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
Applicant's arguments filed 12/16/2025 have been fully considered but they are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 5-6, 21, 35-36 and 39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement.
Claim 5 recites “wherein the indication to reduce the number of layers comprises an indication of a maximum number of layers of communication for communications by the first network node and the second network node, wherein the communications by the first network node and the second network node interfere with the first communication and the second communication via one or more of time or frequency resources”. However, paragraphs [0125], [0138] and [0161] of applicant’s disclosure discloses “wherein the communications by the first network node and the second network node interfere with the communications between the first network node and the UE via one or more of time or frequency resources”. No where in the disclosure does it disclose the communications by the first network node and the second network node interfere with the second communication, or the indication being affected by the second communication in anyway. Accordingly, the amendment is not supported by the specification. Similar rejection applies to claims 21 and 35.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(B) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 5-6, 21, 35-36 and 39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 5 recites “wherein the indication to reduce the number of layers comprises an indication of a maximum number of layers of communication for communications by the first network node and the second network node, wherein the communications by the first network node and the second network node interfere with the first communication and the second communication via one or more of time or frequency resources”. Claim 1 recites transmitting the indication to reduce the number of layers prior to receiving the second communication. Therefore, it is unclear how the indication, having been transmitted prior to the second communication, is still based on the second communication. The examiner interprets the claimed indication not being affected by the second communication, rendering the limitation of “wherein the indication to reduce the number of layers comprises an indication of a maximum number of layers of communication for communications by the first network node and the second network node, wherein the communications by the first network node and the second network node interfere with the first communication and the second communication” indefinite. Similar rejection applies to claims 21 and 35.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-2, 4, 7-8, 17-18, 20, 22-23, 31-32, 34, 37-38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Clevorn (US 2014/0140424 A1) in view of El Chebib et al. (US 10,439,681 B1, hereinafter “El Chebib”) and further in view of Sud (US 2014/0098743 A1).
As to claim 1:
Clevorn discloses a user equipment (UE) for wireless communication (UE; see Fig. 2; [0045]), comprising:
one or more memories (memory; see Fig. 2; [0088]); and
one or more processors, coupled to the one or more memories (“a processor executing software stored in a memory”; Fig. 2; [0088]), configured to cause the UE to (UE; see Figs. 2 and 8; [0045]):
receive a first communication from a first network node associated with a first cell (“data reception in 801”; see Figs. 1 and 8; [0135]; [0118]-[0121] “Each base station 103 provides radio coverage for one or more mobile radio cells 104 of the radio access network 101”; [0021] “Control and user data are transmitted between a base station 103 and a mobile terminal 105 located in the mobile radio cell 104 operated by the base station 103 over the air interface 106 on the basis of a multiple access method”; [0023] note: data reception before reducing antennas/streams = first communication);
transmit, based at least in part on a measured interference within the first communication, an indication to reduce a number of [antennas] of communication of one or more of the first network node associated with the first cell (“Regarding the switching off of one or more receive antennas it should be noted that according to LTE, as the number of the MIMO streams transmitted to the UE 105 is controlled by the NodeB 103, the UE 105 cannot simply switch antennas off without negotiation with the NodeB 103”; see Figs. 1 and 8; [0118]; [0021]; [0023] “the UE 105 may report a lower rank than the one it actually experiences, e.g. rank 1 instead of rank 2, to reduce the number of MIMO streams transmitted by the NodeB 103 which then enables the UE 105 to switch off antennas”; [0119] “when the UE 105 reduces the reported rank to reduce the number of antennas, the UE 105 only reduces the number of antennas when the NodeB 103 reacts to the reduced rank, i.e. reduces the number of transmitted MIMO streams.”; [0120] “the UE 105 performs a channel estimation in 807 based on received data, followed by a rank evaluation in 808 and a selection of antennas to be switched off”; [0137] “the UE 105 may compute the individual SNRs (or signal levels) per antenna, sort these SNRs and switch off the antenna(s) with the lowest SNR”; [0121]) or a second network node associated with a second cell (for examination purposes, this limitation has not been elected by the examiner as it is optional/alternative); wherein the indication is transmitted based at least in part on [SNR] (“Regarding the switching off of one or more receive antennas it should be noted that according to LTE, as the number of the MIMO streams transmitted to the UE 105 is controlled by the NodeB 103, the UE 105 cannot simply switch antennas off without negotiation with the NodeB 103”; see Fig. 8; [0118]-[0119] “the UE 105 performs a channel estimation in 807 based on received data, followed by a rank evaluation in 808 and a selection of antennas to be switched off”; [0137] “the UE 105 may compute the individual SNRs (or signal levels) per antenna, sort these SNRs and switch off the antenna(s) with the lowest SNR”; [0121]); and
receive, from the first network node, a second communication based at least in part on the indication to reduce the number of [antennas] (“After the selected antennas are switched off in 805, the UE 105 continues data reception with the reduced number of active antennas in 801”; see Fig. 8; [0137]; “the UE 105 may report a lower rank than the one it actually experiences, e.g. rank 1 instead of rank 2, to reduce the number of MIMO streams transmitted by the NodeB 103 which then enables the UE 105 to switch off antennas”; [0119] “when the UE 105 reduces the reported rank to reduce the number of antennas, the UE 105 only reduces the number of antennas when the NodeB 103 reacts to the reduced rank, i.e. reduces the number of transmitted MIMO streams.”; [0120]; note: data reception after reducing the antennas/streams = second communication).
Clevorn does not explicitly disclose layers.
However, El Chebib discloses a number of antennas are directly related to a number of layers (“For example, if the UE 110 has a maximum MIMO capability of four receive antennas (i.e., a maximum spatial layer capability of four)”; Col. 3 lines 47-54; see also Col. 3 lines 6-22 and Col. 4 lines 3-32; “Each spatial layer that the UE 110 can receive requires a separate receive antenna, so the highest number of spatial layers that the UE 110 can receive and decode equals the maximum number of receive antennas that the UE 110 currently has available”; Col. 7 lines 61-65).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of El Chebib into Clevorn’s system/method as it would allow Clevorn’s number of antennas to be number of layers. Such combination would have been obvious as the references are from analogous art where combining prior art elements according to known methods would yield predictable results. Such combination would have also increased the effective data transmission throughput to a destination wireless device (El Chebib; Col. 1 lines 26-27; Col. 2 lines 21-23)
The combined system/method of Clevorn and El Chebib does not explicitly disclose detection of interference from cells other than the first cell.
However, Sud discloses SNR is based on detection of interference from cells other than the first cell (“users near the edge of a cell have low SNRs because their signal is weak and there is severe inter-cell interference”; [0058]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to combine the SNR teaching of Sud into the combined system/method of Clevorn and El Chebib as it would allow the indication to be transmitted based at least in part on detection of interference from cells other than the first cell. Such combination would have been obvious as the references are from analogous art where combining prior art elements according to known methods would yield predictable results. Such combination would have also reduced interference between co-channel users (Sud; Abstract).
As to claim 2:
The combined system/method of Clevorn, El Chebib and Sud discloses the inventions set forth above. Clevorn further discloses wherein the one or more processors (“a processor executing software stored in a memory”; Fig. 2; [0088]), to receive the second communication based at least in part on the indication to reduce the number of [antennas] (“After the selected antennas are switched off in 805, the UE 105 continues data reception with the reduced number of active antennas in 801”; see Fig. 8; [0137]; “the UE 105 may report a lower rank than the one it actually experiences, e.g. rank 1 instead of rank 2, to reduce the number of MIMO streams transmitted by the NodeB 103 which then enables the UE 105 to switch off antennas”; [0119] “when the UE 105 reduces the reported rank to reduce the number of antennas, the UE 105 only reduces the number of antennas when the NodeB 103 reacts to the reduced rank, i.e. reduces the number of transmitted MIMO streams.”; [0120]; note: data reception after reducing the antennas/streams = second communication), are configured to:
receive the second communication having fewer [antennas] than the first communication (“After the selected antennas are switched off in 805, the UE 105 continues data reception with the reduced number of active antennas in 801”; see Fig. 8; [0137]; “the UE 105 may report a lower rank than the one it actually experiences, e.g. rank 1 instead of rank 2, to reduce the number of MIMO streams transmitted by the NodeB 103 which then enables the UE 105 to switch off antennas”; [0119] “when the UE 105 reduces the reported rank to reduce the number of antennas, the UE 105 only reduces the number of antennas when the NodeB 103 reacts to the reduced rank, i.e. reduces the number of transmitted MIMO streams.”; [0120]; note: data reception after reducing the antennas/streams = second communication),
receive the second communication with reduced interference based at least in part on the second network node communicating with reduced spatial layers (for examination purposes, this limitation has not been elected by the examiner as it is optional/alternative), or
receive the second communication with reduced interference based at least in part on the second network node communicating using different time or frequency domain resources from the second communication (for examination purposes, this limitation has not been elected by the examiner as it is optional/alternative). El Chebib further discloses antennas are directly related to spatial layers (“For example, if the UE 110 has a maximum MIMO capability of four receive antennas (i.e., a maximum spatial layer capability of four)”; Col. 3 lines 47-54; see also Col. 3 lines 6-22 and Col. 4 lines 3-32; “Each spatial layer that the UE 110 can receive requires a separate receive antenna, so the highest number of spatial layers that the UE 110 can receive and decode equals the maximum number of receive antennas that the UE 110 currently has available”; Col. 7 lines 61-65).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of El Chebib into the combined system/method as it would allow the antennas to be layers. Such combination would have been obvious as the references are from analogous art where combining prior art elements according to known methods would yield predictable results. Such combination would have also increased the effective data transmission throughput to a destination wireless device (El Chebib; Col. 1 lines 26-27; Col. 2 lines 21-23).
As to claim 4:
The combined system/method of Clevorn, El Chebib and Sud discloses the inventions set forth above. Clevorn further discloses wherein transmitting the indication to reduce the number of [antennas] (“Regarding the switching off of one or more receive antennas it should be noted that according to LTE, as the number of the MIMO streams transmitted to the UE 105 is controlled by the NodeB 103, the UE 105 cannot simply switch antennas off without negotiation with the NodeB 103”; see Fig. 8; [0118] “the UE 105 may report a lower rank than the one it actually experiences, e.g. rank 1 instead of rank 2, to reduce the number of MIMO streams transmitted by the NodeB 103 which then enables the UE 105 to switch off antennas”; [0119] “when the UE 105 reduces the reported rank to reduce the number of antennas, the UE 105 only reduces the number of antennas when the NodeB 103 reacts to the reduced rank, i.e. reduces the number of transmitted MIMO streams.”; [0120] “the UE 105 performs a channel estimation in 807 based on received data, followed by a rank evaluation in 808 and a selection of antennas to be switched off”; [0137] “the UE 105 may compute the individual SNRs (or signal levels) per antenna, sort these SNRs and switch off the antenna(s) with the lowest SNR”; [0121]) is based at least in part on one or more of:
the measured interference satisfying a threshold (“Based on the channels estimates the UE 105 may compute the individual SNRs (or signal levels) per antenna, sort these SNRs and switch off the antenna(s) with the lowest SNR”; [0121]; [0094]; [0138]), or
a covariance matrix associated with the first communication (for examination purposes, this limitation has not been elected by the examiner as it is optional/alternative). El Chebib further discloses the number of antennas are directly related to the number of layers (“For example, if the UE 110 has a maximum MIMO capability of four receive antennas (i.e., a maximum spatial layer capability of four)”; Col. 3 lines 47-54; see also Col. 3 lines 6-22 and Col. 4 lines 3-32; “Each spatial layer that the UE 110 can receive requires a separate receive antenna, so the highest number of spatial layers that the UE 110 can receive and decode equals the maximum number of receive antennas that the UE 110 currently has available”; Col. 7 lines 61-65).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of El Chebib into the combined system/method as it would allow the number of antennas to be number of layers. Such combination would have been obvious as the references are from analogous art where combining prior art elements according to known methods would yield predictable results. Such combination would have also increased the effective data transmission throughput to a destination wireless device (El Chebib; Col. 1 lines 26-27; Col. 2 lines 21-23).
As to claim 7:
The combined system/method of Clevorn, El Chebib and Sud discloses the inventions set forth above. Clevorn further discloses wherein the one or more processors, to transmit the indication to reduce the number of [antennas] (“Regarding the switching off of one or more receive antennas it should be noted that according to LTE, as the number of the MIMO streams transmitted to the UE 105 is controlled by the NodeB 103, the UE 105 cannot simply switch antennas off without negotiation with the NodeB 103”; see Fig. 8; [0118] “the UE 105 may report a lower rank than the one it actually experiences, e.g. rank 1 instead of rank 2, to reduce the number of MIMO streams transmitted by the NodeB 103 which then enables the UE 105 to switch off antennas”; [0119] “when the UE 105 reduces the reported rank to reduce the number of antennas, the UE 105 only reduces the number of antennas when the NodeB 103 reacts to the reduced rank, i.e. reduces the number of transmitted MIMO streams.”; [0120] “the UE 105 performs a channel estimation in 807 based on received data, followed by a rank evaluation in 808 and a selection of antennas to be switched off”; [0137] “the UE 105 may compute the individual SNRs (or signal levels) per antenna, sort these SNRs and switch off the antenna(s) with the lowest SNR”; [0121]), are configured to:
transmit the indication based at least in part on a request from the first network node (“the number of the MIMO streams transmitted to the UE 105 is controlled by the NodeB 103, the UE 105 cannot simply switch antennas off without negotiation with the NodeB 103”; [0118]-[0120];), or
transmit the indication based at least in part on a schedule for periodic reporting of whether the UE requests to reduce the number of [antennas] (for examination purposes, this limitation has not been elected by the examiner as it is optional/alternative). El Chebib further discloses the number of antennas are directly related to the number of layers (“For example, if the UE 110 has a maximum MIMO capability of four receive antennas (i.e., a maximum spatial layer capability of four)”; Col. 3 lines 47-54; see also Col. 3 lines 6-22 and Col. 4 lines 3-32; “Each spatial layer that the UE 110 can receive requires a separate receive antenna, so the highest number of spatial layers that the UE 110 can receive and decode equals the maximum number of receive antennas that the UE 110 currently has available”; Col. 7 lines 61-65).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of El Chebib into the combined system/method as it would allow the number of antennas to be number of layers. Such combination would have been obvious as the references are from analogous art where combining prior art elements according to known methods would yield predictable results. Such combination would have also increased the effective data transmission throughput to a destination wireless device (El Chebib; Col. 1 lines 26-27; Col. 2 lines 21-23).
As to claim 8:
The combined system/method of Clevorn, El Chebib and Sud discloses the inventions set forth above. Clevorn further discloses wherein the one or more processors are further configured to, before receiving the second communication, receiving an indication of a number of [antennas] of the second communication (“ the UE 105 cannot simply switch antennas off without negotiation with the NodeB 103”; [0118]), wherein the number of [antennas] of the second communication is based at least in part on the indication to reduce the number of [antennas]
(“Regarding the switching off of one or more receive antennas it should be noted that according to LTE, as the number of the MIMO streams transmitted to the UE 105 is controlled by the NodeB 103, the UE 105 cannot simply switch antennas off without negotiation with the NodeB 103”; see Fig. 8; [0118] “the UE 105 may report a lower rank than the one it actually experiences, e.g. rank 1 instead of rank 2, to reduce the number of MIMO streams transmitted by the NodeB 103 which then enables the UE 105 to switch off antennas”; [0119] “when the UE 105 reduces the reported rank to reduce the number of antennas, the UE 105 only reduces the number of antennas when the NodeB 103 reacts to the reduced rank, i.e. reduces the number of transmitted MIMO streams.”; [0120]). El Chebib further discloses the number of antennas are directly related to a number of layers (“For example, if the UE 110 has a maximum MIMO capability of four receive antennas (i.e., a maximum spatial layer capability of four)”; Col. 3 lines 47-54; see also Col. 3 lines 6-22 and Col. 4 lines 3-32; “Each spatial layer that the UE 110 can receive requires a separate receive antenna, so the highest number of spatial layers that the UE 110 can receive and decode equals the maximum number of receive antennas that the UE 110 currently has available”; Col. 7 lines 61-65).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of El Chebib into the combined system/method as it would allow the number of antennas to be number of layers. Such combination would have been obvious as the references are from analogous art where combining prior art elements according to known methods would yield predictable results. Such combination would have also increased the effective data transmission throughput to a destination wireless device (El Chebib; Col. 1 lines 26-27; Col. 2 lines 21-23).
As to claim 17:
Clevorn discloses a method of wireless communication performed by a user equipment (UE) (UE; see Figs. 2 and 8; [0045]; [0001]), comprising:
receiving a first communication from a first network node associated with a first cell (“data reception in 801”; see Figs. 1 and 8; [0135]; [0118]-[0121] “Each base station 103 provides radio coverage for one or more mobile radio cells 104 of the radio access network 101”; [0021] “Control and user data are transmitted between a base station 103 and a mobile terminal 105 located in the mobile radio cell 104 operated by the base station 103 over the air interface 106 on the basis of a multiple access method”; [0023] note: data reception before reducing antennas/streams = first communication);
transmitting, based at least in part on a measured interference within the first communication, an indication to reduce a number of [antennas] of communication of one or more of the first network node associated with the first cell (“Regarding the switching off of one or more receive antennas it should be noted that according to LTE, as the number of the MIMO streams transmitted to the UE 105 is controlled by the NodeB 103, the UE 105 cannot simply switch antennas off without negotiation with the NodeB 103”; see Figs. 1 and 8; [0118]; [0021]; [0023] “the UE 105 may report a lower rank than the one it actually experiences, e.g. rank 1 instead of rank 2, to reduce the number of MIMO streams transmitted by the NodeB 103 which then enables the UE 105 to switch off antennas”; [0119] “when the UE 105 reduces the reported rank to reduce the number of antennas, the UE 105 only reduces the number of antennas when the NodeB 103 reacts to the reduced rank, i.e. reduces the number of transmitted MIMO streams.”; [0120] “the UE 105 performs a channel estimation in 807 based on received data, followed by a rank evaluation in 808 and a selection of antennas to be switched off”; [0137] “the UE 105 may compute the individual SNRs (or signal levels) per antenna, sort these SNRs and switch off the antenna(s) with the lowest SNR”; [0121]) or a second network node associated with a second cell (for examination purposes, this limitation has not been elected by the examiner as it is optional/alternative), wherein the indication is transmitted based at least in part on [SNR] (“Regarding the switching off of one or more receive antennas it should be noted that according to LTE, as the number of the MIMO streams transmitted to the UE 105 is controlled by the NodeB 103, the UE 105 cannot simply switch antennas off without negotiation with the NodeB 103”; see Fig. 8; [0118]-[0119] “the UE 105 performs a channel estimation in 807 based on received data, followed by a rank evaluation in 808 and a selection of antennas to be switched off”; [0137] “the UE 105 may compute the individual SNRs (or signal levels) per antenna, sort these SNRs and switch off the antenna(s) with the lowest SNR”; [0121]); and
receiving, from the first network node, a second communication based at least in part on the indication to reduce the number of [antennas] (“After the selected antennas are switched off in 805, the UE 105 continues data reception with the reduced number of active antennas in 801”; see Fig. 8; [0137]; “the UE 105 may report a lower rank than the one it actually experiences, e.g. rank 1 instead of rank 2, to reduce the number of MIMO streams transmitted by the NodeB 103 which then enables the UE 105 to switch off antennas”; [0119] “when the UE 105 reduces the reported rank to reduce the number of antennas, the UE 105 only reduces the number of antennas when the NodeB 103 reacts to the reduced rank, i.e. reduces the number of transmitted MIMO streams.”; [0120]; note: data reception after reducing the antennas/streams = second communication).
Clevorn does not explicitly disclose layers.
However, El Chebib discloses a number of antennas are directly related to a number of layers (“For example, if the UE 110 has a maximum MIMO capability of four receive antennas (i.e., a maximum spatial layer capability of four)”; Col. 3 lines 47-54; see also Col. 3 lines 6-22 and Col. 4 lines 3-32; “Each spatial layer that the UE 110 can receive requires a separate receive antenna, so the highest number of spatial layers that the UE 110 can receive and decode equals the maximum number of receive antennas that the UE 110 currently has available”; Col. 7 lines 61-65).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of El Chebib into Clevorn’s system/method as it would allow Clevorn’s number of antennas to be number of layers. Such combination would have been obvious as the references are from analogous art where combining prior art elements according to known methods would yield predictable results. Such combination would have also increased the effective data transmission throughput to a destination wireless device (El Chebib; Col. 1 lines 26-27; Col. 2 lines 21-23)
The combined system/method of Clevorn and El Chebib does not explicitly disclose detection of interference from cells other than the first cell.
However, Sud discloses SNR is based on detection of interference from cells other than the first cell (“users near the edge of a cell have low SNRs because their signal is weak and there is severe inter-cell interference”; [0058]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to combine the SNR teaching of Sud into the combined system/method of Clevorn and El Chebib as it would allow the indication to be transmitted based at least in part on detection of interference from cells other than the first cell. Such combination would have been obvious as the references are from analogous art where combining prior art elements according to known methods would yield predictable results. Such combination would have also reduced interference between co-channel users (Sud; Abstract).
As to claim 18:
The combined system/method of Clevorn, El Chebib and Sud discloses the inventions set forth above. Clevorn further discloses wherein receiving the second communication based at least in part on the indication to reduce the number of [antennas] (“After the selected antennas are switched off in 805, the UE 105 continues data reception with the reduced number of active antennas in 801”; see Fig. 8; [0137]; “the UE 105 may report a lower rank than the one it actually experiences, e.g. rank 1 instead of rank 2, to reduce the number of MIMO streams transmitted by the NodeB 103 which then enables the UE 105 to switch off antennas”; [0119] “when the UE 105 reduces the reported rank to reduce the number of antennas, the UE 105 only reduces the number of antennas when the NodeB 103 reacts to the reduced rank, i.e. reduces the number of transmitted MIMO streams.”; [0120]; note: data reception after reducing the antennas/streams = second communication) comprises:
receiving the second communication having fewer spatial [antennas] than the first communication (“After the selected antennas are switched off in 805, the UE 105 continues data reception with the reduced number of active antennas in 801”; see Fig. 8; [0137]; “the UE 105 may report a lower rank than the one it actually experiences, e.g. rank 1 instead of rank 2, to reduce the number of MIMO streams transmitted by the NodeB 103 which then enables the UE 105 to switch off antennas”; [0119] “when the UE 105 reduces the reported rank to reduce the number of antennas, the UE 105 only reduces the number of antennas when the NodeB 103 reacts to the reduced rank, i.e. reduces the number of transmitted MIMO streams.”; [0120]; note: data reception after reducing the antennas/streams = second communication),
receiving the second communication with reduced interference based at least in part on the second network node communicating with reduced spatial layers (for examination purposes, this limitation has not been elected by the examiner as it is optional/alternative), or
receiving the second communication with reduced interference based at least in part on the second network node communicating using different time or frequency domain resources from the second communication (for examination purposes, this limitation has not been elected by the examiner as it is optional/alternative). El Chebib further discloses antennas are directly related to spatial layers (“For example, if the UE 110 has a maximum MIMO capability of four receive antennas (i.e., a maximum spatial layer capability of four)”; Col. 3 lines 47-54; see also Col. 3 lines 6-22 and Col. 4 lines 3-32; “Each spatial layer that the UE 110 can receive requires a separate receive antenna, so the highest number of spatial layers that the UE 110 can receive and decode equals the maximum number of receive antennas that the UE 110 currently has available”; Col. 7 lines 61-65).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching El Chebib into the combined system/method as it would allow the number of antennas to be number of layers. Such combination would have been obvious as the references are from analogous art where combining prior art elements according to known methods would yield predictable results. Such combination would have also increased the effective data transmission throughput to a destination wireless device (El Chebib; Col. 1 lines 26-27; Col. 2 lines 21-23).
As to claim 20:
The combined system/method of Clevorn, El Chebib and Sud discloses the inventions set forth above. Clevorn further discloses wherein transmitting the indication to reduce the number of [antennas] (“Regarding the switching off of one or more receive antennas it should be noted that according to LTE, as the number of the MIMO streams transmitted to the UE 105 is controlled by the NodeB 103, the UE 105 cannot simply switch antennas off without negotiation with the NodeB 103”; see Fig. 8; [0118] “the UE 105 may report a lower rank than the one it actually experiences, e.g. rank 1 instead of rank 2, to reduce the number of MIMO streams transmitted by the NodeB 103 which then enables the UE 105 to switch off antennas”; [0119] “when the UE 105 reduces the reported rank to reduce the number of antennas, the UE 105 only reduces the number of antennas when the NodeB 103 reacts to the reduced rank, i.e. reduces the number of transmitted MIMO streams.”; [0120] “the UE 105 performs a channel estimation in 807 based on received data, followed by a rank evaluation in 808 and a selection of antennas to be switched off”; [0137] “the UE 105 may compute the individual SNRs (or signal levels) per antenna, sort these SNRs and switch off the antenna(s) with the lowest SNR”; [0121]) is based at least in part on one or more of:
the measured interference satisfying a threshold (“Based on the channels estimates the UE 105 may compute the individual SNRs (or signal levels) per antenna, sort these SNRs and switch off the antenna(s) with the lowest SNR”; [0121]; [0094]; [0138]), or
a covariance matrix associated with the first communication (for examination purposes, this limitation has not been elected by the examiner as it is optional/alternative). El Chebib further discloses the number of antennas are directly related to the number of layers (“For example, if the UE 110 has a maximum MIMO capability of four receive antennas (i.e., a maximum spatial layer capability of four)”; Col. 3 lines 47-54; see also Col. 3 lines 6-22 and Col. 4 lines 3-32; “Each spatial layer that the UE 110 can receive requires a separate receive antenna, so the highest number of spatial layers that the UE 110 can receive and decode equals the maximum number of receive antennas that the UE 110 currently has available”; Col. 7 lines 61-65).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of El Chebib into the combined system/method as it would allow the number of antennas to be number of layers. Such combination would have been obvious as the references are from analogous art where combining prior art elements according to known methods would yield predictable results. Such combination would have also increased the effective data transmission throughput to a destination wireless device (El Chebib; Col. 1 lines 26-27; Col. 2 lines 21-23).
As to claim 22:
The combined system/method of Clevorn, El Chebib and Sud discloses the inventions set forth above. Clevorn further discloses wherein transmitting the indication to reduce the number of [antennas] comprises (“Regarding the switching off of one or more receive antennas it should be noted that according to LTE, as the number of the MIMO streams transmitted to the UE 105 is controlled by the NodeB 103, the UE 105 cannot simply switch antennas off without negotiation with the NodeB 103”; see Fig. 8; [0118] “the UE 105 may report a lower rank than the one it actually experiences, e.g. rank 1 instead of rank 2, to reduce the number of MIMO streams transmitted by the NodeB 103 which then enables the UE 105 to switch off antennas”; [0119] “when the UE 105 reduces the reported rank to reduce the number of antennas, the UE 105 only reduces the number of antennas when the NodeB 103 reacts to the reduced rank, i.e. reduces the number of transmitted MIMO streams.”; [0120] “the UE 105 performs a channel estimation in 807 based on received data, followed by a rank evaluation in 808 and a selection of antennas to be switched off”; [0137] “the UE 105 may compute the individual SNRs (or signal levels) per antenna, sort these SNRs and switch off the antenna(s) with the lowest SNR”; [0121]):
transmitting the indication based at least in part on a request from the first network node (“the number of the MIMO streams transmitted to the UE 105 is controlled by the NodeB 103, the UE 105 cannot simply switch antennas off without negotiation with the NodeB 103”; [0118]-[0120];), or
transmitting the indication based at least in part on a schedule for periodic reporting of whether the UE requests to reduce the number of layers (for examination purposes, this limitation has not been elected by the examiner as it is optional/alternative). El Chebib further discloses the number of antennas are directly related to the number of layers (“For example, if the UE 110 has a maximum MIMO capability of four receive antennas (i.e., a maximum spatial layer capability of four)”; Col. 3 lines 47-54; see also Col. 3 lines 6-22 and Col. 4 lines 3-32; “Each spatial layer that the UE 110 can receive requires a separate receive antenna, so the highest number of spatial layers that the UE 110 can receive and decode equals the maximum number of receive antennas that the UE 110 currently has available”; Col. 7 lines 61-65).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of El Chebib into the combined system/method as it would allow the number of antennas to be number of layers. Such combination would have been obvious as the references are from analogous art where combining prior art elements according to known methods would yield predictable results. Such combination would have also increased the effective data transmission throughput to a destination wireless device (El Chebib; Col. 1 lines 26-27; Col. 2 lines 21-23).
As to claim 23:
The combined system/method of Clevorn, El Chebib and Sud discloses the inventions set forth above. Clevorn further discloses wherein the one or more processors are further configured to, before receiving the second communication, receiving an indication of a number of [antennas] of the second communication (“ the UE 105 cannot simply switch antennas off without negotiation with the NodeB 103”; [0118]), wherein the number of [antennas] of the second communication is based at least in part on the indication to reduce the number of [antennas]
(“Regarding the switching off of one or more receive antennas it should be noted that according to LTE, as the number of the MIMO streams transmitted to the UE 105 is controlled by the NodeB 103, the UE 105 cannot simply switch antennas off without negotiation with the NodeB 103”; see Fig. 8; [0118] “the UE 105 may report a lower rank than the one it actually experiences, e.g. rank 1 instead of rank 2, to reduce the number of MIMO streams transmitted by the NodeB 103 which then enables the UE 105 to switch off antennas”; [0119] “when the UE 105 reduces the reported rank to reduce the number of antennas, the UE 105 only reduces the number of antennas when the NodeB 103 reacts to the reduced rank, i.e. reduces the number of transmitted MIMO streams.”; [0120]). El Chebib further discloses the number of antennas are directly related to a number of layers (“For example, if the UE 110 has a maximum MIMO capability of four receive antennas (i.e., a maximum spatial layer capability of four)”; Col. 3 lines 47-54; see also Col. 3 lines 6-22 and Col. 4 lines 3-32; “Each spatial layer that the UE 110 can receive requires a separate receive antenna, so the highest number of spatial layers that the UE 110 can receive and decode equals the maximum number of receive antennas that the UE 110 currently has available”; Col. 7 lines 61-65).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of El Chebib into the combined system/method as it would allow the number of antennas to be number of layers. Such combination would have been obvious as the references are from analogous art where combining prior art elements according to known methods would yield predictable results. Such combination would have also increased the effective data transmission throughput to a destination wireless device (El Chebib; Col. 1 lines 26-27; Col. 2 lines 21-23).
As to claim 31:
Clevorn discloses a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing a set of instructions for wireless communication that, when executed by one or more processors (“a processor executing software stored in a memory”; Fig. 2; [0088]) of a user equipment (UE) (UE; see Fig. 2; [0045]), cause the UE to:
receive a first communication from a first network node associated with a first cell (“data reception in 801”; see Figs. 1 and 8; [0135]; [0118]-[0121] “Each base station 103 provides radio coverage for one or more mobile radio cells 104 of the radio access network 101”; [0021] “Control and user data are transmitted between a base station 103 and a mobile terminal 105 located in the mobile radio cell 104 operated by the base station 103 over the air interface 106 on the basis of a multiple access method”; [0023] note: data reception before reducing antennas/streams = first communication);
transmit, based at least in part on a measured interference within the first communication, an indication to reduce a number of [antennas] of communication of one or more of the first network node associated with the first cell (“Regarding the switching off of one or more receive antennas it should be noted that according to LTE, as the number of the MIMO streams transmitted to the UE 105 is controlled by the NodeB 103, the UE 105 cannot simply switch antennas off without negotiation with the NodeB 103”; see Figs. 1 and 8; [0118]; [0021]; [0023] “the UE 105 may report a lower rank than the one it actually experiences, e.g. rank 1 instead of rank 2, to reduce the number of MIMO streams transmitted by the NodeB 103 which then enables the UE 105 to switch off antennas”; [0119] “when the UE 105 reduces the reported rank to reduce the number of antennas, the UE 105 only reduces the number of antennas when the NodeB 103 reacts to the reduced rank, i.e. reduces the number of transmitted MIMO streams.”; [0120] “the UE 105 performs a channel estimation in 807 based on received data, followed by a rank evaluation in 808 and a selection of antennas to be switched off”; [0137] “the UE 105 may compute the individual SNRs (or signal levels) per antenna, sort these SNRs and switch off the antenna(s) with the lowest SNR”; [0121]) or a second network node associated with a second cell (for examination purposes, this limitation has not been elected by the examiner as it is optional/alternative), wherein the indication is transmitted based at least in part on [SNR] (“Regarding the switching off of one or more receive antennas it should be noted that according to LTE, as the number of the MIMO streams transmitted to the UE 105 is controlled by the NodeB 103, the UE 105 cannot simply switch antennas off without negotiation with the NodeB 103”; see Fig. 8; [0118]-[0119] “the UE 105 performs a channel estimation in 807 based on received data, followed by a rank evaluation in 808 and a selection of antennas to be switched off”; [0137] “the UE 105 may compute the individual SNRs (or signal levels) per antenna, sort these SNRs and switch off the antenna(s) with the lowest SNR”; [0121]); and
receive, from the first network node, a second communication based at least in part on the indication to reduce the number of [antennas] (“After the selected antennas are switched off in 805, the UE 105 continues data reception with the reduced number of active antennas in 801”; see Fig. 8; [0137]; “the UE 105 may report a lower rank than the one it actually experiences, e.g. rank 1 instead of rank 2, to reduce the number of MIMO streams transmitted by the NodeB 103 which then enables the UE 105 to switch off antennas”; [0119] “when the UE 105 reduces the reported rank to reduce the number of antennas, the UE 105 only reduces the number of antennas when the NodeB 103 reacts to the reduced rank, i.e. reduces the number of transmitted MIMO streams.”; [0120]; note: data reception after reducing the antennas/streams = second communication).
Clevorn does not explicitly disclose layers.
However, El Chebib discloses a number of antennas are directly related to a number of layers (“For example, if the UE 110 has a maximum MIMO capability of four receive antennas (i.e., a maximum spatial layer capability of four)”; Col. 3 lines 47-54; see also Col. 3 lines 6-22 and Col. 4 lines 3-32; “Each spatial layer that the UE 110 can receive requires a separate receive antenna, so the highest number of spatial layers that the UE 110 can receive and decode equals the maximum number of receive antennas that the UE 110 currently has available”; Col. 7 lines 61-65).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of El Chebib into Clevorn’s system/method as it would allow Clevorn’s number of antennas to be number of layers. Such combination would have been obvious as the references are from analogous art where combining prior art elements according to known methods would yield predictable results. Such combination would have also increased the effective data transmission throughput to a destination wireless device (El Chebib; Col. 1 lines 26-27; Col. 2 lines 21-23)
The combined system/method of Clevorn and El Chebib does not explicitly disclose detection of interference from cells other than the first cell.
However, Sud discloses SNR is based on detection of interference from cells other than the first cell (“users near the edge of a cell have low SNRs because their signal is weak and there is severe inter-cell interference”; [0058]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to combine the SNR teaching of Sud into the combined system/method of Clevorn and El Chebib as it would allow the indication to be transmitted based at least in part on detection of interference from cells other than the first cell. Such combination would have been obvious as the references are from analogous art where combining prior art elements according to known methods would yield predictable results. Such combination would have also reduced interference between co-channel users (Sud; Abstract).
As to claim 32:
The combined system/method of Clevorn, El Chebib and Sud discloses the inventions set forth above. Clevorn further discloses wherein the set of instructions (“a processor executing software stored in a memory”; Fig. 2; [0088]) that cause the UE to receive the second communication based at least in part on the indication to reduce the number of [antennas] (“After the selected antennas are switched off in 805, the UE 105 continues data reception with the reduced number of active antennas in 801”; see Fig. 8; [0137]; “the UE 105 may report a lower rank than the one it actually experiences, e.g. rank 1 instead of rank 2, to reduce the number of MIMO streams transmitted by the NodeB 103 which then enables the UE 105 to switch off antennas”; [0119] “when the UE 105 reduces the reported rank to reduce the number of antennas, the UE 105 only reduces the number of antennas when the NodeB 103 reacts to the reduced rank, i.e. reduces the number of transmitted MIMO streams.”; [0120]; note: data reception after reducing the antennas/streams = second communication) further cause the UE to:
receive the second communication having fewer spatial [antennas] than the first communication (“After the selected antennas are switched off in 805, the UE 105 continues data reception with the reduced number of active antennas in 801”; see Fig. 8; [0137]; “the UE 105 may report a lower rank than the one it actually experiences, e.g. rank 1 instead of rank 2, to reduce the number of MIMO streams transmitted by the NodeB 103 which then enables the UE 105 to switch off antennas”; [0119] “when the UE 105 reduces the reported rank to reduce the number of antennas, the UE 105 only reduces the number of antennas when the NodeB 103 reacts to the reduced rank, i.e. reduces the number of transmitted MIMO streams.”; [0120]; note: data reception after reducing the antennas/streams = second communication),
receive the second communication with reduced interference based at least in part on the second network node communicating with reduced spatial layers (for examination purposes, this limitation has not been elected by the examiner as it is optional/alternative), or
receive the second communication with reduced interference based at least in part on the second network node communicating using different time or frequency domain resources from the second communication (for examination purposes, this limitation has not been elected by the examiner as it is optional/alternative). El Chebib further discloses antennas are directly related to spatial layers (“For example, if the UE 110 has a maximum MIMO capability of four receive antennas (i.e., a maximum spatial layer capability of four)”; Col. 3 lines 47-54; see also Col. 3 lines 6-22 and Col. 4 lines 3-32; “Each spatial layer that the UE 110 can receive requires a separate receive antenna, so the highest number of spatial layers that the UE 110 can receive and decode equals the maximum number of receive antennas that the UE 110 currently has available”; Col. 7 lines 61-65).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of El Chebib into the combined system/method as it would allow the number of antennas to be number of layers. Such combination would have been obvious as the references are from analogous art where combining prior art elements according to known methods would yield predictable results. Such combination would have also increased the effective data transmission throughput to a destination wireless device (El Chebib; Col. 1 lines 26-27; Col. 2 lines 21-23).
As to claim 34:
The combined system/method of Clevorn, El Chebib and Sud discloses the inventions set forth above. Clevorn further discloses wherein transmitting the indication to reduce the number of [antennas] (“Regarding the switching off of one or more receive antennas it should be noted that according to LTE, as the number of the MIMO streams transmitted to the UE 105 is controlled by the NodeB 103, the UE 105 cannot simply switch antennas off without negotiation with the NodeB 103”; see Fig. 8; [0118] “the UE 105 may report a lower rank than the one it actually experiences, e.g. rank 1 instead of rank 2, to reduce the number of MIMO streams transmitted by the NodeB 103 which then enables the UE 105 to switch off antennas”; [0119] “when the UE 105 reduces the reported rank to reduce the number of antennas, the UE 105 only reduces the number of antennas when the NodeB 103 reacts to the reduced rank, i.e. reduces the number of transmitted MIMO streams.”; [0120] “the UE 105 performs a channel estimation in 807 based on received data, followed by a rank evaluation in 808 and a selection of antennas to be switched off”; [0137] “the UE 105 may compute the individual SNRs (or signal levels) per antenna, sort these SNRs and switch off the antenna(s) with the lowest SNR”; [0121]) is based at least in part on one or more of:
the measured interference satisfying a threshold (“Based on the channels estimates the UE 105 may compute the individual SNRs (or signal levels) per antenna, sort these SNRs and switch off the antenna(s) with the lowest SNR”; [0121]; [0094]; [0138]), or
a covariance matrix associated with the first communication (for examination purposes, this limitation has not been elected by the examiner as it is optional/alternative). El Chebib further discloses the number of antennas are directly related to the number of layers (“For example, if the UE 110 has a maximum MIMO capability of four receive antennas (i.e., a maximum spatial layer capability of four)”; Col. 3 lines 47-54; see also Col. 3 lines 6-22 and Col. 4 lines 3-32; “Each spatial layer that the UE 110 can receive requires a separate receive antenna, so the highest number of spatial layers that the UE 110 can receive and decode equals the maximum number of receive antennas that the UE 110 currently has available”; Col. 7 lines 61-65).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of El Chebib into the combined system/method as it would allow the number of antennas to be number of layers. Such combination would have been obvious as the references are from analogous art where combining prior art elements according to known methods would yield predictable results. Such combination would have also increased the effective data transmission throughput to a destination wireless device (El Chebib; Col. 1 lines 26-27; Col. 2 lines 21-23).
As to claim 37:
The combined system/method of Clevorn, El Chebib and Sud discloses the inventions set forth above. Clevorn further discloses wherein the set of instructions that cause the UE to transmit the indication to reduce the number of [antennas] (“Regarding the switching off of one or more receive antennas it should be noted that according to LTE, as the number of the MIMO streams transmitted to the UE 105 is controlled by the NodeB 103, the UE 105 cannot simply switch antennas off without negotiation with the NodeB 103”; see Fig. 8; [0118] “the UE 105 may report a lower rank than the one it actually experiences, e.g. rank 1 instead of rank 2, to reduce the number of MIMO streams transmitted by the NodeB 103 which then enables the UE 105 to switch off antennas”; [0119] “when the UE 105 reduces the reported rank to reduce the number of antennas, the UE 105 only reduces the number of antennas when the NodeB 103 reacts to the reduced rank, i.e. reduces the number of transmitted MIMO streams.”; [0120] “the UE 105 performs a channel estimation in 807 based on received data, followed by a rank evaluation in 808 and a selection of antennas to be switched off”; [0137] “the UE 105 may compute the individual SNRs (or signal levels) per antenna, sort these SNRs and switch off the antenna(s) with the lowest SNR”; [0121]) further cause the UE to:
transmit the indication based at least in part on a request from the first network node (“the number of the MIMO streams transmitted to the UE 105 is controlled by the NodeB 103, the UE 105 cannot simply switch antennas off without negotiation with the NodeB 103”; [0118]-[0120]), or transmit the indication based at least in part on a schedule for periodic reporting of whether the UE requests to reduce the number of layers (for examination purposes, this limitation has not been elected by the examiner as it is optional/alternative). El Chebib further discloses the number of antennas are directly related to the number of layers (“For example, if the UE 110 has a maximum MIMO capability of four receive antennas (i.e., a maximum spatial layer capability of four)”; Col. 3 lines 47-54; see also Col. 3 lines 6-22 and Col. 4 lines 3-32; “Each spatial layer that the UE 110 can receive requires a separate receive antenna, so the highest number of spatial layers that the UE 110 can receive and decode equals the maximum number of receive antennas that the UE 110 currently has available”; Col. 7 lines 61-65).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of El Chebib into the combined system/method as it would allow the number of antennas to be number of layers. Such combination would have been obvious as the references are from analogous art where combining prior art elements according to known methods would yield predictable results. Such combination would have also increased the effective data transmission throughput to a destination wireless device (El Chebib; Col. 1 lines 26-27; Col. 2 lines 21-23).
As to claim 38:
The combined system/method of Clevorn, El Chebib and Sud discloses the inventions set forth above. Clevorn further discloses wherein the set of instructions further cause the UE to, before receiving the second communication, receive an indication of a number of [antennas] of the second communication (“ the UE 105 cannot simply switch antennas off without negotiation with the NodeB 103”; [0118]),
wherein the number of [antennas] of the second communication is based at least in part on the indication to reduce the number of [antennas] (“Regarding the switching off of one or more receive antennas it should be noted that according to LTE, as the number of the MIMO streams transmitted to the UE 105 is controlled by the NodeB 103, the UE 105 cannot simply switch antennas off without negotiation with the NodeB 103”; see Fig. 8; [0118] “the UE 105 may report a lower rank than the one it actually experiences, e.g. rank 1 instead of rank 2, to reduce the number of MIMO streams transmitted by the NodeB 103 which then enables the UE 105 to switch off antennas”; [0119] “when the UE 105 reduces the reported rank to reduce the number of antennas, the UE 105 only reduces the number of antennas when the NodeB 103 reacts to the reduced rank, i.e. reduces the number of transmitted MIMO streams.”; [0120]). El Chebib further discloses the number of antennas are directly related to a number of layers (“For example, if the UE 110 has a maximum MIMO capability of four receive antennas (i.e., a maximum spatial layer capability of four)”; Col. 3 lines 47-54; see also Col. 3 lines 6-22 and Col. 4 lines 3-32; “Each spatial layer that the UE 110 can receive requires a separate receive antenna, so the highest number of spatial layers that the UE 110 can receive and decode equals the maximum number of receive antennas that the UE 110 currently has available”; Col. 7 lines 61-65).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of El Chebib into the combined system/method as it would allow the number of antennas to be number of layers. Such combination would have been obvious as the references are from analogous art where combining prior art elements according to known methods would yield predictable results. Such combination would have also increased the effective data transmission throughput to a destination wireless device (El Chebib; Col. 1 lines 26-27; Col. 2 lines 21-23).
Claims 3, 19 and 33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Clevorn (US 2014/0140424 A1) in view of El Chebib (US 10,439,681 B1) in view of Sud (US 2014/0098743 A1) and further in view of Tang et al. (US 2025/0175906 A1, hereinafter “Tang”).
As to claim 3:
The combined system/method of Clevorn, El Chebib and Sud discloses the inventions set forth above. Clevorn further discloses wherein a type of reduction of the number of [antennas] is based at least in part on [SINR] (“Regarding the switching off of one or more receive antennas it should be noted that according to LTE, as the number of the MIMO streams transmitted to the UE 105 is controlled by the NodeB 103, the UE 105 cannot simply switch antennas off without negotiation with the NodeB 103”; see Fig. 8; [0118] “the UE 105 may report a lower rank than the one it actually experiences, e.g. rank 1 instead of rank 2, to reduce the number of MIMO streams transmitted by the NodeB 103 which then enables the UE 105 to switch off antennas”; [0119] “when the UE 105 reduces the reported rank to reduce the number of antennas, the UE 105 only reduces the number of antennas when the NodeB 103 reacts to the reduced rank, i.e. reduces the number of transmitted MIMO streams.”; [0120] “the UE 105 performs a channel estimation in 807 based on received data, followed by a rank evaluation in 808 and a selection of antennas to be switched off”; [0137] “the UE 105 may compute the individual SNRs (or signal levels) per antenna, sort these SNRs and switch off the antenna(s) with the lowest SNR”; [0121]). El Chebib further discloses the number of antennas are directly related to the number of layers (“For example, if the UE 110 has a maximum MIMO capability of four receive antennas (i.e., a maximum spatial layer capability of four)”; Col. 3 lines 47-54; see also Col. 3 lines 6-22 and Col. 4 lines 3-32; “Each spatial layer that the UE 110 can receive requires a separate receive antenna, so the highest number of spatial layers that the UE 110 can receive and decode equals the maximum number of receive antennas that the UE 110 currently has available”; Col. 7 lines 61-65).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of El Chebib into the combined system/method as it would allow the number of antennas to be number of layers. Such combination would have been obvious as the references are from analogous art where combining prior art elements according to known methods would yield predictable results. Such combination would have also increased the effective data transmission throughput to a destination wireless device (El Chebib; Col. 1 lines 26-27; Col. 2 lines 21-23).
The combined system/method of Clevorn, El Chebib and Sud does not explicitly disclose a priority of the UE relative to a priority of an additional UE associated with the measured interference.
However, Tang discloses in order to reduce or avoid interference, a priority of the UE relative to a priority of an additional UE associated with the measured interference must be considered (“When measured interference from one or more other UEs exceeds a threshold, when the UE has a higher priority than the one or more other UEs, the UE requests the one or more other UEs to reduce interference. This may involve having the one or more other UEs reduce power or change sensing resources. When measurement interference from one or more other UEs exceeds a threshold, when the UE has a lower priority than other UEs, the UE reduces its power or changing sensing resources, or both, to avoid interference with the one or more other UEs”; [0082]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Tang into the combined system/method of Clevorn, El Chebib and Sud as it would allow a type of reduction of the number of layers to be based at least in part on a priority of the UE relative to a priority of an additional UE associated with the measured interference. Such combination would have been obvious as the references are from analogous art, where a motivation would have been to reduce or avoid interference (Tang; [0082]; [0007]).
As to claim 19:
The combined system/method of Clevorn, El Chebib and Sud discloses the inventions set forth above. Clevorn further discloses wherein a type of reduction of the number of [antennas] is based at least in part on [SINR] (“Regarding the switching off of one or more receive antennas it should be noted that according to LTE, as the number of the MIMO streams transmitted to the UE 105 is controlled by the NodeB 103, the UE 105 cannot simply switch antennas off without negotiation with the NodeB 103”; see Fig. 8; [0118] “the UE 105 may report a lower rank than the one it actually experiences, e.g. rank 1 instead of rank 2, to reduce the number of MIMO streams transmitted by the NodeB 103 which then enables the UE 105 to switch off antennas”; [0119] “when the UE 105 reduces the reported rank to reduce the number of antennas, the UE 105 only reduces the number of antennas when the NodeB 103 reacts to the reduced rank, i.e. reduces the number of transmitted MIMO streams.”; [0120] “the UE 105 performs a channel estimation in 807 based on received data, followed by a rank evaluation in 808 and a selection of antennas to be switched off”; [0137] “the UE 105 may compute the individual SNRs (or signal levels) per antenna, sort these SNRs and switch off the antenna(s) with the lowest SNR”; [0121]). El Chebib further discloses the number of antennas are directly related to the number of layers (“For example, if the UE 110 has a maximum MIMO capability of four receive antennas (i.e., a maximum spatial layer capability of four)”; Col. 3 lines 47-54; see also Col. 3 lines 6-22 and Col. 4 lines 3-32; “Each spatial layer that the UE 110 can receive requires a separate receive antenna, so the highest number of spatial layers that the UE 110 can receive and decode equals the maximum number of receive antennas that the UE 110 currently has available”; Col. 7 lines 61-65).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of El Chebib into the combined system/method as it would allow the number of antennas to be number of layers. Such combination would have been obvious as the references are from analogous art where combining prior art elements according to known methods would yield predictable results. Such combination would have also increased the effective data transmission throughput to a destination wireless device (El Chebib; Col. 1 lines 26-27; Col. 2 lines 21-23).
The combined system/method of Clevorn, El Chebib and Sud does not explicitly disclose a priority of the UE relative to a priority of an additional UE associated with the measured interference.
However, Tang discloses in order to reduce or avoid interference, a priority of the UE relative to a priority of an additional UE associated with the measured interference must be considered (“When measured interference from one or more other UEs exceeds a threshold, when the UE has a higher priority than the one or more other UEs, the UE requests the one or more other UEs to reduce interference. This may involve having the one or more other UEs reduce power or change sensing resources. When measurement interference from one or more other UEs exceeds a threshold, when the UE has a lower priority than other UEs, the UE reduces its power or changing sensing resources, or both, to avoid interference with the one or more other UEs”; [0082]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Tang into the combined system/method of Clevorn, El Chebib and Sud as it would allow a type of reduction of the number of layers to be based at least in part on a priority of the UE relative to a priority of an additional UE associated with the measured interference. Such combination would have been obvious as the references are from analogous art, where a motivation would have been to reduce or avoid interference (Tang; [0082]; [0007]).
As to claim 33:
The combined system/method of Clevorn, El Chebib and Sud discloses the inventions set forth above. Clevorn further discloses wherein a type of reduction of the number of [antennas] is based at least in part on [SINR] (“Regarding the switching off of one or more receive antennas it should be noted that according to LTE, as the number of the MIMO streams transmitted to the UE 105 is controlled by the NodeB 103, the UE 105 cannot simply switch antennas off without negotiation with the NodeB 103”; see Fig. 8; [0118] “the UE 105 may report a lower rank than the one it actually experiences, e.g. rank 1 instead of rank 2, to reduce the number of MIMO streams transmitted by the NodeB 103 which then enables the UE 105 to switch off antennas”; [0119] “when the UE 105 reduces the reported rank to reduce the number of antennas, the UE 105 only reduces the number of antennas when the NodeB 103 reacts to the reduced rank, i.e. reduces the number of transmitted MIMO streams.”; [0120] “the UE 105 performs a channel estimation in 807 based on received data, followed by a rank evaluation in 808 and a selection of antennas to be switched off”; [0137] “the UE 105 may compute the individual SNRs (or signal levels) per antenna, sort these SNRs and switch off the antenna(s) with the lowest SNR”; [0121]). El Chebib further discloses the number of antennas are directly related to the number of layers (“For example, if the UE 110 has a maximum MIMO capability of four receive antennas (i.e., a maximum spatial layer capability of four)”; Col. 3 lines 47-54; see also Col. 3 lines 6-22 and Col. 4 lines 3-32; “Each spatial layer that the UE 110 can receive requires a separate receive antenna, so the highest number of spatial layers that the UE 110 can receive and decode equals the maximum number of receive antennas that the UE 110 currently has available”; Col. 7 lines 61-65).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of El Chebib into the combined system/method as it would allow the number of antennas to be number of layers. Such combination would have been obvious as the references are from analogous art where combining prior art elements according to known methods would yield predictable results. Such combination would have also increased the effective data transmission throughput to a destination wireless device (El Chebib; Col. 1 lines 26-27; Col. 2 lines 21-23).
The combined system/method of Clevorn, El Chebib and Sud does not explicitly disclose a priority of the UE relative to a priority of an additional UE associated with the measured interference.
However, Tang discloses in order to reduce or avoid interference, a priority of the UE relative to a priority of an additional UE associated with the measured interference must be considered (“When measured interference from one or more other UEs exceeds a threshold, when the UE has a higher priority than the one or more other UEs, the UE requests the one or more other UEs to reduce interference. This may involve having the one or more other UEs reduce power or change sensing resources. When measurement interference from one or more other UEs exceeds a threshold, when the UE has a lower priority than other UEs, the UE reduces its power or changing sensing resources, or both, to avoid interference with the one or more other UEs”; [0082]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Tang into the combined system/method of Clevorn, El Chebib and Sud as it would allow a type of reduction of the number of layers to be based at least in part on a priority of the UE relative to a priority of an additional UE associated with the measured interference. Such combination would have been obvious as the references are from analogous art, where a motivation would have been to reduce or avoid interference (Tang; [0082]; [0007]).
Claims 5-6, 21, 35-36 and 39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Clevorn (US 2014/0140424 A1) in view of El Chebib (US 10,439,681 B1) in view of Sud (US 2014/0098743 A1) and further in view of Abotabl et al. (US 2021/0194663 A1, hereinafter “Abotabl”).
As to claim 5:
The combined system/method of Clevorn, El Chebib and Sud discloses the inventions set forth above. Clevorn further discloses wherein the indication to reduce the number of [antennas] (“Regarding the switching off of one or more receive antennas it should be noted that according to LTE, as the number of the MIMO streams transmitted to the UE 105 is controlled by the NodeB 103, the UE 105 cannot simply switch antennas off without negotiation with the NodeB 103”; see Fig. 8; [0118] “the UE 105 may report a lower rank than the one it actually experiences, e.g. rank 1 instead of rank 2, to reduce the number of MIMO streams transmitted by the NodeB 103 which then enables the UE 105 to switch off antennas”; [0119] “when the UE 105 reduces the reported rank to reduce the number of antennas, the UE 105 only reduces the number of antennas when the NodeB 103 reacts to the reduced rank, i.e. reduces the number of transmitted MIMO streams.”; [0120] “the UE 105 performs a channel estimation in 807 based on received data, followed by a rank evaluation in 808 and a selection of antennas to be switched off”; [0137] “the UE 105 may compute the individual SNRs (or signal levels) per antenna, sort these SNRs and switch off the antenna(s) with the lowest SNR”; [0121]) comprises an indication of a maximum number of [antennas] of communication for communications by the first network node (“To reduce the number of active antennas (i.e. switch off one or more antennas, i.e. use reduce the number of antennas used for the MIMO reception), the UE 105 may in case of good radio conditions and high data rate reception but low rank reduce the number of antennas to the rank it reports with the rank indicator. In the case of only low data rate reception in good conditions and a high rank, the UE 105 may report a lower rank than the one it actually experiences, e.g. rank 1 instead of rank 2, to reduce the number of MIMO streams transmitted by the NodeB 103 which then enables the UE 105 to switch off antennas”; [0119]). El Chebib further discloses the number of antennas are directly related to the number of layers (“For example, if the UE 110 has a maximum MIMO capability of four receive antennas (i.e., a maximum spatial layer capability of four)”; Col. 3 lines 47-54; see also Col. 3 lines 6-22 and Col. 4 lines 3-32; “Each spatial layer that the UE 110 can receive requires a separate receive antenna, so the highest number of spatial layers that the UE 110 can receive and decode equals the maximum number of receive antennas that the UE 110 currently has available”; Col. 7 lines 61-65) and an indication of a maximum number of layers of communication for communications by the first network node and the second network node (“UE 110 may further report the UE 110's maximum MIMO capability to the primary base station 100-1. The UE 110's maximum MIMO capability includes the maximum number of spatial layers that the UE 110 can currently receive”; Col. 2 lines 56-68 “For example, if the UE 110 has a maximum MIMO capability of four receive antennas (i.e., a maximum spatial layer capability of four), and the primary base station 100-1 has two transmit antennas available, then sector scheduler 115-1 may select two adjacent sectors (4 receive antennas−2 available transmit antennas=2 sectors) that are served by the secondary base station 100-2 (or are served by the secondary base station 100-2”; Col. 3 lines 22-67).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of El Chebib into the combined system/method as it would allow the number of antennas to be number of layers and to have an indication of a maximum number of layers of communication for communications by the first network node and the second network node. Such combination would have been obvious as the references are from analogous art where combining prior art elements according to known methods would yield predictable results. Such combination would have also increased the effective data transmission throughput to a destination wireless device (El Chebib; Col. 1 lines 26-27; Col. 2 lines 21-23).
The combined system/method of Clevorn, El Chebib and Sud does not explicitly disclose wherein the communications by the first network node and the second network node interfere with the first communication and the second communication via one or more of time or frequency resources.
However, Abotabl discloses the communications by the first network node and the second network node interfere with the first communication and the second communication via one or more of time or frequency resources (“That is, the first BS 402b can receive a first signal in UL resources from the first UE 404b concurrently with transmitting a second signal in DL resources to the first UE 404b; and the first UE 404b can receive the second signal in DL resources from the first BS 402b concurrently with transmitting the first signal in UL resources to the first BS 402b. Accordingly, self-interference may occur at either or both of the first BS 402b and/or the first UE 404b as a result of the first signal and the second signal being simultaneously communicated between the first BS 402b and the first UE 404b. Further interference may also occur at the first UE 404b based on one or more signals emitted from a second UE 406b and/or a second BS 408b in proximity to the first UE 404b”; see Fig. 4B; [0058]; [0056]; [0060]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Abotabl into the combined system/method of Clevorn, El Chebib and Sud as it would allow the communications by the first network node and the second network node to interfere with the first communication and the second communication via one or more of time or frequency resources. Such combination would have been obvious as the references are from analogous art where combining prior art elements according to known methods would yield predictable results. Such combination would have also improved spectral efficiency and reduced interference (Abotabl; [0090]).
As to claim 6:
The combined system/method of Clevorn, El Chebib, Sud and Abotabl discloses the inventions set forth above. El Chebib further discloses wherein the maximum number of layers of communication is based at least in part on one or more of a number of receivers of the UE or thermal noise of the UE ( “For example, if the UE 110 has a maximum MIMO capability of four receive antennas (i.e., a maximum spatial layer capability of four), and the primary base station 100-1 has two transmit antennas available, then sector scheduler 115-1 may select two adjacent sectors (4 receive antennas−2 available transmit antennas=2 sectors) that are served by the secondary base station 100-2 (or are served by the secondary base station 100-2”; Col. 3 lines 22-67 “UE 110 may further report the UE 110's maximum MIMO capability to the primary base station 100-1. The UE 110's maximum MIMO capability includes the maximum number of spatial layers that the UE 110 can currently receive”; Col. 2 lines 56-68; note: for examination purposes the examiner has elected “a number of receivers of the UE” from the group of alternatives).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of El Chebib into the combined system/method as it would allow the maximum number of layers of communication to be based at least in part on one or more of a number of receivers of the UE or thermal noise of the UE. Such combination would have been obvious as the references are from analogous art where combining prior art elements according to known methods would yield predictable results. Such combination would have also increased the effective data transmission throughput to a destination wireless device (El Chebib; Col. 1 lines 26-27; Col. 2 lines 21-23).
As to claim 21:
The combined system/method of Clevorn, El Chebib and Sud discloses the inventions set forth above. Clevorn further discloses wherein the indication to reduce the number of [antennas] (“Regarding the switching off of one or more receive antennas it should be noted that according to LTE, as the number of the MIMO streams transmitted to the UE 105 is controlled by the NodeB 103, the UE 105 cannot simply switch antennas off without negotiation with the NodeB 103”; see Fig. 8; [0118] “the UE 105 may report a lower rank than the one it actually experiences, e.g. rank 1 instead of rank 2, to reduce the number of MIMO streams transmitted by the NodeB 103 which then enables the UE 105 to switch off antennas”; [0119] “when the UE 105 reduces the reported rank to reduce the number of antennas, the UE 105 only reduces the number of antennas when the NodeB 103 reacts to the reduced rank, i.e. reduces the number of transmitted MIMO streams.”; [0120] “the UE 105 performs a channel estimation in 807 based on received data, followed by a rank evaluation in 808 and a selection of antennas to be switched off”; [0137] “the UE 105 may compute the individual SNRs (or signal levels) per antenna, sort these SNRs and switch off the antenna(s) with the lowest SNR”; [0121]) comprises an indication of a maximum number of [antennas] of communication for communications by the first network node (“To reduce the number of active antennas (i.e. switch off one or more antennas, i.e. use reduce the number of antennas used for the MIMO reception), the UE 105 may in case of good radio conditions and high data rate reception but low rank reduce the number of antennas to the rank it reports with the rank indicator. In the case of only low data rate reception in good conditions and a high rank, the UE 105 may report a lower rank than the one it actually experiences, e.g. rank 1 instead of rank 2, to reduce the number of MIMO streams transmitted by the NodeB 103 which then enables the UE 105 to switch off antennas”; [0119]). El Chebib further discloses the number of antennas are directly related to the number of layers (“For example, if the UE 110 has a maximum MIMO capability of four receive antennas (i.e., a maximum spatial layer capability of four)”; Col. 3 lines 47-54; see also Col. 3 lines 6-22 and Col. 4 lines 3-32; “Each spatial layer that the UE 110 can receive requires a separate receive antenna, so the highest number of spatial layers that the UE 110 can receive and decode equals the maximum number of receive antennas that the UE 110 currently has available”; Col. 7 lines 61-65) and an indication of a maximum number of layers of communication for communications by the first network node and the second network node (“UE 110 may further report the UE 110's maximum MIMO capability to the primary base station 100-1. The UE 110's maximum MIMO capability includes the maximum number of spatial layers that the UE 110 can currently receive”; Col. 2 lines 56-68 “For example, if the UE 110 has a maximum MIMO capability of four receive antennas (i.e., a maximum spatial layer capability of four), and the primary base station 100-1 has two transmit antennas available, then sector scheduler 115-1 may select two adjacent sectors (4 receive antennas−2 available transmit antennas=2 sectors) that are served by the secondary base station 100-2 (or are served by the secondary base station 100-2”; Col. 3 lines 22-67).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of El Chebib into the combined system/method as it would allow the number of antennas to be number of layers and to have an indication of a maximum number of layers of communication for communications by the first network node and the second network node . Such combination would have been obvious as the references are from analogous art where combining prior art elements according to known methods would yield predictable results. Such combination would have also increased the effective data transmission throughput to a destination wireless device (El Chebib; Col. 1 lines 26-27; Col. 2 lines 21-23).
The combined system/method of Clevorn, El Chebib and Sud does not explicitly disclose wherein the communications by the first network node and the second network node interfere with the first communication and the second communication via one or more of time or frequency resources.
However, Abotabl discloses the communications by the first network node and the second network node interfere with the first communication and the second communication via one or more of time or frequency resources (“That is, the first BS 402b can receive a first signal in UL resources from the first UE 404b concurrently with transmitting a second signal in DL resources to the first UE 404b; and the first UE 404b can receive the second signal in DL resources from the first BS 402b concurrently with transmitting the first signal in UL resources to the first BS 402b. Accordingly, self-interference may occur at either or both of the first BS 402b and/or the first UE 404b as a result of the first signal and the second signal being simultaneously communicated between the first BS 402b and the first UE 404b. Further interference may also occur at the first UE 404b based on one or more signals emitted from a second UE 406b and/or a second BS 408b in proximity to the first UE 404b”; see Fig. 4B; [0058]; [0056]; [0060]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Abotabl into the combined system/method of Clevorn, El Chebib and Sud as it would allow the communications by the first network node and the second network node to interfere with the first communication and the second communication via one or more of time or frequency resources. Such combination would have been obvious as the references are from analogous art where combining prior art elements according to known methods would yield predictable results. Such combination would have also improved spectral efficiency and reduced interference (Abotabl; [0090]).
As to claim 35:
The combined system/method of Clevorn, El Chebib and Sud discloses the inventions set forth above. Clevorn further discloses wherein the indication to reduce the number of [antennas] (“Regarding the switching off of one or more receive antennas it should be noted that according to LTE, as the number of the MIMO streams transmitted to the UE 105 is controlled by the NodeB 103, the UE 105 cannot simply switch antennas off without negotiation with the NodeB 103”; see Fig. 8; [0118] “the UE 105 may report a lower rank than the one it actually experiences, e.g. rank 1 instead of rank 2, to reduce the number of MIMO streams transmitted by the NodeB 103 which then enables the UE 105 to switch off antennas”; [0119] “when the UE 105 reduces the reported rank to reduce the number of antennas, the UE 105 only reduces the number of antennas when the NodeB 103 reacts to the reduced rank, i.e. reduces the number of transmitted MIMO streams.”; [0120] “the UE 105 performs a channel estimation in 807 based on received data, followed by a rank evaluation in 808 and a selection of antennas to be switched off”; [0137] “the UE 105 may compute the individual SNRs (or signal levels) per antenna, sort these SNRs and switch off the antenna(s) with the lowest SNR”; [0121]) comprises an indication of a maximum number of [antennas] of communication for communications by the first network node (“To reduce the number of active antennas (i.e. switch off one or more antennas, i.e. use reduce the number of antennas used for the MIMO reception), the UE 105 may in case of good radio conditions and high data rate reception but low rank reduce the number of antennas to the rank it reports with the rank indicator. In the case of only low data rate reception in good conditions and a high rank, the UE 105 may report a lower rank than the one it actually experiences, e.g. rank 1 instead of rank 2, to reduce the number of MIMO streams transmitted by the NodeB 103 which then enables the UE 105 to switch off antennas”; [0119]). El Chebib further discloses the number of antennas are directly related to the number of layers (“For example, if the UE 110 has a maximum MIMO capability of four receive antennas (i.e., a maximum spatial layer capability of four)”; Col. 3 lines 47-54; see also Col. 3 lines 6-22 and Col. 4 lines 3-32; “Each spatial layer that the UE 110 can receive requires a separate receive antenna, so the highest number of spatial layers that the UE 110 can receive and decode equals the maximum number of receive antennas that the UE 110 currently has available”; Col. 7 lines 61-65) and an indication of a maximum number of layers of communication for communications by the first network node and the second network node (“UE 110 may further report the UE 110's maximum MIMO capability to the primary base station 100-1. The UE 110's maximum MIMO capability includes the maximum number of spatial layers that the UE 110 can currently receive”; Col. 2 lines 56-68 “For example, if the UE 110 has a maximum MIMO capability of four receive antennas (i.e., a maximum spatial layer capability of four), and the primary base station 100-1 has two transmit antennas available, then sector scheduler 115-1 may select two adjacent sectors (4 receive antennas−2 available transmit antennas=2 sectors) that are served by the secondary base station 100-2 (or are served by the secondary base station 100-2”; Col. 3 lines 22-67).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of El Chebib into the combined system/method as it would allow the number of antennas to be number of layers and to have an indication of a maximum number of layers of communication for communications by the first network node and the second network node . Such combination would have been obvious as the references are from analogous art where combining prior art elements according to known methods would yield predictable results. Such combination would have also increased the effective data transmission throughput to a destination wireless device (El Chebib; Col. 1 lines 26-27; Col. 2 lines 21-23).
The combined system/method of Clevorn, El Chebib and Sud does not explicitly disclose wherein the communications by the first network node and the second network node interfere with the first communication and the second communication via one or more of time or frequency resources.
However, Abotabl discloses the communications by the first network node and the second network node interfere with the first communication and the second communication via one or more of time or frequency resources (“That is, the first BS 402b can receive a first signal in UL resources from the first UE 404b concurrently with transmitting a second signal in DL resources to the first UE 404b; and the first UE 404b can receive the second signal in DL resources from the first BS 402b concurrently with transmitting the first signal in UL resources to the first BS 402b. Accordingly, self-interference may occur at either or both of the first BS 402b and/or the first UE 404b as a result of the first signal and the second signal being simultaneously communicated between the first BS 402b and the first UE 404b. Further interference may also occur at the first UE 404b based on one or more signals emitted from a second UE 406b and/or a second BS 408b in proximity to the first UE 404b”; see Fig. 4B; [0058]; [0056]; [0060]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Abotabl into the combined system/method of Clevorn and El Chebib as it would allow the communications by the first network node and the second network node to interfere with the first communication and the second communication via one or more of time or frequency resources. Such combination would have been obvious as the references are from analogous art where combining prior art elements according to known methods would yield predictable results. Such combination would have also improved spectral efficiency and reduced interference (Abotabl; [0090]).
As to claim 36:
The combined system/method of Clevorn, El Chebib, Sud and Abotabl discloses the inventions set forth above. El Chebib further discloses wherein the maximum number of layers of communication is based at least in part on one or more of a number of receivers of the UE or thermal noise of the UE ( “For example, if the UE 110 has a maximum MIMO capability of four receive antennas (i.e., a maximum spatial layer capability of four), and the primary base station 100-1 has two transmit antennas available, then sector scheduler 115-1 may select two adjacent sectors (4 receive antennas−2 available transmit antennas=2 sectors) that are served by the secondary base station 100-2 (or are served by the secondary base station 100-2”; Col. 3 lines 22-67 “UE 110 may further report the UE 110's maximum MIMO capability to the primary base station 100-1. The UE 110's maximum MIMO capability includes the maximum number of spatial layers that the UE 110 can currently receive”; Col. 2 lines 56-68; note: for examination purposes the examiner has elected “a number of receivers of the UE” from the group of alternatives).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of El Chebib into the combined system/method as it would allow the maximum number of layers of communication to be based at least in part on one or more of a number of receivers of the UE or thermal noise of the UE. Such combination would have been obvious as the references are from analogous art where combining prior art elements according to known methods would yield predictable results. Such combination would have also increased the effective data transmission throughput to a destination wireless device (El Chebib; Col. 1 lines 26-27; Col. 2 lines 21-23).
As to claim 39:
The combined system/method of Clevorn, El Chebib, Sud and Abotabl discloses the inventions set forth above. El Chebib further discloses wherein the maximum number of layers of communication is based at least in part on one or more of a number of receivers of the UE or thermal noise of the UE ( “For example, if the UE 110 has a maximum MIMO capability of four receive antennas (i.e., a maximum spatial layer capability of four), and the primary base station 100-1 has two transmit antennas available, then sector scheduler 115-1 may select two adjacent sectors (4 receive antennas−2 available transmit antennas=2 sectors) that are served by the secondary base station 100-2 (or are served by the secondary base station 100-2”; Col. 3 lines 22-67 “UE 110 may further report the UE 110's maximum MIMO capability to the primary base station 100-1. The UE 110's maximum MIMO capability includes the maximum number of spatial layers that the UE 110 can currently receive”; Col. 2 lines 56-68; note: for examination purposes the examiner has elected “a number of receivers of the UE” from the group of alternatives).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of El Chebib into the combined system/method as it would allow the maximum number of layers of communication to be based at least in part on one or more of a number of receivers of the UE or thermal noise of the UE. Such combination would have been obvious as the references are from analogous art where combining prior art elements according to known methods would yield predictable results. Such combination would have also increased the effective data transmission throughput to a destination wireless device (El Chebib; Col. 1 lines 26-27; Col. 2 lines 21-23).
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 MARIELA VIDAL CARPIO whose telephone number is (571)272-1250. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00AM to 5:00PM.
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, Ayaz Sheikh can be reached at (571)272-3795. 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.
/MARIELA VIDAL CARPIO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2476
Prosecution Insights