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 – Objections
Applicant’s arguments filed 11/24/2025, with respect to the objections of claims 5 and 6 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objections of claims 5 and 6 has been withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-3, and 9-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al. (EP 3221994 B1), hereinafter Zhang 1 in view of Zhang et al. (2021/0218511), hereinafter Zhang 2.
Re. Claim 1, Zhang 1 teaches a method for scheduling spectrum resources, comprising: obtaining a grid according to dividing a cell in a network, wherein each grid corresponds to one resource block (RB) or one resource block group (RBG) (Fig. 5, ¶0042 - At block 301, a coverage area of the base station is divided into grids, wherein each grid corresponds to a grid index. & ¶0047 - According to the determined minimum units of the grid, the coverage area of the base station is divided into several grids. Examiner interprets that the visual of Fig. 5 shows that one grid, designated for one user, takes up the entirety of resource block 5); performing an interference mark on the grid according to the offline feature data, to obtain a mark model (¶0045 - grid indexes are assigned for the grids. In one embodiment, the grids may be indexed according to an interference sequence relationship between the grids & ¶0062 - The interference level between different users may be estimated according to the PMI or the space channel information and the CQI, RI information. If the interference level is higher than the predefined threshold, the users are in the same grid. If the interference level is not higher than the predefined threshold, the users are not in the same grid. Due to lack of express written definition within the specification or the claim language itself, Examiner interprets the “mark model” to be a collection on interference marks that provide a working model representing the interference across the grid, as per its use in ¶0051-¶0056. Examiner finds this interpretation to be reasonable and is reflected in the mapping provided, which likewise shows that the interference level is estimated and indexed into a model using feature data from different users. Examiner refers to the definition on ¶0031 of the present specification “The historical feature data includes path loss data, beam information, transmission modes, A/N information, resource information, a channel quality indication (CQI), a modulation coding scheme (MCS), rank indicator (RI), and the like” as his reasonable interpretation of “offline feature data”.); and scheduling spectrum resources according to the mark model (¶0063 - Based on the above determination result, grid indexes and reference signal port indexes are assigned to the users. For example, users in the same grid are assigned with the same grid index and different reference signal port indexes. Users in different grids are assigned with different grid indexes. Using the above stated interpretation of the “mark model”, Examiner finds that determining resources on the basis of the grid index assigned by interference discloses the above stated limitation).
However, Zhang 1 does not expressly teach obtaining offline feature data.
Yet, Zhang 2 explicitly teaches obtaining offline feature data (¶0087 - a second device receives first data information and/or a reference signal transmitted by at least one first device. & ¶0092 - the feedback information may include at least one of the following: hybrid automatic repeat request acknowledgement (HARQ-ACK, which may include ACK/NACK) information, channel state information (CSI), a modulation and coding scheme (MCS), channel quality indicator (CQI), a precoding matrix indicator (PMI), a rank indicator (RI), beam information, reference signal received power (RSRP), reference signal received quality (RSRQ), pathloss (pathgain), sounding reference signal resource indicator (SRI, SRS resource indicator), a channel state information reference signal (CSI-RS) resource indicator (CRI, CSI-RS resource indicator), an interference condition, motion information; however, this disclosure is not limited thereto, and other information may also be included. Examiner also directs Applicant’s attention to the above cited ¶0062 of Zhang 1.);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the teaching of Zhang 2 to the teaching of Zhang 1. The motivation for such would be as Zhang 2 provides a means for obtaining offline feature data (Zhang 2, ¶0092). All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements, as claimed by known methods, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention.
Re. Claim 2, Zhang 1 and Zhang 2 teach Claim 1.
Additionally, Zhang 1 further teaches wherein the obtaining the grid according to dividing the cell in the network, each grid corresponds to one RB or one RBG comprises: dividing the cell according to a path loss level and a horizontal beam, to obtain a logical location (¶0056 - the grid division may be dynamic, e.g. according to current user situations in the system, such that more of users are located in central grids); and dividing the spectrum resources at the logical location, to obtain a plurality of grids (¶0047 - Then, grid division is performed. According to the determined minimum units of the grid, the coverage area of the base station is divided into several grids).
Re. Claim 3, Zhang 1 and Zhang 2 teach Claim 1.
Additionally, Zhang 1 further teaches wherein the obtaining the grid according to dividing the cell in the network, each grid corresponds to one RB or one RBG comprises: dividing the cell according to a vertical beam and a horizontal beam, to obtain a logical location (¶0046 - It is possible to determine a minimum unit of horizontal and vertical grid according to an interference level threshold such as 1/X=-3dB using A.sub.total(θ",ϕ")=1/X • A.sub.tolal(θ.sub.T,ϕ.sub.T)); and dividing the spectrum resources at the logical location, to obtain a plurality of grids (¶0047 - Then, grid division is performed. According to the determined minimum units of the grid, the coverage area of the base station is divided into several grids).
Re. Claim 9, Zhang 1 and Zhang 2 teach Claim 2.
Additionally, Zhang 1 further wherein the scheduling spectrum resources according to the mark model comprises: obtaining path loss data of a user and/or beam information, and determining the logical location corresponding to the user (¶0059 - The horizontal angle and the vertical angle between the grid and the user may be determined according to the user position information); determining the grid to be used by the user according to the mark model and the logical location (¶0062 - The interference level between different users may be estimated according to the PMI or the space channel information and the CQI, RI information. If the interference level is higher than the predefined threshold, the users are in the same grid. If the interference level is not higher than the predefined threshold, the users are not in the same grid); and scheduling spectrum resources for the user according to the grid to be used (¶0063 - Based on the above determination result, grid indexes and reference signal port indexes are assigned to the users. For example, users in the same grid are assigned with the same grid index and different reference signal port indexes. Users in different grids are assigned with different grid indexes).
Re. Claim 10, Zhang 1 and Zhang 2 teach Claim 9.
Additionally, Zhang 1 further teaches wherein the determining the grid to be used by the user according to the mark model and the logical location comprises: detecting whether the grid with the interference mark exists in the logical location according to the mark model (¶0086 - since the UE knows the grid index of the interfering user, the UE is able to obtain the reference signal sequence transmitted by the paired user based on the grid index of the paired user according to the reference signal sequence generating method); and in response to that the grid with the interference mark exists in the logical location and is continuous, and a number of the grids reaches a threshold, analyzing and determining the grid to be used (¶0061 - If the interference level is higher than a predefined threshold, the users are in the same grid. If the interference level is not higher than the predefined threshold, the users are not located in the same grid. As such, it is determined whether users are located in the same grid in case that the division is performed dynamically. Additionally, Examiner interprets that ).
Re. Claim 11, Zhang 1 and Zhang 2 teach Claim 9.
Additionally, Zhang 1 further teaches wherein the determining the grid to be used by the user according to the mark model and the logical location comprises: detecting whether the grid with the interference mark exists in the logical location according to the mark model (¶0086 - since the UE knows the grid index of the interfering user, the UE is able to obtain the reference signal sequence transmitted by the paired user based on the grid index of the paired user according to the reference signal sequence generating method); and in response to that the grid with the interference mark exists in the logical location and the grid with the interference mark is not continuous, determining that the grid without the interference mark is to be used (¶0061 - If the interference level is higher than a predefined threshold, the users are in the same grid. If the interference level is not higher than the predefined threshold, the users are not located in the same grid. As such, it is determined whether users are located in the same grid in case that the division is performed dynamically).
Re. Claim 12, Zhang 1 and Zhang 2 teach Claim 9.
Additionally, Zhang 1 further teaches wherein the determining the grid to be used by the user according to the mark model and the logical location comprises: detecting whether the grid with the interference mark exists in the logical location according to the mark model (¶0086 - since the UE knows the grid index of the interfering user, the UE is able to obtain the reference signal sequence transmitted by the paired user based on the grid index of the paired user according to the reference signal sequence generating method); and in response to that no grid with the interference mark exists in the logical location, determining that all the grids are to be used (Fig. 3, Examiner interprets that if no interference mark exists then the coverage area as defined in 301 will be all grids that are available).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-6 and 13 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Additionally, Claims 7-8 and 14-16 are likewise allowable if the above stated dependent claims are rewritten in independent form due to the nature of their dependency on these claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/24/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Examiner has addressed some of the arguments brought by Applicant in the response above to clarify within context his interpretation, however these points will be restated here for ease of access.
With regard to Applicant’s argument’s regarding the non-limiting embodiments, specifically on Pg. 10 Line 5, and Pg. 11, Line 4, it appears that Applicant’s interpretation of the claims is narrower than the actual breadth of the claims. During examination, the claims are given its broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification as it would be interpreted by one of ordinary skill in the art. As such, the arguments regarding “spatial gridding” and “demodulation performances” which Examiner recognizes as present in the specification, are not considered in this office action due to their scope being substantially narrower than the language presented within the claim language itself.
The term “mark model” is not adequately known in the art or defined in the specification, and as such the Examiner is permitted his broadest reasonable interpretation of the term. As such, Examiner relies on ¶0051-0056 of the specification to inform the use case of the mark model. Here, Examiner interprets that the mark model is used in order to mark the grid with regard to its interference level in order to inform scheduling resources. As such, Zhang 1’s disclosure found in ¶0045 (grid indexes are assigned for the grids. In one embodiment, the grids may be indexed according to an interference sequence relationship between the grids) & ¶0062 (The interference level between different users may be estimated according to the PMI or the space channel information and the CQI, RI information. If the interference level is higher than the predefined threshold, the users are in the same grid. If the interference level is not higher than the predefined threshold, the users are not in the same grid) satisfies the Examiner’s interpretation of a mark model.
Likewise, the “offline feature data” is defined in ¶0031 of the present application and is defined as “The historical feature data includes path loss data, beam information, transmission modes, A/N information, resource information, a channel quality indication (CQI), a modulation coding scheme (MCS), rank indicator (RI), and the like”. Both Zhang 1 and 2 disclose this type of data in ¶0062 (The interference level between different users may be estimated according to the PMI or the space channel information and the CQI, RI information) and ¶0092 (the feedback information may include at least one of the following: hybrid automatic repeat request acknowledgement (HARQ-ACK, which may include ACK/NACK) information, channel state information (CSI), a modulation and coding scheme (MCS), channel quality indicator (CQI), a precoding matrix indicator (PMI), a rank indicator (RI)) respectively. Examiner has considered Applicant’s argument of relevance regarding these two references and finds that the use of Zhang 2 is to show clarification on the type of information that can be used, and no further. Since Zhang 2 is merely exemplifying types of feedback information, of which, information of the same type can be found in Zhang 1, and is not used to reject the technical aspects of the present claim, Examiner interprets that one of ordinary skill in the art would be able to interpret its use as such. Regarding a lack of “obtaining” said information, Examiner has provided ¶0087 (a second device receives first data information and/or a reference signal transmitted by at least one first device) to demonstrate said reception.
As such, Examiner maintains the rejection of Claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as well as all subsequent dependent claims that were previously rejected. Examiner upholds the previously provided objection to the allowable claims that depend from Claim 1.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Chai et al. (2016/0270034) - ¶0172-0211
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NOAH JAMES SUGDEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7406. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 9:00-6:00 ET, Fri 9:00-1:00 ET.
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, Khaled Kassim can be reached at (571) 270-3770. 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.
/N.J.S./Examiner, Art Unit 2475
/KHALED M KASSIM/supervisory patent examiner, Art Unit 2475