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 Amendment
Applicant’s submission filed on 03/25/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-20 are pending in the
application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant' s arguments with respect to claims 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-12 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ibrahim et al. (US 2023/0422283 A1), hereinafter “IBRAHIM” in view of Nogami et al. (US 2018/0324770 A1), hereinafter “NOGAMI”.
Regarding claim 1, IBRAHIM teaches, ‘A method, comprising:’ (Abstract, In some aspects, a user equipment (UE) may receive… a configuration for a channel state information (CSI) report):
‘conducting a measurement, by a User Equipment (UE), using a CSI resource, the CSI resource being a Channel State Information reference signal (CSI-RS) or a Channel State Information Interference Measurement (CSI-IM);’ (Paragraph [0008], The one or more processors may be configured to receive, from a network node, a configuration for a CSI report associated with one or more CSI-RS resources…
obtain one or more measurements of a CSI reference resource);
‘and performing channel estimation or beam measurement, by the UE, the channel estimation or beam measurement being based on a set of resources of the CSI resource,’ (Paragraph [0006], Accordingly, because a sub-band full-duplexing (SBFD) mode is associated with non-contiguous downlink frequency resources… a CSI report may be linked to one non-contiguous CSI-RS resource),
IBRAHIM does not explicitly teach but NOGAMI teaches, ‘resources of the set of resources being non-contiguous in an orthogonal frequency domain multiplexing (OFDM) symbol of the CSI resource.’ (NOGAMI – Paragraph [0353], REGs may be numbered within PRB such that REG indices correspond to OFDM symbol number. To be more specific, in a given PRB, the REG in the OFDM symbol #0 is indexed as REG #0… For frequency first REG-to-CCE mapping, the CCE number n may correspond to REGs numbered floor(6n/Nf) in RB indices (i+6x(n mode Nf/6)) within the control resource RB set [Note: This formula places assigned resource nodes non-contiguously within the exact span of the target OFDM symbol boundary]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of NOGAMI with IBRAHIM because both are in the same/similar field of endeavor. IBRAHIM teaches a wireless network operating in a subband full-duplexing (SBFD) mode where a component carrier is split into non-overlapping uplink and downlink subbands, thereby linking a CSI report configuration to a non-contiguous resource allocation pattern over a given bandwidth part (BWP) or slot. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of NOGAMI into IBRAHIM is that NOGAMI provides precise physical-layer mapping parameters where resource elements are grouped and distributed across the frequency spectrum in an interleaved, non-contiguous pattern within a standalone OFDM symbol boundary. NOGAMI represents the application of a known physical resource element mapping technique to achieve a predictable result, a non-contiguous subcarrier array configuration within a single symbol duration. (See Paragraph [0353], NOGAMI)
Regarding claim 2, IBRAHIM and NOGAMI teach, The method of claim 1, IBRAHIM further teaches, ‘wherein the performing of channel estimation or beam measurement, by the UE,’ (Paragraph [0008], The one or more processors may be configured to receive, from a network node, a configuration for a CSI report associated with one or more CSI-RS resources… determine a duplex mode associated with the CSI report… obtain one or more measurements of a CSI reference resource of the one or more CSI-RS resources based at least in part on the duplex mode associated with the CSI report),
‘comprises selecting the set of resources based on resources allocated for full-duplex uplink subband.’ (Paragraph [0006], Accordingly, because a sub-band full-duplexing (SBFD) mode is associated with non-contiguous downlink frequency resources, there may be a need to adapt a CSI-RS resource configuration for fullduplex communication (e.g., because a portion of the bandwidth is not available for downlink)… a CSI reference resource definition that may be based on one or more non-contiguous resource allocations that may be used for a downlink data transmission and/or an uplink data transmission in an SBFD slot, where a middle frequency region is used for uplink-only).
Regarding claim 3, IBRAHIM and NOGAMI teach, The method of claim 2, wherein: IBRAHIM further teaches, ‘a first portion of a resource block set (RB set) of the CSI resource overlaps…’ (Paragraph [0006], because a sub-band full-duplexing (SBFD) mode is associated with non-contiguous downlink frequency resources… a portion of the bandwidth is not available for downlink)…
‘a second portion of the RB set does not overlap any resource elements allocated for full-duplex uplink subband;’ (Paragraph [0006], a CSI reference resource definition that may be based on one or more non-contiguous resource allocations that may be used for a downlink data transmission and/or an uplink data transmission in an SBFD slot, where a middle frequency region is used for uplink-only);
‘and the set of resources does not include any resources of the RB set.’ (Paragraph [0007], Alternatively, a non-contiguous frequency domain allocation may be based on a continuous data allocation that spans the entire bandwidth part, and a rate-matching pattern is defined to achieve the non-contiguous frequency domain allocation. In this case, one or more ZP CSI-RS resources are defined to rate match around the uplink sub-band (e.g., the one or more ZP CSI-RS resources include time and frequency resources in which no signal is transmitted). In this way, combining the contiguous resource allocation with the rate-matching pattern removes the uplink frequency region from the contiguous resource allocation).
IBRAHIM does not explicitly teach but NOGAMI teaches, ‘…one or more resource elements allocated for full-duplex uplink subband;’ (NOGAMI – Paragraph [0107], A region defined by one sub-carrier in frequency domain and one OFDM symbol in time domain is referred to as a resource element (RE) and is uniquely identified by the index pair (k,l) in a slot, where k and l are indices in the frequency and time domains, respectively [Note: data matrices specifically into contiguous or non-contiguous resource block groups made of individual resource elements, where the resource block set will structurally intersect/overlap the exact localized resource elements assigned to the full-duplex uplink subband]);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of NOGAMI with IBRAHIM because both are in the same/similar field of endeavor. IBRAHIM teaches a wireless network operating in a subband full-duplexing (SBFD) mode where a component carrier is split into non-overlapping uplink and downlink subbands, thereby linking a CSI report configuration to a non-contiguous resource allocation pattern over a given bandwidth part (BWP) or slot. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of NOGAMI into IBRAHIM is that NOGAMI provides precise physical-layer mapping parameters where resource elements are grouped and distributed across the frequency spectrum in an interleaved, non-contiguous pattern within a standalone OFDM symbol boundary. NOGAMI represents the application of a known physical resource element mapping technique to achieve a predictable result, a non-contiguous subcarrier array configuration within a single symbol duration. (See Paragraph [0353], NOGAMI)
Regarding claim 4, IBRAHIM and NOGAMI teach, The method of claim 2, wherein: IBRAHIM further teaches, ‘a first portion of a resource block set (RB set) of the CSI resource overlaps…’ (Paragraph [0006], because a sub-band full-duplexing (SBFD) mode is associated with non-contiguous downlink frequency resources… a portion of the bandwidth is not available for downlink)…
‘a second portion of the RB set does not overlap any resource elements allocated for full-duplex uplink subband;’ (Paragraph [0006], a CSI reference resource definition that may be based on one or more non-contiguous resource allocations that may be used for a downlink data transmission and/or an uplink data transmission in an SBFD slot, where a middle frequency region is used for uplink-only);
‘and the set of resources includes the second portion of the RB set, and does not include the first portion of the RB set.’ (Paragraphs [0006]-[0007], in an SBFD mode associated with non-contiguous downlink frequency resources, a CSI report may be linked to two disjoint CSI-RS resources (e.g., a first CSI-RS resource in a first sub-band and a second CSI-RS resource in a second subband)… Alternatively, a non-contiguous frequency domain allocation may be based on a continuous data allocation that spans the entire bandwidth part, and a rate-matching pattern is defined to achieve the non-contiguous frequency domain allocation… In this way, combining the contiguous resource allocation with the rate-matching pattern removes the uplink frequency region from the contiguous resource allocation).
IBRAHIM does not explicitly teach but NOGAMI teaches, ‘…one or more resource elements allocated for full-duplex uplink subband;’ (NOGAMI – Paragraphs [0106]-[0107], A downlink radio frame may include multiple pairs of downlink resource blocks (RBs)… A region defined by one sub-carrier in frequency domain and one OFDM symbol in time domain is referred to as a resource element (RE) and is uniquely identified by the index pair (k,l) in a slot, where k and l are indices in the frequency and time domains, respectively [Note: data matrices specifically into contiguous or non-contiguous resource block groups made of individual resource elements, where the resource block set will structurally intersect/overlap the exact localized resource elements assigned to the full-duplex uplink subband]);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of NOGAMI with IBRAHIM because both are in the same/similar field of endeavor. IBRAHIM teaches a wireless network operating in a subband full-duplexing (SBFD) mode where a component carrier is split into non-overlapping uplink and downlink subbands, thereby linking a CSI report configuration to a non-contiguous resource allocation pattern over a given bandwidth part (BWP) or slot. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of NOGAMI into IBRAHIM is that NOGAMI provides precise physical-layer mapping parameters where resource elements are grouped and distributed across the frequency spectrum in an interleaved, non-contiguous pattern within a standalone OFDM symbol boundary. NOGAMI represents the application of a known physical resource element mapping technique to achieve a predictable result, a non-contiguous subcarrier array configuration within a single symbol duration. (See Paragraph [0353], NOGAMI)
Regarding claim 5, IBRAHIM and NOGAMI teach, The method of claim 2, wherein: IBRAHIM further teaches, ‘a first portion of a CSI subband of the CSI resource overlaps…’ (Paragraph [0006], because a sub-band full-duplexing (SBFD) mode is associated with non-contiguous downlink frequency resources… a portion of the bandwidth is not available for downlink)…
‘a second portion of the CSI subband of the CSI resource does not overlap any resource elements allocated for full-duplex uplink subband;’ (Paragraph [0006], a CSI reference resource definition that may be based on one or more non-contiguous resource allocations that may be used for a downlink data transmission and/or an uplink data transmission in an SBFD slot, where a middle frequency region is used for uplink-only);
‘and the CSI subband of the CSI resource excludes the first portion of the CSI subband of the CSI resource and consists of only the second portion.’ (Paragraphs [0006]-[0007], in an SBFD mode associated with non-contiguous downlink frequency resources, a CSI report may be linked to two disjoint CSI-RS resources (e.g., a first CSI-RS resource in a first sub-band and a second CSI-RS resource in a second subband)… Alternatively, a non-contiguous frequency domain allocation may be based on a continuous data allocation that spans the entire bandwidth part, and a rate-matching pattern is defined to achieve the non-contiguous frequency domain allocation… In this way, combining the contiguous resource allocation with the rate-matching pattern removes the uplink frequency region from the contiguous resource allocation).
IBRAHIM does not explicitly teach but NOGAMI teaches, ‘…one or more resource elements allocated for full-duplex uplink subband;’ (NOGAMI – Paragraphs [0106]-[0107], A downlink radio frame may include multiple pairs of downlink resource blocks (RBs)… A region defined by one sub-carrier in frequency domain and one OFDM symbol in time domain is referred to as a resource element (RE) and is uniquely identified by the index pair (k,l) in a slot, where k and l are indices in the frequency and time domains, respectively [Note: data matrices specifically into contiguous or non-contiguous resource block groups made of individual resource elements, where the resource block set will structurally intersect/overlap the exact localized resource elements assigned to the full-duplex uplink subband]);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of NOGAMI with IBRAHIM because both are in the same/similar field of endeavor. IBRAHIM teaches a wireless network operating in a subband full-duplexing (SBFD) mode where a component carrier is split into non-overlapping uplink and downlink subbands, thereby linking a CSI report configuration to a non-contiguous resource allocation pattern over a given bandwidth part (BWP) or slot. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of NOGAMI into IBRAHIM is that NOGAMI provides precise physical-layer mapping parameters where resource elements are grouped and distributed across the frequency spectrum in an interleaved, non-contiguous pattern within a standalone OFDM symbol boundary. NOGAMI represents the application of a known physical resource element mapping technique to achieve a predictable result, a non-contiguous subcarrier array configuration within a single symbol duration. (See Paragraph [0353], NOGAMI)
Regarding claim 6, IBRAHIM and NOGAMI teach, The method of claim 2, IBRAHIM further teaches, ‘wherein the UE expects that for each indicated CSI subband to be reported,’ (Paragraph [0008], the UE may… receive, from a network node, a configuration for a CSI report associated with one or more CSI-RS resources… transmit, to the network node, the CSI report based at least in part on the one or more measurements of the CSI reference resource);
‘the CSI-RS linked to the report…’ (Paragraph [0006], Accordingly, because a sub-band full-duplexing (SBFD) mode is associated with non-contiguous downlink frequency resources… a CSI report may be linked to two disjoint CSI-RS resources… or a CSI report may be linked to one non-contiguous CSI-RS resource).
‘…spanned by the CSI subband.’ (Paragraph [0005], For example, in a frequency domain, a CSI reference resource for a serving cell is defined by a group of downlink physical resource blocks that correspond to a band to which derived CSI relates).
IBRAHIM does not explicitly teach but NOGAMI teaches, ‘…is at least mapped to resource blocks (RBs)…’ (NOGAMI – Paragraph [0104], NDLRB is downlink bandwidth configuration of the serving cell, expressed in multiples of NRBsc, where NRBsc is a resource block 289 size in the frequency domain expressed as a number of subcarriers… A resource block 289 may include a number of resource elements (RE) 291)…
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of NOGAMI with IBRAHIM because both are in the same/similar field of endeavor. IBRAHIM teaches a wireless network operating in a subband full-duplexing (SBFD) mode where a component carrier is split into non-overlapping uplink and downlink subbands, thereby linking a CSI report configuration to a non-contiguous resource allocation pattern over a given bandwidth part (BWP) or slot. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of NOGAMI into IBRAHIM is that NOGAMI provides precise physical-layer mapping parameters where resource elements are grouped and distributed across the frequency spectrum in an interleaved, non-contiguous pattern within a standalone OFDM symbol boundary. NOGAMI represents the application of a known physical resource element mapping technique to achieve a predictable result, a non-contiguous subcarrier array configuration within a single symbol duration. (See Paragraph [0353], NOGAMI)
Regarding claim 7, IBRAHIM and NOGAMI teach, The method of claim 1, wherein: IBRAHIM further teaches, ‘the set of resources comprises a first portion and a second portion, the second portion being non-contiguous with the first portion;’ (Paragraph [0006], in an SBFD mode associated with non-contiguous downlink frequency resources, a CSI report may be linked to two disjoint CSI-RS resources (e.g., a first CSI-RS resource in a first sub-band and a second CSI-RS resource in a second subband));
‘and the method further comprises receiving, by the UE, configuration information from a network node (gNB)’ (Paragraph [0008], The one or more processors [of the UE] may be configured to receive, from a network node, a configuration for a CSI report associated with one or more CSI-RS resources)
‘identifying the first portion of the set of resources and the second portion of the set of resources.’ (Paragraph [0006], In such cases, there may be a frequency domain resource allocation (FDRA) specific to SBFD slots, which may use a bitmap or two start and length indicators to explicitly define the disjoint frequency domain resource).
Regarding claim 8, IBRAHIM and NOGAMI teach, The method of claim 1, wherein: IBRAHIM further teaches, ‘the set of resources comprises a first portion and a second portion, the second portion being non-contiguous with the first portion;’ (Paragraph [0006], in an SBFD mode associated with non-contiguous downlink frequency resources, a CSI report may be linked to two disjoint CSI-RS resources (e.g., a first CSI-RS resource in a first sub-band and a second CSI-RS resource in a second subband));
‘and the method further comprises determining, by the UE, the first portion of the set of resources and the second portion of the set of resources.’ (Paragraph [0005], a user equipment (UE) is configured to report one or more CSI parameters based on a hypothetical data transmission in the CSI reference resource, the UE generally assumes, among other things, that a bandwidth is as configured for a corresponding CSI parameter. Paragraph [0104], the UE 120 may determine the duplex mode of the CSI report based on the frequency domain resources of the CSI-RS resources associated with the CSI report).
Regarding claim 9, IBRAHIM and NOGAMI teach, The method of claim 1, wherein: IBRAHIM further teaches, ‘the set of resources comprises a first portion and a second portion, the second portion being non-contiguous with the first portion;’ (Paragraph [0006], in an SBFD mode associated with non-contiguous downlink frequency resources, a CSI report may be linked to two disjoint CSI-RS resources (e.g., a first CSI-RS resource in a first sub-band and a second CSI-RS resource in a second subband)),
‘…of the non-contiguous set of resources of the CSI resource in each portion’ (Paragraph [0006], CSI report may be linked to two disjoint CSI-RS resources… or a CSI report may be linked to one non-contiguous CSI-RS resource)
‘is expected to be greater than a certain threshold.’ (Paragraph [0005], Furthermore, the CSI reference resource typically defines various properties for the hypothetical data transmission used to calculate the CSI parameters (e.g., a reference signal overhead, bandwidth, and/or precoding). Paragraph [0105], the UE 120 may determine the number of available REs associated with the CSI reference resource based on the bandwidth of the CSI reference resource (which depends on the duplex mode of the CSI report)… one or more downlink sub-bands to be considered part of the CSI reference resource may be defined in a wireless communication standard, or the downlink sub-bands may be adjusted based on the bandwidth of the CSI report configuration).
IBRAHIM does not explicitly teach but NOGAMI teaches, ‘and a minimum number of allocated resource elements…’ (NOGAMI – Paragraph [0104], A resource block 289 may include a number of resource elements (RE) 291. Paragraph [0107], A region defined by one sub-carrier in frequency domain and one OFDM symbol in time domain is referred to as a resource element (RE) and is uniquely identified by the index pair (k,l) in a slot)…
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of NOGAMI with IBRAHIM because both are in the same/similar field of endeavor. IBRAHIM teaches a wireless network operating in a subband full-duplexing (SBFD) mode where a component carrier is split into non-overlapping uplink and downlink subbands, thereby linking a CSI report configuration to a non-contiguous resource allocation pattern over a given bandwidth part (BWP) or slot. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of NOGAMI into IBRAHIM is that NOGAMI provides precise physical-layer mapping parameters where resource elements are grouped and distributed across the frequency spectrum in an interleaved, non-contiguous pattern within a standalone OFDM symbol boundary. NOGAMI represents the application of a known physical resource element mapping technique to achieve a predictable result, a non-contiguous subcarrier array configuration within a single symbol duration. (See Paragraph [0353], NOGAMI)
Regarding claim 10, IBRAHIM teaches, ‘A method, comprising:’ (Abstract, transmit, to the network node, the CSI report):
‘generating, by a User Equipment (UE), a first Channel State Information (CSI) report based on a first plurality of CSI resources, each of the first plurality of CSI resources being a Channel State Information reference signal (CSI-RS) or a Channel State Information Interference Measurement (CSI-IM),’ (Paragraph [0008], The one or more processors may be configured to receive, from a network node, a configuration for a CSI report associated with one or more CSI-RS resources… transmit, to the network node, the CSI report),
‘…and generating, by the UE, a second CSI report based on a second plurality of CSI resources, each of the second plurality of CSI resources being a Channel State Information reference signal (CSI-RS) or a Channel State Information Interference Measurement (CSI-IM), the second plurality of CSI resources being selected based on: instructions from a network node (gNB) or an overlap, in time, of a full-duplex uplink subband with each of the CSI resources of the second plurality of CSI resources, or a change in a network antenna pattern or power pattern between transmission of the first plurality of CSI resources and transmission of the second plurality of CSI resources.’ (Paragraph [0006], a CSI reference resource definition that may be based on one or more non-contiguous resource allocations that may be used for a downlink data transmission and/or an uplink data transmission in an SBFD slot, where a middle frequency region is used for uplink-only).
IBRAHIM does not explicitly teach but NOGAMI teaches, ‘wherein the first plurality of CSI resources is non-contiguous in an orthogonal frequency domain multiplexing (OFDM) symbol;’ (NOGAMI - Paragraph [0353], For frequency first REG-to-CCE mapping, the CCE number n may correspond to REGs… within the control resource RB set [Note: splitting the resource mapping matrices inside a uniform OFDM symbol layer, creating an intra-symbol non-contiguous sequence profile]),
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of NOGAMI with IBRAHIM because both are in the same/similar field of endeavor. IBRAHIM teaches a wireless network operating in a subband full-duplexing (SBFD) mode where a component carrier is split into non-overlapping uplink and downlink subbands, thereby linking a CSI report configuration to a non-contiguous resource allocation pattern over a given bandwidth part (BWP) or slot. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of NOGAMI into IBRAHIM is that NOGAMI provides precise physical-layer mapping parameters where resource elements are grouped and distributed across the frequency spectrum in an interleaved, non-contiguous pattern within a standalone OFDM symbol boundary. NOGAMI represents the application of a known physical resource element mapping technique to achieve a predictable result, a non-contiguous subcarrier array configuration within a single symbol duration. (See Paragraph [0353], NOGAMI)
Regarding claim 11, IBRAHIM and NOGAMI teach, The method of claim 10, further comprising IBRAHIM further teaches, ‘receiving, by the UE, instructions from the network node,’ (Paragraph [0110], As shown in FIG. 10, in some aspects, process 1000 may include receiving, from a network node, a configuration for a CSI report associated with one or more CSI-RS resources (block 1010).
‘the instructions including an identification of a CSI resource of the first plurality of CSI resources or an identification of a CSI resource of the second plurality of CSI resources.’ (Paragraph [0104], the duplex mode of the CSI report may be explicitly indicated in the CSI report configuration provided by the network node 110 and/or in a downlink control information (DCI) message triggering transmission of a CSI report associated with the CSI report configuration… the CSI report configuration and/or the triggering DCI may include an explicit definition of a noncontiguous bandwidth that the UE 120 is to use for CSI derivation. In the latter case, indicating the duplex mode in the CSI report configuration and/or the triggering DCI may provide the network node 110 with greater flexibility to link the same CSI-RS resource set to half-duplex CSI reports and full-duplex CSI reports).
Regarding claim 12, IBRAHIM and NOGAMI teach, The method of claim 11, further comprising IBRAHIM further teaches ‘receiving, by the UE, the identification’ (Paragraph [0104], the duplex mode of the CSI report
may be explicitly indicated in the CSI report configuration provided by the network node 110. Paragraph [0089], In some aspects, the FDD configuration may identify bandwidth part (BWP) configurations corresponding to the uplink frequency regions and the downlink frequency regions. For example, a respective BWP may be configured for each uplink frequency region and each downlink frequency region)
IBRAHIM does not explicitly teach but NOGAMI teaches, ‘in a form of a Radio Resource Control (RRC) parameter or a MAC-CE.’ (NOGAMI – Paragraph [0049], The UE includes a higher layer processor configured to acquire a dedicated radio resource control (RRC) message, the dedicated RRC message including information for indicating a configuration of a control resource set (CORESET). Paragraph [0081], Furthermore, the downlink PSCH and the uplink PSCH are used to transmit information of higher layer (e.g., Radio Resource Control (RRC)) layer, and/or MAC layer). For example, the downlink PSCH and the uplink PSCH are used to transmit RRC message (RRC signal) and/or MAC Control Element (MAC CE)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of NOGAMI with IBRAHIM because both are in the same/similar field of endeavor. IBRAHIM teaches a wireless network operating in a subband full-duplexing (SBFD) mode where a component carrier is split into non-overlapping uplink and downlink subbands, thereby linking a CSI report configuration to a non-contiguous resource allocation pattern over a given bandwidth part (BWP) or slot. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of NOGAMI into IBRAHIM is that NOGAMI provides precise physical-layer mapping parameters where resource elements are grouped and distributed across the frequency spectrum in an interleaved, non-contiguous pattern within a standalone OFDM symbol boundary. NOGAMI represents the application of a known physical resource element mapping technique to achieve a predictable result, a non-contiguous subcarrier array configuration within a single symbol duration. (See Paragraph [0353], NOGAMI)
Regarding claim 18, IBRAHIM teaches, ‘A method, comprising:’ ’ (Abstract, In some aspects, a user equipment (UE) may receive… a configuration for a channel state information (CSI) report):
‘…and determining, by the UE, that in the first monitoring occasion, the CORESET overlaps a resource element (RE) allocated for a full-duplex uplink subband.’ (Paragraph [0006], Accordingly, because a sub-band full-duplexing (SBFD) mode is associated with non-contiguous downlink frequency resources, there may be a need to adapt a CSI-RS resource configuration for fullduplex communication (e.g., because a portion of the bandwidth is not available for downlink)).
IBRAHIM does not explicitly teach but NOGAMI teaches, ‘receiving, by a User Equipment (UE), configuration information including a Control Resource Set (CORESET) and a first monitoring occasion,’ (NOGAMI – Paragraph [0049], The UE includes a higher layer processor configured to acquire a dedicated radio resource control (RRC) message, the dedicated RRC message including information for indicating a configuration of a control resource set (CORESET). The UE also includes physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) receiving circuitry configured to monitor a PDCCH in the CORESET),
‘the configuration information identifying a set of resources of the CSI resource, resources of the set of resources being non-contiguous in an orthogonal frequency domain multiplexing (OFDM) symbol of the CSI resource;’ (NOGAMI – Paragraph [0353], the REG in the OFDM symbol #0 is indexed as REG #0, the REG in the OFDM symbol #1 is indexed as REG #1, and so on... the CCE number n may correspond to REGs numbered floor(6n/Nf) in RB indices (i+6x(n mode Nf/6)) within the control resource RB set [Note: logical structure within the control parameters separates elements over distributed frequency steps within a single OFDM symbol interval]);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of NOGAMI with IBRAHIM because both are in the same/similar field of endeavor. IBRAHIM teaches a wireless network operating in a subband full-duplexing (SBFD) mode where a component carrier is split into non-overlapping uplink and downlink subbands, thereby linking a CSI report configuration to a non-contiguous resource allocation pattern over a given bandwidth part (BWP) or slot. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of NOGAMI into IBRAHIM is that NOGAMI provides precise physical-layer mapping parameters where resource elements are grouped and distributed across the frequency spectrum in an interleaved, non-contiguous pattern within a standalone OFDM symbol boundary. NOGAMI represents the application of a known physical resource element mapping technique to achieve a predictable result, a non-contiguous subcarrier array configuration within a single symbol duration. (See Paragraph [0353], NOGAMI)
Claims 13-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over IBRAHIM in view of NOGAMI in view of Davydov et al. (US 2018/0220399 A1), hereinafter “DAVYODV”.
Regarding claim 13, IBRAHIM and NOGAMI teach, The method of claim 10, IBRAHIM further teaches, ‘wherein the second CSI report’ (Paragraph [0113], As further shown in FIG. 10, in some aspects, process 1000 may include transmitting, to the network node, the CSI report based at least in part on the one or more measurements of the CSI reference resource (block 1040))
IBRAHIM and NOGAMI do not explicitly teach but DAVYDOV teaches, ‘is a differential report with respect to the first CSI report.’ (DAVYDOV - Paragraph [0050], in order to save signaling overhead in the uplink due to additional CQIs, differential CQI reporting may be considered. More specifically, differential CQI offset level may be calculated as a CQI index corresponding to a reference Pd minus a CQI index… corresponding to a configured Pd and reported by the UE, where one of the power offset Pd can be the reference power offset and can be equal to one (e.g., "Pd=1"). This can be depicted in the example of FIG. 5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of DAVYDOV with IBRAHIM and NOGAMI because both are in the same/similar field of endeavor. IBRAHIM and NOGAMI provide generating a first and second Channel State Information (CSI) report where the underlying resources are mathematically mapped to be non-contiguous within an individual OFDM symbol layer to handle subband full-duplexing (SBFD) spectrum constraints. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of DAVYDOV into IBRAHIM and NOGAMI is that DAVYDOV provides an uplink signaling architecture where multiple channel quality reports are differentially encoded and reported relative to a primary reference report to compress the total payload size. A secondary report is computed strictly as an offset minus a baseline reference parameter, which represents the application of a known differential compression technique to achieve the highly predictable result of minimizing uplink messaging overhead. (See paragraph [0050], DAVYDOV)
Regarding claim 14, IBRAHIM and NOGAMI teach, The method of claim 10, wherein: IBRAHIM further teaches, ‘the generating of the first CSI report comprises generating the first CSI report…’ (Paragraph [0105], the UE 120 may determine the number of available REs associated with the CSI reference resource based on the bandwidth of the CSI reference resource (which depends on the duplex mode of the CSI report), which can affect the CQI or other CSI parameter(s) calculated)…
‘and the generating of the second CSI report comprises generating the second CSI report…’ (Paragraph [0105], the definition of the CSI reference resource may need to be updated to account for cases where a PXSCH configuration explicitly defines disjoint frequency domain resources, such as disjoint downlink and uplink frequency regions used in SBFD slots. In particular, the UE 120 may update the definition of the CSI reference resource to reflect the PXSCH frequency domain resources associated with half-duplex and/or SBFD slots)…
IBRAHIM and NOGAMI do not explicitly teach but DAVYDOV teaches, ‘…based on a first power offset;’ (DAVYDOV - Paragraph [0048], the present technology proposes signaling of the power offset values ("Pd") that can be used by the UE to derive more than one CQI report... In one aspect, the channel measurements from the serving cell/point can be scaled by a value of Pd prior to calculation of the corresponding CQI values);
‘…based on a second power offset, different from the first power offset.’ (DAVYDOV - Paragraph [0048], The set of Pd values indicated to the UE can describe one of a plurality of possible power reductions due to superposition transmission, where one of the power offset values (PD) equals 1 (e.g., Pd=1) and corresponds to a conventional single-user transmission without MUST… multiple CQI reports can be calculated for each of the different Pd values and can be reported by the UE to eNB).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of DAVYDOV with IBRAHIM and NOGAMI because both are in the same/similar field of endeavor. IBRAHIM and NOGAMI provide generating a first and second Channel State Information (CSI) report where the underlying resources are mathematically mapped to be non-contiguous within an individual OFDM symbol layer to handle subband full-duplexing (SBFD) spectrum constraints. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of DAVYDOV into IBRAHIM and NOGAMI is that DAVYDOV provides an uplink signaling architecture where multiple channel quality reports are differentially encoded and reported relative to a primary reference report to compress the total payload size. A secondary report is computed strictly as an offset minus a baseline reference parameter, which represents the application of a known differential compression technique to achieve the highly predictable result of minimizing uplink messaging overhead. (See paragraph [0050], DAVYDOV)
Regarding claim 15, IBRAHIM, NOGAMI and DAVYDOV teach, The method of claim 14, IBRAHIM does not explicitly teach but NOGAMI teaches, ‘…as part of Radio Resource Control (RRC) configuration information.’ (NOGAMI – Paragraph [0049], The UE includes a higher layer processor configured to acquire a dedicated radio resource control (RRC) message. Furthermore, the downlink PSCH and the uplink PSCH are used to transmit information of higher layer (e.g., Radio Resource Control (RRC)) layer)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of NOGAMI with IBRAHIM because both are in the same/similar field of endeavor. IBRAHIM teaches a wireless network operating in a subband full-duplexing (SBFD) mode where a component carrier is split into non-overlapping uplink and downlink subbands, thereby linking a CSI report configuration to a non-contiguous resource allocation pattern over a given bandwidth part (BWP) or slot. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of NOGAMI into IBRAHIM is that NOGAMI provides precise physical-layer mapping parameters where resource elements are grouped and distributed across the frequency spectrum in an interleaved, non-contiguous pattern within a standalone OFDM symbol boundary. NOGAMI represents the application of a known physical resource element mapping technique to achieve a predictable result, a non-contiguous subcarrier array configuration within a single symbol duration. (See Paragraph [0353], NOGAMI)
further comprising IBRAHIM and NOGAMI do not explicitly teach but DAVYDOV teaches, ‘receiving, by the UE, from a network node (gNB)’ (DAVYDOV – Paragraph [0022], The UE can process a plurality of power offset parameters, which are received from an eNodeB, for the MUST)
‘the first power offset or the second power offset…’ (DAVYDOV – Paragraphs [0048]-[0049], the present technology proposes signaling of the power offset values ("Pd") that can be used by the UE to derive more than one CQI report… multiple CQI reports can be calculated for each of the different Pd values and can be reported by the UE to eNB. Paragraph [0052], the high layer configuration can comprise radio resource control (RRC) signaling for two or more power offset values Pd that can be used by the UE for CQI calculation)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of DAVYDOV with IBRAHIM and NOGAMI because both are in the same/similar field of endeavor. IBRAHIM and NOGAMI provide generating a first and second Channel State Information (CSI) report where the underlying resources are mathematically mapped to be non-contiguous within an individual OFDM symbol layer to handle subband full-duplexing (SBFD) spectrum constraints. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of DAVYDOV into IBRAHIM and NOGAMI is that DAVYDOV provides an uplink signaling architecture where multiple channel quality reports are differentially encoded and reported relative to a primary reference report to compress the total payload size. A secondary report is computed strictly as an offset minus a baseline reference parameter, which represents the application of a known differential compression technique to achieve the highly predictable result of minimizing uplink messaging overhead. (See paragraph [0050], DAVYDOV)
Regarding claim 16, IBRAHIM, NOGAMI and DAVYDOV teach, The method of claim 15,
IBRAHIM does not explicitly teach but NOGAMI teaches, ‘…as part of Radio Resource Control (RRC) configuration information;’ (NOGAMI – Paragraph [0049], The UE includes a higher layer processor configured to acquire a dedicated radio resource control (RRC) message);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of NOGAMI with IBRAHIM because both are in the same/similar field of endeavor. IBRAHIM teaches a wireless network operating in a subband full-duplexing (SBFD) mode where a component carrier is split into non-overlapping uplink and downlink subbands, thereby linking a CSI report configuration to a non-contiguous resource allocation pattern over a given bandwidth part (BWP) or slot. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of NOGAMI into IBRAHIM is that NOGAMI provides precise physical-layer mapping parameters where resource elements are grouped and distributed across the frequency spectrum in an interleaved, non-contiguous pattern within a standalone OFDM symbol boundary. NOGAMI represents the application of a known physical resource element mapping technique to achieve a predictable result, a non-contiguous subcarrier array configuration within a single symbol duration. (See Paragraph [0353], NOGAMI)
further comprising: IBRAHIM and NOGAMI do not explicitly teach but DAVYDOV teaches, ‘receiving, by the UE, from the gNB, a third power offset…’ (DAVYDOV – Paragraph [0052], In one aspect, the high layer configuration can comprise radio resource control (RRC) signaling for two or more power offset values Pd that can be used by the UE for CQI calculation)…
‘and using the first power offset or the second power offset to override or to modify, by the UE, the third power offset.’ (DAVYDOV – Paragraph [0050], More specifically, differential CQI offset level may be calculated as a CQI index… corresponding to a configured Pd and reported by the UE, where one of the power offset Pd can be the reference power offset and can be equal to one (e.g., "Pd=1").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of DAVYDOV with IBRAHIM and NOGAMI because both are in the same/similar field of endeavor. IBRAHIM and NOGAMI provide generating a first and second Channel State Information (CSI) report where the underlying resources are mathematically mapped to be non-contiguous within an individual OFDM symbol layer to handle subband full-duplexing (SBFD) spectrum constraints. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of DAVYDOV into IBRAHIM and NOGAMI is that DAVYDOV provides an uplink signaling architecture where multiple channel quality reports are differentially encoded and reported relative to a primary reference report to compress the total payload size. A secondary report is computed strictly as an offset minus a baseline reference parameter, which represents the application of a known differential compression technique to achieve the highly predictable result of minimizing uplink messaging overhead. (See paragraph [0050], DAVYDOV)
Regarding claim 17, IBRAHIM and NOGAMI teach, The method of claim 10, wherein: IBRAHIM and NOGAMI do not explicitly teach but DAVYDOV teaches, ‘the first CSI report is based on a first plurality of subcarriers within each the first plurality of CSI resources;’ (DAVYDOV – Paragraph [0023], In
other words, the eNodeB can transmit signals to the UEs using different sub carriers or orthogonal frequency-division multiple access (OFDMA) symbols);
‘and the second CSI report is based on a second plurality of subcarriers, different from the first plurality of subcarriers, within each the second plurality of CSI resources.’ (DAVYDOV – Paragraph [0048], That is, the signaling of the power offset values Pd can be used by the UE to derive more than one CQI report for a given measurement resource (e.g. subband and/or layer)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of DAVYDOV with IBRAHIM and NOGAMI because both are in the same/similar field of endeavor. IBRAHIM and NOGAMI provide generating a first and second Channel State Information (CSI) report where the underlying resources are mathematically mapped to be non-contiguous within an individual OFDM symbol layer to handle subband full-duplexing (SBFD) spectrum constraints. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of DAVYDOV into IBRAHIM and NOGAMI is that DAVYDOV provides an uplink signaling architecture where multiple channel quality reports are differentially encoded and reported relative to a primary reference report to compress the total payload size. A secondary report is computed strictly as an offset minus a baseline reference parameter, which represents the application of a known differential compression technique to achieve the highly predictable result of minimizing uplink messaging overhead. (See paragraph [0050], DAVYDOV)
Claims 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over IBRAHIM in view of NOGAMI in view of Kim et al. (US 2023/0007641 A1), hereinafter “KIM”.
Regarding claim 19, IBRAHIM and NOGAMI teach, The method of claim 18, further comprising IBRAHIM and NOGAMI do not explicitly teach but KIM teaches, ‘excluding from the CORESET, by the UE,’ (KIM – Paragraph [0023], monitoring downlink control channels in valid resource element group (REG) bundle(s) under assumption that control channel element(s) CCE(s) are mapped only to the valid REG bundle( s) belonging to the CORESET),
‘each resource block of the CORESET overlapping a resource element (RE) allocated for a full-duplex uplink subband.’ (KIM – Paragraphs [0024]-[0025], The at least part of the CORESET may be resource element(s) (RE(s)) in which a downlink (DL) reception operation of the terminal is impossible due to a duplex gap or guard time according to subband duplex operations… The valid REG bundle(s) is a REG bundle(s) that does not include the RE(s) in which the DL reception operation of the terminal is impossible).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of KIM with IBRAHIM and NOGAMI because both are in the same/similar field of endeavor. IBRAHIM and NOGAMI teaches a wireless device receiving configuration information that includes a Control Resource Set (CORESET) and identifying that the underlying resources are mathematically mapped to be non-contiguous within an individual OFDM symbol layer to handle subband full-duplexing (SBFD) spectrum constraints. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of KIM into IBRAHIM and KIM is that KIM provides an optimized physical layer framework where a wireless terminal identifies a subband full duplex collision inside a CORESET structure and dynamically excludes the invalid resource segments from its active monitoring configurations. The terminal identifies the specific resource elements rendered “impossible” due to subband duplex operations and restricts its blind decoding strictly to valid REG bundles that do not include the overlapping components, which represents the application of a known resource filtering technique to achieve the highly predictable result of preserving control channel monitoring integrity over the surviving portion of the CORESET. (See Paragraphs [0023]-[0025], KIM)
Regarding claim 20, IBRAHIM and NOGAMI teach, The method of claim 18, further comprising IBRAHIM and NOGAMI do not explicitly teach but KIM teaches, ‘not monitoring, by the UE,’ (KIM – Paragraph [0023], monitoring downlink control channels in valid resource element group (REG) bundle(s) under assumption that control channel element(s) CCE(s) are mapped only to the valid REG bundle( s) belonging to the CORESET [Note: terminal mapping constraint where the UE performs “not” monitoring])
IBRAHIM, NOGAMI and KIM do not explicitly teach but NIU teaches, ‘a Physical Downlink Control Channel (PDCCH) candidate’ (KIM – Paragraph [0023], receiving, from a base station, configuration information for a control resource set (CORESET)… monitoring downlink control channels in valid resource element group (REG) bundle(s) [Note: “downlink control channel” is synonymous with a Physical Downlink Control Channel (PDCCH) in 3GPP LTE and 5G NR frameworks])
‘overlapping a resource element allocated for the full-duplex uplink subband.’ (KIM – Paragraphs [0024]-[0025], The at least part of the CORESET may be resource element(s) (RE(s)) in which a downlink (DL) reception operation of the terminal is impossible due to a duplex gap or guard time according to subband duplex operations… The valid REG bundle(s) is a REG bundle(s) that does not include the RE(s) in which the DL reception operation of the terminal is impossible).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of KIM with IBRAHIM and NOGAMI because both are in the same/similar field of endeavor. IBRAHIM and NOGAMI teaches a wireless device receiving configuration information that includes a Control Resource Set (CORESET) and identifying that the underlying resources are mathematically mapped to be non-contiguous within an individual OFDM symbol layer to handle subband full-duplexing (SBFD) spectrum constraints. The advantage of incorporating the above limitation(s) of KIM into IBRAHIM and KIM is that KIM provides an optimized physical layer framework where a wireless terminal identifies a subband full duplex collision inside a CORESET structure and dynamically excludes the invalid resource segments from its active monitoring configurations. The terminal identifies the specific resource elements rendered “impossible” due to subband duplex operations and restricts its blind decoding strictly to valid REG bundles that do not include the overlapping components, which represents the application of a known resource filtering technique to achieve the highly predictable result of preserving control channel monitoring integrity over the surviving portion of the CORESET. (See Paragraphs [0023]-[0025], KIM)
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 HAESHIL J CHOI whose telephone number is (703)756-5409. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday 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, Jae Y Lee can be reached on 571-270-3936. 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.
/HAESHIL JESSICA CHOI/Examiner, Art Unit 2479
/JAE Y LEE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2479
Prosecution Insights