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 Amendment
The Amendment filed 10/21/2025 has been entered. Claims 1, 6, 8-11, 18, and 19 have been amended. Claim 21 has been added. Claims 1-21 are pending in the application. Applicant’s amendment overcomes the claim objections from the previously filed Office Action. The provisional non-statutory double patenting rejection of claims 11-15 and 19 being unpatentable over claims 1, 15-18, and 20 of copending Application No. 18/331467 remains.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 10/21/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding Applicant’s arguments for the USC § 103 rejection of claim 1, Applicant argues on pg. 6 of the Remarks,
“Lei does not cure the deficiencies of Bai. The relied-upon section of Lei states that a "location of the UE 105 may be expressed as a relative location comprising, for example, a distance and direction from a known location. The relative location may be expressed as relative coordinates (e.g., X, Y (and Z) coordinates) defined relative to some origin at a known location which may be defined." Lei, [0041] (emphasis added). Here, Lei is clear that the asserted coordinate information is about the location of a UE, not about a beam direction, let alone that such coordinate information specifying the first beam direction is used in a beam switching instruction.
As such, amended claim 1 is allowable over the cited references. Amended independent claims 10, 11, and 19 are allowable at least for similar reasons as amended claim 1 is allowable.”
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Examiner acknowledges that the cited sections of Lei are directed towards coordinate positions of a UE. However, Examiner asserts that the combination of Bai and Lei disclose the amended claim 1.
Bai discloses on pg. 7, paragraphs 0083 and 0083,
“Transmissions in different beam directions may be used to identify (e.g., by the base station 105 or a receiving device, such as a UE 115) a beam direction for subsequent transmission and/or reception by the base station 105.
Some signals, such as data signals associated with a receiving device, may be transmitted by a base station 105 in a single beam direction (e.g., a direction associated with the receiving device, such as a UE 115)”
According to Bai, the UE location can specify and determine the beam direction, as position/location of UE qualifies as “a direction associated with the… UE” . According to Lei, the UE location can be expressed in coordinate terms. Therefore, combination of Bai and Lei would allow the coordinate information to specify the beam direction.
Bai discloses the use of UE location/position to determine beam direction. Bai fails to disclose UE location/position in coordinate terms. Lei discloses UE position/location in coordinate terms. It is reasonable to believe a combination of the method of Bai, using UE location/position to determine beam direction, with the features of Lei, where UE position is expressed in coordinates, would be obvious to combine in order to successfully achieve the beam direction of Bai being directed towards a coordinate position, allowing for a stronger and more exact beam transmission. Bai teaches that the beam direction transmissions may be used to “identify a beam direction for subsequent transmission and/or reception,” indicating that the beam direction can be included in beam switching instructions.
For at least these reasons, Examiner is unpersuaded and maintains previous rejections corresponding to the USC § 103 rejection of claim 1, with the same cited sections and rationale applied to the 103 rejections of claims 10, 11, and 19. Therefore, the Examiner asserts that Bai et al. (US 20200259545 A1) and Lei et al. (US 20240012084 A1) disclose each and every limitation of independent claim 1, 10, 11, and 19 based on the broadest reasonable interpretation of claims 1, 10, 11, and 19.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bai et al. (US 20200259545 A1) in view of Lei et al. (US 20240012084 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Bai discloses [Note: what Bai fails to disclose is strike-through]
A device (see pg. 1, paragraph 0007, device for beam management) comprising:
a memory storing instructions (see pg. 1, paragraph 0009, apparatus includes instructions stored in the memory); and
at least one processor configured, by executing the instructions (see pg. 1, paragraph 0009, “The instructions may be executable by the processor”), to:
transmit a beam switching instruction (see pg. 3, paragraph 0035, the method and device can transmit instructions), the beam switching instruction including:
an indication of a first beam direction for a physical channel (see pg. 4, paragraph 0060, “the base station may transmit a beam switch message to the UE on a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH)… the base station and the UE may establish communication over the newly indicated beam”; pg. 10, paragraph 0106, “Each beamformed communication beam may have an associated beam identifier, beam direction…the base station 105-a and the UE 115-a may be capable of correlating a beam identifier, a beam direction, a beam symbol, and the like to a certain beam”; pg. 7, paragraphs 0083 and 0084, “Transmissions in different beam directions may be used to identify (e.g., by the base station 105 or a receiving device, such as a UE 115) a beam direction for subsequent transmission and/or reception by the base station 105. Some signals, such as data signals associated with a receiving device, may be transmitted by a base station 105 in a single beam direction (e.g., a direction associated with the receiving device, such as a UE 115).”),
a time offset indication allowing for a determination of a future moment (see Fig. 3; pg. 14, paragraph 0130, “the base station 105 (and the UE 115) may determine at a time instance 325 that an active beam may fail at a future time”);
communicate, before the future moment, using a second beam direction (see pg. 14, paragraph 0130, “the base station 105 (and the UE 115) may transmit a beam switch message that may include beam switch timing information (e.g., time and frequency resources, symbol index, etc.) and a request for the UE 115 (and the base station 105) to perform a beam switch procedure”; pg. 7, paragraph 0083, “some signals… may be transmitted by a base station 105 multiple times in different directions”); and
communicate, after the future moment, using a third beam direction, the third beam direction corresponding to the first beam direction (see Fig. 3; pg. 14, paragraph 0131, “the base station 105 (and the UE 115) may determine at a time instance 330 that the active beam may remain above an RSRP threshold for at least a future duration (e.g., x slots, where x is a positive integer) based in part on the determination. In some examples, the base station 105 (and the UE 115) may proactively request to switch back to the active beams”; pg. 7, paragraph 0084, “Some signals… may be transmitted by a base station 105 in a single beam direction”).
Lei discloses
the indication using coordinate information (see pg. 7, paragraph 0055, an information signal “may include timing and configuration information for directional SS transmissions and location coordinates”), the coordinate information specifying the first beam direction expressed relative to a predefined coordinate system (see pg. 5, paragraph 0041, “The relative location may be expressed as relative coordinates (e.g., X, Y (and Z) coordinates) defined relative to some origin at a known location which may be defined, e.g., geographically, in civic terms, or by reference to a point, area, or volume, e.g., indicated on a map, floor plan, or building plan”);
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by Lei into the invention of Bai. Both Bai and Lei are considered analogous arts to the claimed invention as they both disclose improvements to radio transmission systems with a UE regarding beam selection, direction, and location. Bai discloses the structure, first second and third beam, indicating a beam direction, and time component of claim 1; however, Bai fails to disclose the coordinate information component of claim 1. This feature is disclosed by Lei where location coordinates for transmission purposes are able to be defined in relative ways. The combination of Bai and Lei would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve beam direction accuracy, especially when multiple beams are involved, therefore improving communication quality and reducing signal interference.
Regarding claim 2, Bai further discloses
The device of claim 1, wherein the physical channel comprises a physical downlink channel and the first beam direction comprises a receive beam direction (see pg. 4, paragraph 0060, “the base station may transmit a beam switch message to the UE on a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH)”), or the physical channel comprises a physical uplink channel and the first beam direction comprises a transmit beam direction.
Regarding claim 3, Lei discloses
The device of claim 1, wherein the coordinate information comprises differential coordinates relative to a reference beam direction (see pg. 6, paragraph 0048, the device may support positioning through methods such as differential GNSS; pg. 8, paragraph 0058, “positioning functionality may be implemented, at least in part, using the directional SS beams”; pg. 3, paragraph 0028, the positioning methods may utilize reference signals; pg. 5, paragraph 0041, “The relative location may be expressed as relative coordinates (e.g., X, Y (and Z) coordinates) defined relative to some origin at a known location”).
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by Lei into the invention of Bai. Bai fails to disclose differential coordinate information relative to a reference beam direction. This feature is disclosed by Lei where differential positioning methods can be integrated with beam direction to express positioning location as relative coordinates. The combination of Bai and Lei would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve beam direction and location accuracy by using different position methods available, such as DGNSS, therefore improving communication quality and reducing signal interference when multiple signals are involved.
Regarding claim 4, Lei further discloses
The device of claim 3, wherein the reference beam direction (see pg. 3, paragraph 0028, the positioning methods may utilize reference signals; pg. 8, paragraph 0058, “positioning functionality may be implemented, at least in part, using the directional SS beams”) comprises coordinates of a sensing beam direction (see pg. 8, paragraph 0059, sensors on the UE may be configured to sense transmitted and reflected radio frequency beams; pg. 7, paragraph 0056, the UE can obtain measurement quantities of directional signals; pg. 9, paragraph 0063, sensor information can be used for location determination and measurements; pg. 15, paragraph 0100, location can be expressed in coordinates).
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by Lei into the invention of Bai. Bai fails to disclose a reference beam direction comprising coordinates of a sensing beam direction. This feature is disclosed by Lei where a reference signal direction may be integrated with a sensing signal direction to express location coordinates. The combination of Bai and Lei would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve beam direction and detection accuracy, especially when multiple beams are involved, by incorporating coordinates to refer to location and therefore improving communication quality while reducing signal interference.
Regarding claim 5, Bai further discloses
The device of claim 1, wherein the beam switching instruction further includes an indication of a reference time point (see pg. 12, paragraph 0121, the UE may identify a time stamp), or an indication of a plurality of beam directions for the physical channel.
Regarding claim 6, Bai further discloses
The device of claim 5, wherein the at least one processor is further configured, by executing the instructions, to express the indication of the plurality of beam directions as a pattern (see pg. 10, paragraph 0106, “the base station 105-a may transmit beams 205-a through 205-d according to a beam sweep pattern, and the UE 115-a may also transmit beams 210-a through 210-d according to a same or different beam sweep pattern”).
Regarding claim 7, Bai further discloses
The device of claim 5, wherein the beam switching instruction further includes, for each beam direction in the plurality of beam directions, an indication of a respective start time and a respective duration (see pg. 10, paragraph 0106, “the base station 105-a and the UE 115-a may be capable of correlating a beam identifier, a beam direction, a beam symbol, and the like to a certain beam”; pg. 8, paragraph 0089 and paragraph 0090, a system frame number (SFN) may be used to identify each radio frame start time and a transmission time interval (TTI) may be known for each beam symbol).
Regarding claim 8, Bai further discloses
The device of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor further is configured, by executing the instructions, to obtain a range of beam directions through sensing (see pg. 7, paragraph 0085, “a receiving device may try multiple receive directions by receiving via different antenna subarrays, by processing received signals according to different antenna subarrays, by receiving according to different receive beamforming weight sets applied to signals received at a plurality of antenna elements of an antenna array, or by processing received signals according to different receive beamforming weight sets applied to signals received at a plurality of antenna elements of an antenna array, any of which may be referred to as “listening” according to different receive beams or receive directions”).
Regarding claim 9, Lei further discloses
The device of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is further configured, by executing the instructions, to:
receive reflections of sensing signals (see Fig. 2, sensor element 213 and sensor processor element 234; pg. 8, paragraph 0059, “the sensor processor 234 may comprise, e.g., processors for RF (radio frequency) sensing (with one or more (cellular) wireless signals transmitted and reflection(s) used to identify, map, and/or track an object)”);
perform an analysis of the reflections (see pg. 8, paragraph 0059, the processor can identify, map, or track an object based on the reflections); and
determine, based on the analysis, the third beam direction (see pg. 9, paragraph 0063, sensor information can be used for location determination and measurements, for example “for relative positioning information, the sensors/IMU can be used to determine the angle and/or orientation of the other device with respect to the UE 200, etc”).
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by Lei into the invention of Bai. Bai fails to disclose receiving reflections of sensing signals and using that data to determine beam direction. This feature is disclosed by Lei where the device can detect and analyze reflected sensing signals, then use that information to help determine positioning, location, orientation, or direction. The combination of Bai and Lei would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to reduce signal interference and improve beam communication quality by sensing and taking into account possible environmental factors, such as a blockage, when deciding which beam direction to select.
Regarding claim 10, the same cited sections and rationale as claim 1 are applied.
Regarding claim 11, the same cited sections and rationale as claim 1 are applied. Bai further discloses
receive a beam switching instruction (see pg. 2, paragraph 0012, method and apparatus can receive instructions), the beam switching instruction including:
Regarding claim 12, Lei discloses
The device of claim 11, wherein the coordinate information comprises absolute coordinate information (see pg. 5, paragraph 0041, the location coordinates can be expressed as absolute coordinates).
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by Lei into the invention of Bai. Bai fails to disclose coordinate information comprising absolute coordinate information. This feature is disclosed by Lei where location coordinates can be converted into absolute coordinates. The combination of Bai and Lei would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve beam direction accuracy, especially when multiple beams are involved, therefore improving communication quality and reducing signal interference.
Regarding claim 13, the same cited section and rationale as claim 3 is applied.
Regarding claim 14, the same cited section and rationale as claim 4 is applied.
Regarding claim 15, Bai further discloses
The device of claim 11, wherein the beam switching instruction further includes an indication of a reference time point (see pg. 12, paragraph 0121, the UE may identify a time stamp).
Regarding claim 16, Bai further discloses
The device of claim 11, wherein the beam switching instruction further includes an indication of a plurality of beam directions for the physical channel (see pg. 8, paragraph 0093, “A physical control channel and a physical data channel may be multiplexed on a downlink carrier”).
Regarding claim 17, the same cited section and rationale as claim 7 is applied.
Regarding claim 18, Bai further discloses
The device of claim 11, wherein the at least one processor further configured, by executing the instructions, to: transmit an acknowledgement of receipt of the beam switching instruction (see pg. 8, paragraph 0088, the UE and base station can implement HARQ feedback).
Regarding claim 19, the same cited sections and rationale as claim 11 are applied.
Regarding claim 20, the same cited section and rationale as claim 12 is applied.
Regarding claim 21, Bai further discloses
The device of claim 1, wherein the first beam direction is based on a predicted location of a user equipment (UE) at the future moment (see pg. 1, paragraph 0006, “a beam pair used for communication between two communication devices may become misaligned due to mobility or dynamic blockages, and may result in a beam failure.”; pg. 1, paragraph 0007, “The described techniques relate to improved methods, systems, devices, and apparatuses that support beam management using channel state information prediction…the described techniques provide for enabling a user equipment (UE) and base station … to reduce or eliminate overhead and latencies associated with processes related to beam management by supporting a proactive approach to predict a beam event, such as a beam switch event or a beam failure event”).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ISABELLA A EDRADA whose telephone number is (571)272-4859. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9am-5pm 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, William Kelleher, can be reached at (571) 272-7753. 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.
/ISABELLA A EDRADA/Examiner, Art Unit 3648 /William Kelleher/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3648