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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement submitted on 06/20/2024 has been considered by the Examiner and made of record in the application file.
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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koskela et al. (US 20210258062 A1) in view of Chavva et al. (US 20220255611 A1).
Consider claim 1, Koskela discloses an apparatus (read as the UE 510, figure 5, par [0055]-[0057]) comprising:
at least one processor and at least one memory including computer program code, wherein the at least one memory and the computer program code are configured, with the at least one processor (read as the processor 511 and memory 512 comprising the computer program instructions, figure 5, par [0058]-[0062]), to cause the apparatus at least to:
determine orientation of the apparatus (read as sensor for determining orientation of the UE 510, figure 5, par [0057]);
receive reference signals of a non-serving cell (read as receiving reference signal (CSI-RS, SSB) of secondary serving cell/SCell, par [0016] and [0037]-[0041]);
measure signal quality of the non-serving cell for a beam that is used for the serving cell (read as measuring reference signal quality (RSRP, RSRQ, etc.) on beams and using the same spatial filter/beam for PCell (primary cell) and SCell (secondary cell), par [0039]-[0040] and [0053]-[0054]);
determine measurement for the non-serving cell with said beam in response to adding the non-serving cell as a secondary cell in multicarrier connectivity with a serving cell using the same antenna configuration for shaping an antenna beam that provides a spatial filter (read as the multicarrier/multi-cell operation/connectivity with PCell and SCell, with selection of candidate SCell antenna beams based on measurements, and re-using the same antenna beam/spatial filter across PCell and SCell, par [0016]-[0018], [0036]-[0040] and [0053]-[0054]);
transmit to a base station of the serving cell information on said determined measurement (read as UE transmitting to serving cell (base station) information including beam/measurement data corresponding to SCell candidates, par [0017] and [0039]-[0040]).
However, Koskela discloses the claimed invention above but does not specifically disclose the determine measurement as determine based on the orientation of the apparatus a first antenna gain index.
Nonetheless, Chavva discloses a method and apparatus for selecting beam in a beamforming based communication system, which the UE determine its orientation using sensor, estimates the beam/antenna gain based on the determined orientations; specifically, the UE determines the its orientation and RSRP (beam-specific signal quality), associates the orientation with RSRP per beam and uses orientation-dependent gain (sensor/beam gain) as a metric (i.e. index) for selecting beams for communication between the UE 104 and the base station 102, par [0102], [0126]-[0129], [0134]-[0135] and [0140]-[0143].
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Chavva into the teachings of Koskela to apply Chavva’s orientation-based gain/metric estimation into Koskela’s multi-carrier (PCell/SCell) beam recovery and candidate SCell beam selection in order to improve robustness of beam selection across PCell/SCell when the UE device is rotated.
Consider claim 2, as applied to claim 1 above, Koskela, as modified by Chavva, discloses wherein the at least one memory and the computer program code are further configured, with the at least one processor, to cause the apparatus at least to: determine based on the orientation of the apparatus a second antenna gain index for the serving cell with said beam in response to adding said non-serving cell as the secondary cell in multicarrier connectivity with a serving cell using the same beam; and transmit to the base station information on said determined second antenna gain (read as the orientation-dependent sensor/beam gain applies to Tx and Rx pairs generally, irrespective of a particular cell, and it used to estimate and update gain as the device orientation changes (fig. 6, par [0134]-[0135] of Chavva); and the uses of same RX beam/spatial filter for PCell and SCell (par [0053]-[0054] of Koskela), so the orientation-based gain metric/index would naturally be associated with both the SCell and PCell using that beam for communication with the base station).
Consider claim 3, as applied to claim 1 above, Koskela, as modified by Chavva, discloses wherein the at least one memory and the computer program code are further configured, with the at least one processor, to cause the apparatus at least to: store information on the orientation of the apparatus (read as the memory for storing the data for the beamforming operation, par [0057] and [0061] of Koskela, par [0167]-[0117] of Chavva); detect change in the orientation of the apparatus; and determine said first antenna gain for the non-serving cell and said second antenna gain for the serving cell based on the stored information on the orientation of the apparatus and on a determined change in the orientation of the apparatus (read as estimate the change in sensor gain in direction of AoA based on the change in orientation of the UE 104 and uses orientation to derive beam selection metric (par [0135] and [0140]-[0143] of Chavva).
Consider claim 4, as applied to claim 3 above, Koskela, as modified by Chavva, discloses wherein the at least one memory and the computer program code are further configured, with the at least one processor, to cause the apparatus at least to: determine change in orientation of antenna system of the apparatus based on the change in orientation of the apparatus; and determine the first antenna gain index for the non-serving cell and the second antenna gain index for the serving cell based on a determined change in the orientation of the antenna system of the apparatus (read as estimate the change in sensor gain in direction of AoA based on the change in orientation of the UE 104 and uses orientation to derive beam selection metric (par [0135] and [0140]-[0143] of Chavva) but does not specifically disclose the antenna system is antenna arrays.
Nonetheless, Chavva further disclose the antenna system of the UE comprising antenna arrays 204a as shown in figure 1, par [0100].
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further incorporate the teachings of Chavva into the teachings of Koskela, which modified by Chavva, to design the antenna system as antenna arrays in order to provide the ability to electronically steer the beam without physical movement.
Consider claim 5, as applied to claim 1 above, Koskela, as modified by Chavva, discloses wherein the at least one memory and the computer program code are further configured, with the at least one processor, to cause the apparatus at least to: store information on the beam of the serving cell (read as the memory for storing the data for the beamforming operation, par [0057] and [0061] of Koskela, par [0167]-[0117] of Chavva); detect change in the beam of the serving cell; determine the first antenna gain index for the non-serving cell and the second antenna gain index for the serving cell based on the stored information on the beam of the serving cell and on the change in the beam of the serving cell; and transmit to a base station of the serving cell information on said determined first and second antenna gain (read as the orientation-dependent sensor/beam gain applies to Tx and Rx pairs generally, irrespective of a particular cell, and it used to estimate and update gain as the device orientation changes (fig. 6, par [0134]-[0135] of Chavva); and the uses of same RX beam/spatial filter for PCell and SCell (par [0053]-[0054] of Koskela), so the orientation-based gain metric/index would naturally be associated with both the SCell and PCell using that beam for communication with the base station).
Consider claim 6, as applied to claim 1 above, Koskela, as modified by Chavva, discloses wherein the at least one memory and the computer program code are configured, with the at least one processor, to cause the apparatus at least to measure the signal quality of a non-serving cell by using a wide beam measurement and a narrow beam measurement applied to the beam that is used for the serving cell (read as the refined (narrow) beams with higher gain and candidate beam measurements, and the common practice of using both wide and narrow beams to characterize a cell, using both wide-beam and narrow-beam measurements of a non-serving cell (SCell) on the beam used for the serving cell (PCEll), par [0037], [0036]-[0040] and [0053]-[0057]).
Consider claim 7, as applied to claim 1 above, Koskela, as modified by Chavva, discloses wherein the at least one memory and the computer program code are configured, with the at least one processor, to cause the apparatus at least to measure the signal quality of the non-serving cell in response to the change exceeding a threshold value in the signal quality of the serving cell or in response to reaching a timer limit (read as using a threshold TH1 based on signal quality (RSRP) to select candidate beams: the threshold TH1 maybe be a network configured candidate beam select threshold, such as SS/PBCH Block (SSB) signal quality, include RSRP; when the candidate beam selections are above the threshold, the UE would consider the SSB as a potential beam failure recovery candidate, par [0054]).
Consider claim 8, as applied to claim 7 above, Koskela, as modified by Chavva, discloses wherein the at least one memory and the computer program code are configured, with the at least one processor, to cause the apparatus at least to receive said threshold value from network equipment (read as the threshold TH1 may be a network configured candidate beam selection threshold, such as an SS/PBCH Block (SSB) signal quality, including RSRP, RSRQ, and SINR, par [0054]).
Consider claim 9, as applied to claim 7 above, Koskela, as modified by Chavva, discloses wherein the at least one memory and the computer program code are configured, with the at least one processor (read as the processor 511 and memory 512 comprising the computer program instructions, figure 5, par [0058]-[0062]) and measure signal quality in response a parameter received from network equipment (read as the threshold TH1 may be a network configured candidate beam selection threshold, such as an SS/PBCH Block (SSB) signal quality, including RSRP, RSRQ, and SINR, par [0054]) but does not specifically disclose the parameter as a timer limit.
Nonetheless, Chavva further discloses AOA monitor timer in step 701 used as a local UE timer used to control when orientation/beam statistics are recomputed, figure 7, par [0299]-[0305].
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further incorporate the teachings of Chavva into the teachings of Koskela, which modified by Chavva, to design the UE the perform the measurement according to a timer to allow the UE to report the results periodically.
Consider claim 10, as applied to claim 1 above, Koskela, as modified by Chavva, discloses a user equipment comprising the apparatus of claim 1 (read as the user equipment as mobile phone, par [0055]-[0057]).
Consider claim 11, Koskela discloses a method (read as method performed by the UE 510, figure 5, par [0055]-[0057]) comprising:
determining orientation of an apparatus (read as sensor for determining orientation of the UE 510, figure 5, par [0057]);
measuring signal quality of a non-serving cell for a beam that is used for the serving cell (read as measuring reference signal quality (RSRP, RSRQ, etc.) on beams and using the same spatial filter/beam for PCell (primary cell) and SCell (secondary cell), par [0039]-[0040] and [0053]-[0054]);
determining a first measurement for the non-serving cell with said beam in response to adding the non-serving cell as a secondary cell in multicarrier connectivity with a serving cell using the same beam (read as the multicarrier/multi-cell operation/connectivity with PCell and SCell, with selection of candidate SCell antenna beams based on measurements of the SCell, and re-using the same antenna beam/spatial filter across PCell and SCell, par [0016]-[0018], [0036]-[0040] and [0053]-[0054]);
determining a second measurement for the serving cell with said beam in response to adding said non-serving cell as the secondary cell in multicarrier connectivity with the serving cell using the same beam (read as the multicarrier/multi-cell operation/connectivity with PCell and SCell, with selection of candidate SCell antenna beams based on measurements of the PCell, and re-using the same antenna beam/spatial filter across PCell and SCell, par [0016]-[0018], [0036]-[0040] and [0053]-[0054]); and
transmitting to a base station of the serving cell information on said determined measurements (read as UE transmitting to serving cell (base station) information including beam/measurement data corresponding to SCell candidates, par [0017] and [0039]-[0040]).
However, Koskela discloses the claimed invention above but does not specifically disclose the determine measurement as determine based on the orientation of the apparatus a first antenna gain index and a second antenna gain index.
Nonetheless, Chavva discloses a method and apparatus for selecting beam in a beamforming based communication system, which the UE determine its orientation using sensor, estimates the beam/antenna gain based on the determined orientations; specifically, the UE determines the its orientation and RSRP (beam-specific signal quality), associates the orientation with RSRP per beam and uses orientation-dependent gain (sensor/beam gain) as a metric (i.e. index) for selecting beams for communication between the UE 104 and the base station 102, par [0102], [0126]-[0129], [0134]-[0135] and [0140]-[0143].
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Chavva into the teachings of Koskela to apply Chavva’s orientation-based gain/metric estimation into Koskela’s multi-carrier (PCell/SCell) beam recovery and candidate SCell beam selection in order to improve robustness of beam selection across PCell/SCell when the UE device is rotated.
Consider claim 12, Koskela discloses a computer program product embodied on a non-transitory computer-readable medium and comprising a computer program code readable by a computer, wherein the computer program code configures the computer to carry out a computer process in an apparatus (read as the processor 511 and memory 512 comprising the computer program instructions, figure 5, par [0058]-[0062]), the computer process comprising:
determining orientation of an apparatus (read as sensor for determining orientation of the UE 510, figure 5, par [0057]);
measuring signal quality of a non-serving cell for a beam that is used for the serving cell (read as measuring reference signal quality (RSRP, RSRQ, etc.) on beams and using the same spatial filter/beam for PCell (primary cell) and SCell (secondary cell), par [0039]-[0040] and [0053]-[0054]);
determining a first measurement for the non-serving cell with said beam in response to adding the non-serving cell as a secondary cell in multicarrier connectivity with a serving cell using the same beam (read as the multicarrier/multi-cell operation/connectivity with PCell and SCell, with selection of candidate SCell antenna beams based on measurements of the SCell, and re-using the same antenna beam/spatial filter across PCell and SCell, par [0016]-[0018], [0036]-[0040] and [0053]-[0054]);
determining a second measurement for the serving cell with said beam in response to adding said non-serving cell as the secondary cell in multicarrier connectivity with the serving cell using the same beam (read as the multicarrier/multi-cell operation/connectivity with PCell and SCell, with selection of candidate SCell antenna beams based on measurements of the PCell, and re-using the same antenna beam/spatial filter across PCell and SCell, par [0016]-[0018], [0036]-[0040] and [0053]-[0054]); and
transmitting to a base station of the serving cell information on said determined measurements (read as UE transmitting to serving cell (base station) information including beam/measurement data corresponding to SCell candidates, par [0017] and [0039]-[0040]).
However, Koskela discloses the claimed invention above but does not specifically disclose the determine measurement as determine based on the orientation of the apparatus a first antenna gain index and a second antenna gain index.
Nonetheless, Chavva discloses a method and apparatus for selecting beam in a beamforming based communication system, which the UE determine its orientation using sensor, estimates the beam/antenna gain based on the determined orientations; specifically, the UE determines the its orientation and RSRP (beam-specific signal quality), associates the orientation with RSRP per beam and uses orientation-dependent gain (sensor/beam gain) as a metric (i.e. index) for selecting beams for communication between the UE 104 and the base station 102, par [0102], [0126]-[0129], [0134]-[0135] and [0140]-[0143].
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Chavva into the teachings of Koskela to apply Chavva’s orientation-based gain/metric estimation into Koskela’s multi-carrier (PCell/SCell) beam recovery and candidate SCell beam selection in order to improve robustness of beam selection across PCell/SCell when the UE device is rotated.
Consider claim 13, as applied to claim 11 above, Koskela, as modified by Chavva, discloses determining based on the orientation of the apparatus a second antenna gain index for the serving cell with said beam in response to adding said non-serving cell as the secondary cell in multicarrier connectivity with a serving cell using the same beam; and transmitting to the base station information on said determined second antenna gain (read as the orientation-dependent sensor/beam gain applies to Tx and Rx pairs generally, irrespective of a particular cell, and it used to estimate and update gain as the device orientation changes (fig. 6, par [0134]-[0135] of Chavva); and the uses of same RX beam/spatial filter for PCell and SCell (par [0053]-[0054] of Koskela), so the orientation-based gain metric/index would naturally be associated with both the SCell and PCell using that beam for communication with the base station).
Consider claim 14, as applied to claim 11 above, Koskela, as modified by Chavva, discloses storing information on the orientation of the apparatus; detecting change in the orientation of the apparatus (read as the memory for storing the data for the beamforming operation, par [0057] and [0061] of Koskela, par [0167]-[0117] of Chavva); detect change in the orientation of the apparatus; and determine said first antenna gain for the non-serving cell and said second antenna gain for the serving cell based on the stored information on the orientation of the apparatus and on a determined change in the orientation of the apparatus (read as estimate the change in sensor gain in direction of AoA based on the change in orientation of the UE 104 and uses orientation to derive beam selection metric (par [0135] and [0140]-[0143] of Chavva).
Consider claim 15, as applied to claim 14 above, Koskela, as modified by Chavva, discloses determine change in orientation of antenna system of the apparatus based on the change in orientation of the apparatus; and determine the first antenna gain index for the non-serving cell and the second antenna gain index for the serving cell based on a determined change in the orientation of the antenna system of the apparatus (read as estimate the change in sensor gain in direction of AoA based on the change in orientation of the UE 104 and uses orientation to derive beam selection metric (par [0135] and [0140]-[0143] of Chavva) but does not specifically disclose the antenna system is antenna arrays.
Nonetheless, Chavva further disclose the antenna system of the UE comprising antenna arrays 204a as shown in figure 1, par [0100].
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further incorporate the teachings of Chavva into the teachings of Koskela, which modified by Chavva, to design the antenna system as antenna arrays in order to provide the ability to electronically steer the beam without physical movement.
Consider claim 16, as applied to claim 11 above, Koskela, as modified by Chavva, discloses storing information on the beam of the serving cell (read as the memory for storing the data for the beamforming operation, par [0057] and [0061] of Koskela, par [0167]-[0117] of Chavva); detect change in the beam of the serving cell; determine the first antenna gain index for the non-serving cell and the second antenna gain index for the serving cell based on the stored information on the beam of the serving cell and on the change in the beam of the serving cell; and transmit to a base station of the serving cell information on said determined first and second antenna gain (read as the orientation-dependent sensor/beam gain applies to Tx and Rx pairs generally, irrespective of a particular cell, and it used to estimate and update gain as the device orientation changes (fig. 6, par [0134]-[0135] of Chavva); and the uses of same RX beam/spatial filter for PCell and SCell (par [0053]-[0054] of Koskela), so the orientation-based gain metric/index would naturally be associated with both the SCell and PCell using that beam for communication with the base station).
Consider claim 17, as applied to claim 11 above, Koskela, as modified by Chavva, discloses measuring the signal quality of a non-serving cell by using a wide beam measurement and a narrow beam measurement applied to the beam that is used for the serving cell (read as the refined (narrow) beams with higher gain and candidate beam measurements, and the common practice of using both wide and narrow beams to characterize a cell, using both wide-beam and narrow-beam measurements of a non-serving cell (SCell) on the beam used for the serving cell (PCEll), par [0037], [0036]-[0040] and [0053]-[0057]).
Consider claim 18, as applied to claim 11 above, Koskela, as modified by Chavva, discloses measuring the signal quality of the non-serving cell in response to the change exceeding a threshold value in the signal quality of the serving cell or in response to reaching a timer limit (read as using a threshold TH1 based on signal quality (RSRP) to select candidate beams: the threshold TH1 maybe be a network configured candidate beam select threshold, such as SS/PBCH Block (SSB) signal quality, include RSRP; when the candidate beam selections are above the threshold, the UE would consider the SSB as a potential beam failure recovery candidate, par [0054]).
Consider claim 19, as applied to claim 18 above, Koskela, as modified by Chavva, discloses receiving said threshold value from network equipment (read as the threshold TH1 may be a network configured candidate beam selection threshold, such as an SS/PBCH Block (SSB) signal quality, including RSRP, RSRQ, and SINR, par [0054]).
Consider claim 20, as applied to claim 18 above, Koskela, as modified by Chavva, discloses measure signal quality in response a parameter received from network equipment (read as the threshold TH1 may be a network configured candidate beam selection threshold, such as an SS/PBCH Block (SSB) signal quality, including RSRP, RSRQ, and SINR, par [0054]) but does not specifically disclose the parameter as a timer limit.
Nonetheless, Chavva further discloses AOA monitor timer in step 701 used as a local UE timer used to control when orientation/beam statistics are recomputed, figure 7, par [0299]-[0305].
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further incorporate the teachings of Chavva into the teachings of Koskela, which modified by Chavva, to design the UE the perform the measurement according to a timer to allow the UE to report the results periodically.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1, 11 and 12 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 23 and 26 of copending Application No. 18/855,027 in view of Chavva et al. (US 20220255611 A1).
Consider claims 1, 11 and 12, claims 23 and 26 of copending Application No. 18/855,027 discloses all the limitations except determine orientation of the apparatus and determine based on the orientation of the apparatus a first antenna gain index and/or a second antenna gain index.
Nonetheless, Chavva discloses a method and apparatus for selecting beam in a beamforming based communication system, which the UE determine its orientation using sensor, estimates the beam/antenna gain based on the determined orientations; specifically, the UE determines the its orientation and RSRP (beam-specific signal quality), associates the orientation with RSRP per beam and uses orientation-dependent gain (sensor/beam gain) as a metric (i.e. index) for selecting beams for communication between the UE 104 and the base station 102, par [0102], [0126]-[0129], [0134]-[0135] and [0140]-[0143].
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Chavva into the teachings of claims 23 and 26 of copending Application No. 18/855,027 to apply Chavva’s orientation-based gain/metric estimation into claims 23 and 26 of copending Application No. 18/855,027’s multicarrier connectivity operation in order to improve robustness of beam selection across primary cell and secondary cell when the UE device is rotated.
Claims 2-10 and 13-20 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 23 and 26 of copending Application No. 18/855,027 in view of Chavva et al. (US 20220255611 A1), and in further view of Koskela et al. (US 20210258062 A1).
Consider 2, 3, 5-10, 13, 14 and 16-20, as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, claims 23 and 26 of copending Application No. 18/855,027, as modified by Chavva, discloses the claimed invention above but does not disclose all of the limitations for each of these claims.
However, Koskela discloses what’s lacking in the combination of claims 23 and 26 of copending Application No. 18/855,027 and Chavva (see respective claim rejection in the 35 USC 103 rejection above for details on how Koskela teaches what’s lacking for each of the claims).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further incorporate the teachings of Koskela into the teachings of claims 23 and 26 of copending Application No. 18/855,027, which modified by Chavva, to incorporate Koskela’s beam selection system for PCell and SCell in order to improve robustness of the cell adding/activating operation.
Consider claims 4 and 15, as applied to claims 3 and 14 respectively above, claims 23 and 26 of copending Application No. 18/855,027, as modified by Chavva, discloses the claimed invention above and wherein the at least one memory and the computer program code are further configured, with the at least one processor, to cause the apparatus at least to: determine change in orientation of antenna system of the apparatus based on the change in orientation of the apparatus; and determine the first antenna gain index for the non-serving cell and the second antenna gain index for the serving cell based on a determined change in the orientation of the antenna system of the apparatus (read as estimate the change in sensor gain in direction of AoA based on the change in orientation of the UE 104 and uses orientation to derive beam selection metric (par [0135] and [0140]-[0143] of Chavva) but does not specifically disclose the antenna system is antenna arrays.
Nonetheless, Chavva further disclose the antenna system of the UE comprising antenna arrays 204a as shown in figure 1, par [0100].
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further incorporate the teachings of Chavva into the teachings of claims 23 and 26 of copending Application No. 18/855,027, which modified by Chavva, to design the antenna system as antenna arrays in order to provide the ability to electronically steer the beam without physical movement.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Junpeng Chen whose telephone number is (571) 270-1112. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Thursday, 8:00 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, Anthony S Addy can be reached on 571-272-7795. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/Junpeng Chen/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2645