE based on a determination of the condition being satisfied, a reduced CSI report payload.
Zhang teaches the configuration including a condition for reduced CSI report payload transmission (see paragraph [0076], the network entity 104 may send configuration (i.e., configuration 302 as shown in figure 3A) to the UE 102. Said configuration 302 may indicate that the UE 102 omit a portion of or all of, an ML-based CSI report or a non-ML based CSI report when the total payload size of a CSI report transmission from the UE exceeds a threshold for the maximum payload size);
and receiving, from the UE based on a determination of the condition being satisfied, a reduced CSI report payload (see paragraph [0078], after performing 308a a CSI measurement of the CSI-RS(s), the UE 102 may implement an omission procedure to omit 308 CSI reports or portions of the CSI reports from the CSI report transmission 310 to the network entity 304 if the multiple CSI reports with a total payload size exceeds the maximum payload size for the PUCCH/PUSCH used for the CSI report).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to implement the omission of portion(s) of CSI report when the total payload size exceeds the maximum payload size for the PUCCH/PUSCH used for CSI report (as disclosed in Zhang) into Maattanen as a way of reducing overhead associated with the CSI report transmission (please see paragraphs [0007] and [0075] of Zhang).
The combination of Maattanen and Rahman do not clearly teach having fewer bits than a size of an absolute CSI value times a number of subbands in the first plurality of subbands.
Bala teaches having fewer bits than a size of an absolute CSI value times a number of subbands in the first plurality of subbands (see paragraph [0034], to reduce the feedback overhead, it is possible to represent the CQIs of some of the sub-bands with smaller resolution, that is fewer than 5 bits per sub-band, where the CQI values are computed with respect to a given reference value and denote the differential between the reference point and the original CQI value. Paragraph [0063] discloses to reduce overhead, the wideband CQI is computed based on the differential CQI and either the odd numbered or even numbered subbands (i.e., indicated as 1-bit indicators) and thus time the number of subbands in the plurality of subbands. Note: Examiner is reading said differential CQI as said absolute CQI value and the selected subbands (i.e., even or odd) as the plurality of subbands. Paragraphs [0081]-[0083], equations (1)-(3) shows the overhead is calculated based on the difference in number of subbands times said differential CQI).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate the differential CQI computed for each subband (as disclosed in Bala) into both Maattanen and Rahman as a way of representing the CQIs of some of the sub-bands with smaller resolution, thereby reducing feedback overhead (please see paragraph [0034] of Bala). Therefore, implementing the differential CQI may provide a more accurate representation of the channel (please see paragraph [0028] of Bala).
Claim 26 is rejected in the same scope as claim 13.
As per claim 28:
Maattanen in view of Zhang and further in view of Bala teaches the method of claim 15.
Maattanen and Zhang do not teach further comprising scheduling the UE for a downlink transmission on at least one subband of the plurality of subbands based on the CSI report.
Bala teaches further comprising scheduling the UE for a downlink transmission on at least one subband of the plurality of subbands based on the CSI report (see paragraph [0096], from the scheduler perspective, based on the CQIs, majority good subbands may be distinguished from the few degraded subbands. The scheduler selects the proper subbands to reduce the number of unsuccessful transmissions).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate the differential CQI computed for each subband (as disclosed in Bala) into Maattanen and Zhang as a way of representing the CQIs of some of the sub-bands with smaller resolution, thereby reducing feedback overhead (please see paragraph [0034] of Bala). Therefore, implementing the differential CQI may provide a more accurate representation of the channel (please see paragraph [0028] of Bala).
As per claim 29:
Maattanen teaches an apparatus for wireless communication (see Figure 3, UE 20), comprising:
a transceiver (see Figure 3, TX 20D and RX 20E);
a memory storing computer-executable instructions (see Figure 3, MEM 20B comprising PROG 20C);
and a processor coupled with the transceiver and the memory (see Figure 3, data process, DP 20A coupled to MEM 20B, TX 20D and RX 20E) and configured to execute the computer-executable instructions to cause the apparatus (see paragraph [0067], DP 20A for executing instructions stored in MEM 20B for enabling the device to operate in accordance with the exemplary embodiments of the invention) to:
receive, at a user equipment (UE), a configuration of a first plurality of subbands having different sizes for channel state information (CSI) reporting (see paragraph [0037], the UE receives from the eNB additional requests (construed as said configuration) for identifying the primary sub-bands for which finer granularity CSI is to be reported. As a consequence, the UE will first be reporting the coarser granularity CQIs which are measured across larger frequency bandwidths of the primary sub-bands 110a-110e and then will separately report the finer granularity CQIs which are measured across the smaller frequency bandwidths of the secondary sub-bands, the latter being in response to the network’s further request for finer granularity CQI).
Maattanen does not clearly disclose the configuration including a condition for reduced CSI report payload transmission (see paragraph [0076], the network entity 104 may send configuration (i.e., configuration 302 as shown in figure 3A) to the UE 102. Said configuration 302 may indicate that the UE 102 omit a portion of or all of, an ML-based CSI report or a non-ML based CSI report when the total payload size of a CSI report transmission from the UE exceeds a threshold for the maximum payload size);
and transmit, from the UE based on a determination of the condition being satisfied, a reduced CSI report payload including a plurality of CSI values.
Zhang teaches the configuration including a condition for reduced CSI report payload transmission (see paragraph [0172], the W2 payload for type II CSI reporting is reduced when the number of beams increases or the resolution of the phase quantization codebook increases);
and transmit, from the UE based on a determination of the condition being satisfied, a reduced CSI report payload including a plurality of CSI values (see paragraph [0078], after performing 308a a CSI measurement of the CSI-RS(s), the UE 102 may implement an omission procedure to omit 308 CSI reports or portions of the CSI reports from the CSI report transmission 310 to the network entity 304 if the multiple CSI reports with a total payload size exceeds the maximum payload size for the PUCCH/PUSCH used for the CSI report).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to implement the omission of portion(s) of CSI report when the total payload size exceeds the maximum payload size for the PUCCH/PUSCH used for CSI report (as disclosed in Zhang) into Maattanen as a way of reducing overhead associated with the CSI report transmission (please see paragraphs [0007] and [0075] of Zhang).
The combination of Maattanen and Zhang do not clearly teach the reduced CSI report payload having fewer bits than a size of an absolute CSI value times a number of subbands in the first plurality of subbands.
Bala teaches the reduced CSI report payload having fewer bits than a size of an absolute CSI value times a number of subbands in the first plurality of subbands (see paragraph [0034], to reduce the feedback overhead, it is possible to represent the CQIs of some of the sub-bands with smaller resolution, that is fewer than 5 bits per sub-band, where the CQI values are computed with respect to a given reference value and denote the differential between the reference point and the original CQI value. Paragraph [0063] discloses to reduce overhead, the wideband CQI is computed based on the differential CQI and either the odd numbered or even numbered subbands (i.e., indicated as 1-bit indicators) and thus time the number of subbands in the plurality of subbands. Note: Examiner is reading said differential CQI as said absolute CQI value and the selected subbands (i.e., even or odd) as the plurality of subbands. Paragraphs [0081]-[0083], equations (1)-(3) shows the overhead is calculated based on the difference in number of subbands times said differential CQI).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate the differential CQI computed for each subband (as disclosed in Bala) into both Maattanen and Zhang as a way of representing the CQIs of some of the sub-bands with smaller resolution, thereby reducing feedback overhead (please see paragraph [0034] of Bala). Therefore, implementing the differential CQI may provide a more accurate representation of the channel (please see paragraph [0028] of Bala).
As per claim 30:
Maattanen teaches an apparatus for wireless communication (see Figure 3, eNB 22), comprising:
a transceiver (see Figure 3, TX 22D and RX 22E);
a memory storing computer-executable instructions (see Figure 3, MEM 22B comprising PROG 22C);
and a processor coupled with the transceiver and the memory (see Figure 3, DP 22A coupled to MEM 22B) and configured to execute the computer-executable instructions to cause the apparatus (see paragraph [0067], DP 22A for executing PROG 22C stored in MEM 22B) to:
transmit, to a UE, a configuration of a first plurality of subbands having different sizes for channel state information (CSI) reporting (see paragraph [0037], the UE receives from the eNB additional requests (construed as said configuration) for identifying the primary sub-bands for which finer granularity CSI is to be reported. As a consequence, the UE will first be reporting the coarser granularity CQIs which are measured across larger frequency bandwidths of the primary sub-bands 110a-110e and then will separately report the finer granularity CQIs which are measured across the smaller frequency bandwidths of the secondary sub-bands, the latter being in response to the network’s further request for finer granularity CQI).
Maattanen does not clearly teach the configuration including a condition for reduced CSI report payload transmission;
and receive, from the UE based on a determination of the condition being satisfied, a reduced CSI report payload.
Zhang teaches the configuration including a condition for reduced CSI report payload transmission (see paragraph [0076], the network entity 104 may send configuration (i.e., configuration 302 as shown in figure 3A) to the UE 102. Said configuration 302 may indicate that the UE 102 omit a portion of or all of, an ML-based CSI report or a non-ML based CSI report when the total payload size of a CSI report transmission from the UE exceeds a threshold for the maximum payload size);
and receive, from the UE based on a determination of the condition being satisfied, a reduced CSI report payload (see paragraph [0078], after performing 308a a CSI measurement of the CSI-RS(s), the UE 102 may implement an omission procedure to omit 308 CSI reports or portions of the CSI reports from the CSI report transmission 310 to the network entity 304 if the multiple CSI reports with a total payload size exceeds the maximum payload size for the PUCCH/PUSCH used for the CSI report).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to implement the omission of portion(s) of CSI report when the total payload size exceeds the maximum payload size for the PUCCH/PUSCH used for CSI report (as disclosed in Zhang) into Maattanen as a way of reducing overhead associated with the CSI report transmission (please see paragraphs [0007] and [0075] of Zhang).
The combination of Maattanen and Zhang do not clearly teach having fewer bits than a size of an absolute CSI value times a number of subbands in the first plurality of subbands.
Bala teaches having fewer bits than a size of an absolute CSI value times a number of subbands in the first plurality of subbands (see paragraph [0034], to reduce the feedback overhead, it is possible to represent the CQIs of some of the sub-bands with smaller resolution, that is fewer than 5 bits per sub-band, where the CQI values are computed with respect to a given reference value and denote the differential between the reference point and the original CQI value. Paragraph [0063] discloses to reduce overhead, the wideband CQI is computed based on the differential CQI and either the odd numbered or even numbered subbands (i.e., indicated as 1-bit indicators) and thus time the number of subbands in the plurality of subbands. Note: Examiner is reading said differential CQI as said absolute CQI value and the selected subbands (i.e., even or odd) as the plurality of subbands. Paragraphs [0081]-[0083], equations (1)-(3) shows the overhead is calculated based on the difference in number of subbands times said differential CQI).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate the differential CQI computed for each subband (as disclosed in Bala) into both Maattanen and Zhang as a way of representing the CQIs of some of the sub-bands with smaller resolution, thereby reducing feedback overhead (please see paragraph [0034] of Bala). Therefore, implementing the differential CQI may provide a more accurate representation of the channel (please see paragraph [0028] of Bala).
4. Claim(s) 5, 6, 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maattanen in view of Zhang and further in view of Bala and Pajukoski (US PG Pub. No. 2013/0315188).
As per claim 5:
Maattanen in view of Zhang and further in view of Bala teaches the method of claim 1 with the exception of:
wherein transmitting the reduced CSI report payload comprises reducing a number of bits in a CSI report.
Pajukoski teaches wherein transmitting the reduced CSI report payload comprises reducing a number of bits in a CSI report (see paragraph [0055], discloses in order to select the PUCCH transmission format for the periodic CQI report for the UE, the user equipment 202 checks 502 the CQI mode of the received RRC signaling. Based on the checking, UE determines 503 a container of a periodic channel quality indicator report. If the determined container of the periodic CQI report is a reduced-bit container (i.e., the size of the report is 4 bits or less), a modified PUCCH format 1b is selected 504 as the PUCCH transmission format for the periodic CQI report).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate the PUCCH transmission format 1b for transporting the periodic CQI report (as disclosed in Pajukoski) into Maattanen, Zhang and Bala as a way of achieving a block-level spreading factor for the data part (please see paragraph [0022] of Pajukoski).
As per claim 6:
Maattanen in view of Zhang and further in view of Bala teaches the method of claim 1 with the exception of:
wherein the condition is that a physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) resource size is insufficient to transmit a full CSI report payload having a size of the absolute CSI value times the number of the subbands in the first plurality of subbands.
Pajukoski teaches wherein the condition is that a physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) resource size is insufficient to transmit a full CSI report payload having a size of the absolute CSI value times the number of the subbands in the first plurality of subbands (see paragraphs [0054]-[0055], if the container is too small for the PUCCH transmission format, PUCCH format 1b is selected and transmitted on reserved PRBs. If, on the other hand, the container is more than four bits, a PUCCH transmission format 2 is selected).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate the PUCCH transmission format 1b for transporting the periodic CQI report (as disclosed in Pajukoski) into Zhang, Rahman and Bala as a way of achieving a block-level spreading factor for the data part (please see paragraph [0022] of Pajukoski).
As per claim 8:
Maattanen in view of Zhang and further in view of Bala teaches the method of claim 1 with the exception of:
wherein transmitting the reduced CSI report payload comprises transmitting a CSI value for only a subset of the subbands.
Pajukoski teaches wherein transmitting the reduced CSI report payload comprises transmitting a CSI value for only a subset of the subbands (paragraph [0039], each modified PUCCH format 1b allocation reserves from one to four PUCCH format 1/1a/1b resource(s). The periodic CQI are transmitted in resources reserved for PUCCH format 1/1a/1b, please see paragraph [0041]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate the PUCCH transmission format 1b for transporting the periodic CQI report (as disclosed in Pajukoski) into Maattanen, Zhang and Bala as a way of achieving a block-level spreading factor for the data part (please see paragraph [0022] of Pajukoski).
5. Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maattanen in view of Zhang and further in view of Bala and Love (US PG Pub. No. 2010/0029289).
As per claim 7:
Maattanen in view of Zhang and further in view of Bala teaches the method of claim 1 with the exception of:
wherein the condition is based on a transmit power of the UE.
Love teaches wherein the condition is based on a transmit power of the UE (see paragraph [0027], the UE continues to report CQI on the PUCCH but at a reduced transmission power on the PUCCH PRBs adjacent to the public safety band when CQI reports sent on the PUCCH indicate that CQI has dropped below a specified threshold or when an estimated transmit power level of the UE rises above a threshold).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate the transmission of the CQI report via the PUCCH at reduced power (as disclosed in Love) into Maattanen, Zhang and Bala as a way of enabling the scheduled UE to report CQI/PMI/RI on the PUSCH where the PUCCH and PUSCH feedback transmissions can be subsequently soft combined (please see paragraph [0027] of Love).
6. Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maattanen in view of Zhang and further in view of Bala, Pajukoski and You (US PG Pub. No. 2025/0167847).
As per claim 9:
Maattanen in view of Zhang and further in view of Bala and Pajukoski teaches the method of claim 8 with the exception of:
wherein the configuration includes a bitmap indicating which subbands to include in the subset of the subbands.
You teaches wherein the configuration includes a bitmap indicating which subbands to include in the subset of the subbands (see paragraph [0265], the UE may receive information from the base station about the location and/or amount of frequency resources performing subband omission CSI reporting to determine whether frequency resources are subject to subband CSI reporting. Paragraph [0266], discloses the location information of the frequency resources may be set in bitmap format, with each bit indicating whether each unit frequency resource is included in the resources performing subband omission CSI reporting).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate the location information set in bitmap format (as disclosed in You) into Maattanen, Zhang, Bala and Pajukoski as a way of enabling the UE to determine which frequency subbands to perform CSI reporting and which frequency subbands to omit CSI reporting (please see paragraphs [0261], [0266] of You). Therefore, performing CSI reporting on selected subbands, accuracy and efficiency of channel state information reporting can be improved and unnecessary power consumption of the UE can be prevented (please see paragraph [0014] of You).
7. Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maattanen in view of Zhang and further in view of Bala, Pajukoski and Gou (US PG Pub. No. 2024/0147445).
As per claim 10:
Maattanen in view of Zhang and further in view of Bala and Pajukoski teaches the method of claim 8 with the exception of:
wherein the subset of the subbands is based on a configured or pre-defined pattern.
Gou teaches wherein the subset of the subbands is based on a configured or pre-defined pattern (see paragraph [0045], wireless communication node 102 or 202 transmitting the configuration to a wireless communication device such as UE 104 or 204. The configuration may indicate a time-frequency domain pattern of the flexible subband resources).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate the transmission of configuration information indicating the time-frequency domain pattern of flexible subband resources (as disclosed in Gou) into Maattanen, Zhang, Bala and Pajukoski as a way of enabling the wireless device to receive and transmit data over a the configured flexible subband resource (please see paragraph [0046] of Gou).
8. Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maattanen in view of Zhang and further in view of Bala and Chae (US PG Pub. No. 2021/0105055).
As per claim 11:
Maattanen in view of Zhang and further in view of Bala teaches the method of claim 1 with the exception of:
wherein transmitting the CSI report comprises transmitting a CSI value for each of a second plurality of subbands having an equal size, wherein a number of the second plurality of subbands is less than a number of the first plurality of subbands.
Chae teaches wherein transmitting the CSI report comprises transmitting a CSI value for each of a second plurality of subbands having an equal size, wherein a number of the second plurality of subbands is less than a number of the first plurality of subbands (see paragraph [0262], For the subband CSI reporting in sidelink, a RX UE may transmit best M subband CSIs to reduce overhead of CSI reporting. For example, if there are N subbands 9N>M), a RX UE may report best M CSIs among the CSIs of all subbands. The RX UE may determine a subband size for CSI reporting as the same size as the subchannel or a multiple of the subchannel size).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate the reporting of the best CSIs among CSIs of all subbands (as disclosed in Chae) into Maattanen, Zhang and Bala as a way of reducing the overhead of CSI reporting (please see paragraph [0262] of Chae).
9. Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maattanen in view of Zhang and further in view of Bala and Shim (US PG Pub. No. 2025/0267667).
As per claim 14:
Maattanen in view of Zhang and further in view of Bala teaches the method of claim 1 with the exception of:
wherein the configuration is for a bandwidth part configured for subband full duplexing with an uplink subband, wherein a size of the subbands in the first plurality of subbands decreases closer in frequency to the uplink subband.
Shim teaches wherein the configuration is for a bandwidth part configured for subband full duplexing with an uplink subband (see Figure 14, paragraph [0297], in a subband full duplex (SBFD) environment, UL subband and DL subband may co-exist in the same time resource. Paragraph [0298] discloses the UE may, based on an UL BWP, determine a PUCCH transmission location in the frequency domain), wherein a size of the subbands in the first plurality of subbands decreases closer in frequency to the uplink subband (see paragraph [0298], the UE may determine whether the size of the configured UL BWP is larger or smaller than the size of the UL subband. For example, If the configured UL BWP is narrower than the UL subband, the UE may transmit a PUCCH only in the region where only UL transmission is possible (e.g., UL only region)).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate the non-overlapping full duplex configuration (as disclosed in Shim) into Maattanen, Zhang and Bala as a way of establishing orthogonality (please see paragraph [0047] of Shim).
10. Claim(s) 2 and 31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maattanen in view of Zhang and further in view of Bala and Gutman (US PG Pub. No. 2021/0050981).
As per claim 2:
Maattanen in view of Zhang and further in view of Bala teaches the method of claim 1 with the exception of:
wherein the configuration includes a first group of subbands having a size greater than or equal to a threshold and a second group of subbands having a size less than the threshold, wherein transmitting the reduced CSI report payload comprises:
transmitting a CSI report including a CSI value for each subband, wherein each CSI value for the first group of subbands is an absolute CSI value and each CSI value for the second group of subbands is a differential CSI value.
Gutman teaches wherein the configuration includes a first group of subbands having a size greater than or equal to a threshold and a second group of subbands having a size less than the threshold (see paragraph [0079], if the maximum uplink message length for reporting a CQI index for each of a set of subbands based on the CQI index for a wideband (e.g., msgLengthDefault) is less than the maximum uplink message length for reporting a CQI index for each of a set of subbands based on the CQI index for a previous, adjacent subband (e.g., msgLengthLow), UE may report the CQI index for each of the set of subbands based on the CQI index for a wideband. In other words, the message length for a set of subband is less than the message length or previous subbands), wherein transmitting the reduced CSI report payload comprises:
transmitting a CSI report (see paragraph [0063], UE may be configured to report a CQI index for each subband of a set of subbands. To limit overhead, the length of the uplink control message may be limited) including a CSI value for each subband, wherein each CSI value for the first group of subbands is an absolute CSI value and each CSI value for the second group of subbands is a differential CSI value (see paragraph [0064], discloses subband set of differential CQI values mapped to different offset values. To reduce overhead, the number of offset levels configured to be indicated may be low).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate the reporting of a selected of CQI subbands (as disclosed in Gutman) into Maattanen, Zhang and Bala as a way of reducing overhead of channel state feedback (please see paragraph [0037] of Gutman).
Claim 31 is rejected in the same scope as claim 2.
11. Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maattanen in view of Zhang and further in view of Bala, Gutman and Sahin (US PG Pub. No. 2025/0226866).
As per claim 3:
Maattanen in view of Zhang and further in view of Bala and Gutman teaches the method of claim 2 with the exception of:
wherein the threshold is a number of resource blocks or a frequency range.
Sahin teaches wherein the threshold is a number of resource blocks or a frequency range (see paragraph [0175], the WTRU may be configured to determine a reduced set of subbabds with a different number of resource blocks allocated to each subband, with each subband satisfying a certain (e.g., preconfigured) correlation threshold).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to include the reduced set of subbands (as disclosed in Sahin) into Maattanen, Zhang, Bala and Gutman as a way of reducing the overhead associated with the reporting (please see paragraph [0175] of Sahin).
12. Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maattanen in view of Zhang and further in view of Bala, Gutman and Zhang (US PG Pub. No. 2019/0319763), hereinafter referred to as Zhang’763.
As per claim 4:
Maattanen in view of Zhang and further in view of Bala and Gutman teaches the method of claim 2 with the exception of:
wherein the second group of subbands are located closer in frequency to an uplink subband than the first group of subbands.
Zhang’763 teaches wherein the second group of subbands are located closer in frequency to an uplink subband than the first group of subbands (see paragraph [0105], discloses the system bandwidth may divided into plurality of subband sets, with one subband set associated with a coarser subband granularity for resource scheduling and another set being an integer multiple of the coarser subband granularity).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate the teachings of Zhang’763. The motivation for doing so would be to provide an effective solution for transmitting a downlink measurement pilot signal (please see paragraph [0005] of Zhang’763).
13. Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maattanen in view Zhang and further in view of Bala and further in view of Gutman.
As per claim 16:
Maattanen in view of Zhang and further in view of Bala teaches the method of claim 15 with the exception of:
wherein the configuration includes a first group of subbands having a size greater than or equal to a threshold and a second group of subbands having a size less than the threshold, wherein receiving the CSI report comprises:
receiving a CSI report including a CSI value for each subband, wherein each CSI value for the first group of subbands is an absolute CSI value and each CSI value for the second group of subbands is a differential CSI value.
Gutman teaches wherein the configuration includes a first group of subbands having a size greater than or equal to a threshold and a second group of subbands having a size less than the threshold (see paragraph [0079], if the maximum uplink message length for reporting a CQI index for each of a set of subbands based on the CQI index for a wideband (e.g., msgLengthDefault) is less than the maximum uplink message length for reporting a CQI index for each of a set of subbands based on the CQI index for a previous, adjacent subband (e.g., msgLengthLow), UE may report the CQI index for each of the set of subbands based on the CQI index for a wideband. In other words, the message length for a set of subband is less than the message length or previous subbands), wherein receiving the CSI report comprises:
receiving a CSI report (see paragraph [0063], UE may be configured to report a CQI index for each subband of a set of subbands. To limit overhead, the length of the uplink control message may be limited) including a CSI value for each subband, wherein each CSI value for the first group of subbands is an absolute CSI value and each CSI value for the second group of subbands is a differential CSI value (see paragraph [0064], discloses subband set of differential CQI values mapped to different offset values. To reduce overhead, the number of offset levels configured to be indicated may be low).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate the reporting of a selected of CQI subbands (as disclosed in Gutman) into Maattanen, Zhang and Bala as a way of reducing overhead of channel state feedback (please see paragraph [0037] of Gutman).
14. Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maattanen in view of Zhang and further in view of Bala, Gutman and Sahin.
As per claim 17:
Maattanen in view of Zhang and further in view of Bala and Gutman teaches the method of claim 16 with the exception of:
wherein the threshold is a number of resource blocks or a frequency range.
Sahin teaches wherein the threshold is a number of resource blocks or a frequency range (see paragraph [0175], the WTRU may be configured to determine a reduced set of subbabds with a different number of resource blocks allocated to each subband, with each subband satisfying a certain (e.g., preconfigured) correlation threshold).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to include the reduced set of subbands (as disclosed in Sahin) into Maattanen, Zhang, Bala and Gutman as a way of reducing the overhead associated with the reporting (please see paragraph [0175] of Sahin).
15. Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maattanen in view of Zhang and further in view of Bala, Gutman and Zhang’763.
As per claim 18:
Maattanen in view of Zhang and further in view of Bala, Gutman teaches the method of claim 16 with the exception of:
wherein the second group of subbands are located closer in frequency to an uplink subband than the first group of subbands.
Zhang’763 teaches wherein the second group of subbands are located closer in frequency to an uplink subband than the first group of subbands (see paragraph [0105], discloses the system bandwidth may divided into plurality of subband sets, with one subband set associated with a coarser subband granularity for resource scheduling and another set being an integer multiple of the coarser subband granularity).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate the teachings of Zhang’763. The motivation for doing so would be to provide an effective solution for transmitting a downlink measurement pilot signal (please see paragraph [0005] of Zhang’763).
16. Claims 20 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maattanen in view of Zhang and further in view of Bala and Pajukoski.
As per claim 20:
Maattanen in view of Zhang and further in view of Bala teaches the method of claim 15 with the exception of:
wherein the condition is that a physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) resource size is insufficient to transmit the CSI report having a size of the absolute CSI value times the number of the subbands in the first plurality of subbands.
Pajukoski teaches wherein the condition is that a physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) resource size is insufficient to transmit the CSI report having a size of the absolute CSI value times the number of the subbands in the first plurality of subbands (see paragraphs [0054]-[0055], if the container is too small for the PUCCH transmission format, PUCCH format 1b is selected and transmitted on reserved PRBs. If, on the other hand, the container is more than four bits, a PUCCH transmission format 2 is selected).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate the PUCCH transmission format 1b for transporting the periodic CQI report (as disclosed in Pajukoski) into Maattanen, Zhang and Bala as a way of achieving a block-level spreading factor for the data part (please see paragraph [0022] of Pajukoski).
As per claim 22:
Maattanen in view of Zhang and further in view of Bala teaches the method of claim 15 with the exception of:
wherein receiving the reduced CSI report payload comprises receiving a CSI value for only a subset of the subbands, wherein the CSI value for other subbands is dropped.
Pajukoski teaches wherein receiving the reduced CSI report payload comprises receiving a CSI value for only a subset of the subbands, wherein the CSI value for other subbands is dropped (paragraph [0039], each modified PUCCH format 1b allocation reserves from one to four PUCCH format 1/1a/1b resource(s)).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate the PUCCH transmission format 1b for transporting the periodic CQI report (as disclosed in Pajukoski) into Maattanen, Zhang and Bala as a way of achieving a block-level spreading factor for the data part (please see paragraph [0022] of Pajukoski).
17. Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maattanen in view of Zhang and further in view of Bala and Love.
As per claim 21:
Maattanen in view of Zhang and further in view of Bala teaches the method of claim 15 with the exception of:
wherein the condition is based on a transmit power of the UE.
Love teaches wherein the condition is based on a transmit power of the UE (see paragraph [0027], the UE continues to report CQI on the PUCCH but at a reduced transmission power on the PUCCH PRBs adjacent to the public safety band when CQI reports sent on the PUCCH indicate that CQI has dropped below a specified threshold or when an estimated transmit power level of the UE rises above a threshold).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate the transmission of the CQI report via the PUCCH at reduced power (as disclosed in Love) into Maattanen, Zhang and Bala as a way of enabling the scheduled UE to report CQI/PMI/RI on the PUSCH where the PUCCH and PUSCH feedback transmissions can be subsequently soft combined (please see paragraph [0027] of Love).
18. Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maattanen in view of Zhang and further in view of Bala, Pajukoski and You.
As per claim 23:
Maattanen in view of Zhang and further in view of Bala and Pajukoski teaches the method of claim 22 with the exception of:
wherein the configuration includes a bitmap indicating for which subbands to include the CSI value in the reduced CSI report payload.
Gou teaches wherein the configuration includes a bitmap indicating for which subbands to include the CSI value in the reduced CSI report payload (see paragraph [0265], the UE may receive information from the base station about the location and/or amount of frequency resources performing subband omission CSI reporting to determine whether frequency resources are subject to subband CSI reporting. Paragraph [0266], discloses the location information of the frequency resources may be set in bitmap format, with each bit indicating whether each unit frequency resource is included in the resources performing subband omission CSI reporting).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate the location information set in bitmap format (as disclosed in You) into Maattanen, Zhang, Bala and Pajukoski as a way of enabling the UE to determine which frequency subbands to perform CSI reporting and which frequency subbands to omit CSI reporting (please see paragraphs [0261], [0266] of You). Therefore, performing CSI reporting on selected subbands, accuracy and efficiency of channel state information reporting can be improved and unnecessary power consumption of the UE can be prevented (please see paragraph [0014] of You).
19. Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maattanen in view of Zhang and further in view of Bala, Pajukoski and Gou.
As per claim 24:
Maattanen in view of Zhang and further in view of Bala and Pajukoski teaches the method of claim 22 with the exception of:
wherein the subset of the subbands is based on a configured or pre-defined pattern.
Gou teaches wherein the subset of the subbands is based on a configured or pre-defined pattern (see paragraph [0045], wireless communication node 102 or 202 transmitting the configuration to a wireless communication device such as UE 104 or 204. The configuration may indicate a time-frequency domain pattern of the flexible subband resources).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate the transmission of configuration information indicating the time-frequency domain pattern of flexible subband resources (as disclosed in Gou) into Maattanen, Zhang, Bala and Pajukoski as a way of enabling the wireless device to receive and transmit data over a the configured flexible subband resource (please see paragraph [0046] of Gou).
20. Claim 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maattanen in view of Zhang and further in view of Bala and Chae.
As per claim 25:
Maattanen in view of Zhang and further in view of Bala teaches the method of claim 15 with the exception of:
wherein receiving the reduced CSI report payload comprises receiving a CSI value for each of a second plurality of subbands having an equal size, wherein a number of the second plurality of subbands is less than a number of the first plurality of subbands.
Chae teaches wherein receiving the reduced CSI report payload comprises receiving a CSI value for each of a second plurality of subbands having an equal size, wherein a number of the second plurality of subbands is less than a number of the first plurality of subbands (see paragraph [0262], For the subband CSI reporting in sidelink, a RX UE may transmit best M subband CSIs to reduce overhead of CSI reporting. For example, if there are N subbands 9N>M), a RX UE may report best M CSIs among the CSIs of all subbands. The RX UE may determine a subband size for CSI reporting as the same size as the subchannel or a multiple of the subchannel size).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate the reporting of the best CSIs among CSIs of all subbands (as disclosed in Chae) into Maattanen, Zhang and Bala as a way of reducing the overhead of CSI reporting (please see paragraph [0262] of Chae).
21. Claim 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maattanen in view of Zhang and further in view of Bala and Shim.
As per claim 27:
Maattanen in view of Zhang and Bala teaches the method of claim 15 with the exception of:
wherein the configuration is for a bandwidth part configured for subband full duplexing with an uplink subband, wherein a size of the subbands in the first plurality of subbands decreases closer in frequency to the uplink subband.
Shim teaches wherein the configuration is for a bandwidth part configured for subband full duplexing with an uplink subband (see Figure 14, paragraph [0297], in a subband full duplex (SBFD) environment, UL subband and DL subband may co-exist in the same time resource. Paragraph [0298] disclos the UE may, based on an UL BWP, determine a PUCCH transmission location in the frequency domain), wherein a size of the subbands in the first plurality of subbands decreases closer in frequency to the uplink subband (see paragraph [0298], the UE may determine whether the size of the configured UL BWP is larger or smaller than the size of the UL subband. For example, If the configured UL BWP is narrower than the UL subband, the UE may transmit a PUCCH only in the region where only UL transmission is possible (e.g., UL only region)).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to incorporate the non-overlapping full duplex configuration (as disclosed in Shim) into Maattanen, Zhang and Bala as a way of establishing orthogonality (please see paragraph [0047] of Shim).
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 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 PRINCE AKWASI MENSAH whose telephone number is (571)270-7183. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00am-4:00pm.
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, MICHAEL THIER can be reached at 571-272-2832. 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.
PRINCE AKWASI. MENSAH
Examiner
Art Unit 2474
/PRINCE A MENSAH/Examiner, Art Unit 2474
/BENJAMIN H ELLIOTT IV/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2474
Prosecution Insights