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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph 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 the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
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 1, 11 and 20 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. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The examiner didn’t find the support for the amended claims in Paras. [0056], [0117]-[0119] of the Specification. The UE can transmit lightweight spatial muting feedback for network configured patterns, and may separately report channel properties for the two identified subsets of antenna ports. The Specification support each limitation separately and the Specification does not link the lightweight spatial muting parameters to the particular first and second subsets of antenna ports and does not cite the separation of reporting mode. In addition, the network may configure the UE to provide the lightweight feedback within the CSI reporting framework (report quantity belongs to CSI reportConfig to enhance the CSI reporting framework) rather than in separate reporting mode, as described in [0059], [0064] and [0117]. The Examiner is considering this amendment and thus arguing back the “transmitting a light-weight feedback comprising one or more spatial muting parameters indicating, for each of a plurality of spatial muting patterns based on the first subset of the first plurality of antenna ports and the second subset of the first plurality of antenna ports, the light-weight feedback being configured by a network as a reporting mode separate from a CSI feedback report”.
Response to Remarks
This Office action is considered fully responsive to the amendments filed 08/11/2026.
Claims 1-21 are pending in the application, claims 1, 11, 20, and 21 have been amended, and claims 2-10, 12-19 were previously presented. The Claim objection is withdrawn in light of Applicant’s amendments.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments, see Remarks, filed 08/11/2026, with respect to the rejection(s)
of claim(s) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of (US-20250350333-A1).
A) Regarding independent claims 1, 11 and 20, see the U.S.C. 103 rejection below.
B) Regarding all dependent claims, see the U.S.C. 103 rejection below. The Claim Rejections section below details the rejections of the instant claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 11, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwak et al. (US-20190053089-A1), here in referred to as Kwak1, in view of Nimbalker et al. (US-20250350333-A1), here in referred to as Nimbalker.
As to claim 1, see similar rejections to claim 11. The apparatus teaches the method.
Regarding claims 11 and 20 (Currently Amended), Kwak1 teaches a User Equipment (UE) comprising: one or more processors; and a memory storing instructions which, when executed by the one or more processors, cause performance of (Fig. 22, [0025], [0066], the UE includes one or more processors that execute the instructions stored in its memory. The processor responsible to perform different operations): receiving a Channel State Information reference signal (CSI-RS) transmitted through a first plurality of antenna ports (Fig. 1, [0085], [0088], the UE can receive CSI-RS transmitted by the BS through a plurality of antenna ports, “In case the number of antenna ports is two, the CSI-RS is transmitted through a half of a particular pattern of FIG. 1, in case the number of antenna ports is four, the CSI-RS is transmitted through the overall particular pattern, and in case the number of antenna ports is eight, the CSI-RS is transmitted via two patterns“ as stated in [0088], which explicitly mentions the CSI-RS can be transmitted through multiple antenna ports, such as 2, 4, 8, or 16 ports (e.g., Table 12-1 and Table 12-2)); calculating a first channel property indicator for a first subset of the first plurality of antenna ports, based on the CSI-RS ([0287], [0281], [0110]-[0113], the UE generates feedback information (channel property indicator) including indicators such as precoding matrix indicator PMI, rank indicator RI, and channel quality indicator CQI, using the received CSI-SR and feedback configuration information, as stated in [0286] “feedback configuration information that is based on at least one or more CSI-RSs. The feedback configuration information may be set to at least one of the PMI/CQI period and offset, the RI period and offset”, and [0297], lines 32-35. The calculation is guided by the feedback configuration which specified specific parameters such as number of antenna ports and codebook type. [0287] states “The UE estimates the channel per antenna port and estimates an additional channel for a virtual resource based on the same.”); and calculating a second channel property indicator for a second subset of the first plurality of antenna ports, based on the CSI-RS ([0285],Table 12-1 and Table 12-2, describe type I and type II CSI reporting which involve calculating channel property indicators for subsets of antenna ports based on the received CSI-RS, as stated in [0285], “it may include at least one of the number of the ports for the reference signal, N1 and N2, each of which indicates the number of antennas per dimension, O1 and O2, each of which indicates the oversampling factor per dimension”), wherein the second subset is different from the first subset ([0275], the CSI-RS resource configuration allows for multiple subsets of antenna ports to be defined. [0277], lines 5-12, “the type of the codebook, N1 and N2, each of which indicates the number of antennas per dimension, O1 and O2, each of which indicates the oversampling factor per dimension, one subframe config for transmitting multiple CSI-RSs”, it indicates the configurations for sunsets of antenna ports, such as (N1, N2) and (Q1, Q2), which indicate the number of antennas and oversampling factors per dimension (Table 12-1 and Table 12-2)), and transmitted via Physical Uplink Control Channel (PUCCH) or Physical Uplink Shared Channel (PUSCH) ([0158] sates “The PUCCH used in periodic and semi-persistent CSI report is limited in the amount of report that may be transmitted. Accordingly, in LTE, the UE selects some subbands of the bandwidth part and transmits on the uplink.” and [0168] states “in the case of aperiodic CSI report, type II CSI report is supported via the PUSCH that may support more overhead, type II reporting which needs higher reporting overhead may be supported only in aperiodic CSI report.” [0088] also states “Further, the muting may also apply to some of the positions denoted with A, B, C, D, E, E, F, G, H, I, and J. In particular, the CSI-RS may be transmitted via two, four, or eight REs depending on the number of transmit (TX) antenna ports. In case the number of antenna ports is two, the CSI-RS is transmitted through a half of a particular pattern of FIG. 1, in case the number of antenna ports is four, the CSI-RS is transmitted through the overall particular pattern, and in case the number of antenna ports is eight, the CSI-RS is transmitted via two patterns”, see further explanation in [0088]. That implies the PUCCH and PUSCH can be used for the periodic and aperiodic (Type II ) for reporting the feedback CSI reports, respectively, which include parameters for spatial muting [0088], such as codebook subset restrictions [0101] and Table 7, PMI, RI, and CQI, etc., as stated in [0032], claims 3 and 8, see also [0138] and [0206]).
Kwak1 does not explicitly teach and transmitting, by the UE, patterns based on the first subset of the first plurality of antenna ports and the second subset of the first plurality of antenna ports, the light-weight feedback being configured by a network as a reporting mode separate from a CSI feedback report.
However, Nimbalker teaches and transmitting, by the UE, a light-weight feedback comprising one or more spatial muting parameters indicating muting patterns based on the first subset of the first plurality of antenna ports and the second subset of the first plurality of antenna ports ([0107] provides the method includes transmitting of the CSI-RS port muting pattern indication to the WD/UE in response to the receiving of the indication of the muted port estimate, where the UE can estimate which ports are muted and report special muting parameters to the network, such as includes CSI-RS port IDs or indices that are muted and The list may contain options comprising CSI-RS port IDs or indices that are not muted. Further, the list may contain an explicit list of port IDs or indices, and/or specify subgroups of ports, e.g., first/second half of the ports provided in (Step S1000), [0290]-[0291] and the estimated port muting pattern. [0321] states “the potential CSI-RS muting patterns are signaled via the cell system information. This has the advantage that is easy to achieve (e.g., by defining a system information extension in the standard) and it may be a low additional cost to add a few additional bits in an already existing system information block.” [0005], [0027]-[0028], [0245], [0276], [0290], [0301], [0317] and [0323]describe and specify how the muting patterns based on the first subset of the first plurality of antenna ports, such as first/second half of the configured ports and that can help to reduce the weight of feedback by avoiding reporting each port details measurements and reducing the number of unnecessary CSI-RS transmissions, e.g., because of the use of less antenna elements or ports, thus reducing the power consumption, see also Fig. 8-13), the light-weight feedback being configured by a network as a reporting mode separate from a CSI feedback report ([0058] states “the method further includes determining a muted port estimate, and transmitting, to the network node, a third signaling including an indication of the muted port estimate.” This is different from “receive, from the WD, at least one CSI-RS measurement report for at least one CSI-RS measurement on at least one port of the plurality of ports using the modified CSI-RS measurement configuration and omitting measurements on the at least one muted port. “ as stated in claim 49. [0301] describes the separate reporting framework is identical which is signaling may use the UE assistance information (UAI) framework, see also [0228] describes (Block S152) a second signaling to the WD 22, the second signaling including a CSI-RS port muting pattern indication muting at least one muted port of the first plurality of ports and enabling the WD 22 to utilize a modified CSI-RS measurement configuration for feedback reporting. That implies the feedback message separate from the normal/standard CSI report, see also [0313], [0179], and [0193]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kwak1 to incorporate the teachings of Nimbalker (in analogous art) by adding light weight feedback comprising one or more spatial muting parameters indicating muting patterns based on the first subset of the first plurality of antenna ports and the second subset of the first plurality of antenna ports to reduce network power and enable efficient resource usage (Nimbalker, [0004], [0077]).
Claims 2-3, 5-9 , 12-13, 15-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwak et al. (US-20190053089-A1) here in referred to as Kwak1, in view of Nimbalker et al. (US-20250350333-A1), here in referred to as Nimbalker, further in view of khoshnevisan et al. (US-20210258964-A1).
As to claims 2-3, 5-9 see similar rejections to claims 12-13, 15-19 respectively. The apparatus teaches the method.
Regarding claim 10 (Original), Kwak1 and Nimbalker teach method of claim 1.
Kwak1 and Nimbalker fail to teach receiving, by the UE, in a Media Access Control control element (MAC CE), a trigger state identifier, determining, based on the trigger state identifier, the first subset; determining, based on the trigger state identifier, the first subset; and receiving, by the UE, a Physical Downlink Shared Channel (PDSCH) transmitted over the first subset.
However, khoshnevisan teaches receiving, by the UE, in a Media Access Control control element (MAC CE), a trigger state identifier (Figs. 7A and 7B, Fig. 12 Step 1205, [0112], lines 9-13, [0123], lines 12-16, UE can receive MAC-CE that includes a trigger state identifier, where transmission configuration indicator (TCI) can be considered a trigger state identifier, [0080], lines 3-5); determining, based on the trigger state identifier, the first subset ( [0080], , the TCI state is linked to antenna ports, beam pairs or quasi-colocation assumptions. Fig. 7B illustrate each TCI state is linked to specific CSI_RS resources which associated with antenna ports. This mapping will help the UE to determine the set of antenna ports based on the TCI state); and receiving, by the UE, a Physical Downlink Shared Channel (PDSCH) transmitted over the first subset ([0080], lines 3-8, [0106], lines 6-7, claim 19, lines 4-6. UE can receive a PDSCH transmitted over a subset of antenna ports by activation a subset of TCI, where the TCI states being associated with antenna ports).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kwak1 in view of Nimbalker to incorporate the teachings of khoshnevisan (in analogous art) by adding receiving, by the UE, in a Media Access Control control element (MAC CE), a trigger state identifier to enhance signal quality and coverage (khoshnevisan, [0004], lines 13-15).
Regarding claim 12 (Original), Kwak1 and Nimbalker teach the UE of claim 11.
Kwak1 and Nimbalker fail to teach wherein the first subset is associated with an index.
However, khoshnevisan teaches wherein the first subset is associated with an index (Fig. 7B and [0080] states “a TCI state is associated with a beam pair, an antenna panel, antenna ports, antenna port groups, a quasi-colocation (QCL) relation, and/or a transmission reception point (TRP). Multi-TCI state transmission may be associated with multiple beam pairs, multiple antenna panels” . [0124] states “each control resource set (CORESET) may be configured with an index value. In some example, the index values are a 0 or 1”. These parts indicates that the subsets of antenna ports or configurations may associated with indices through TCI states).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kwak1 in view of Nimbalker to incorporate the teachings of khoshnevisan (in analogous art) by adding receiving, by the UE, in a Media Access Control control element (MAC CE), a trigger state identifier to enhance signal quality and coverage (khoshnevisan, [0004], lines 13-15).
Regarding claim 13 (Original), Kwak1 and Nimbalker teach the UE of claim 11, wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, further cause performance of:
Kwak1 and Nimbalker do not explicitly teach receiving, by the UE, in a Downlink Control Information (DCI), a trigger state identifier, and determining, based on the trigger state identifier, the first subset and the second subset.
However, khoshnevisan teaches receiving, by the UE, in a Downlink Control Information (DCI), a trigger state identifier ([0113] states “ the UE 702 receives a DCI (with a last symbol of the DCI at t1) from the BS 704 triggering an A-CSI-RS (with a first symbol of the A-CSI-RS at t2). The DCI may indicate one of the active trigger states. “ That’s implies the UE receives a trigger state identifier through DCI); and determining, based on the trigger state identifier, the first subset and the second subset (Fig. 8, [0126] states “the DCI, received at 810, may indicate a TCI state for the scheduled A-CSI-RS. The DCI may be received in a CORESET associated with one of the index values (e.g., index value 0 in the example in FIG. 8). Thus, the UE 802 identifies the CORESET and index value associated with the DCI. “ Where the multi-TCI states can be used by UE to identify the different subsets of antenna ports as stated in [0080], “ Multi-TCI state transmission may be associated with multiple beam pairs, multiple antenna panels” and “that a user equipment (UE) may use for channel estimation.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kwak1 in view of Nimbalker to incorporate the teachings of khoshnevisan (in analogous art) by adding receiving, by the UE, from a network node (gNB), a trigger state identifier to enhance signal quality and coverage (khoshnevisan, [0004], lines 13-15).
Regarding claim 15 (Original), Kwak1 and Nimbalker teach the UE of claim 13.
Kwak1 and Nimbalker do not explicitly teach wherein the UE is preconfigured with an association mapping the trigger state identifier to the first subset and the second subset.
However, khoshnevisan teaches wherein the UE is preconfigured with an association mapping the trigger state identifier to the first subset and the second subset (Fig. 7A and [0112] states “As shown in FIG. 7A, at 706, a radio resource control (RRC) configured CSI reporting configuration may configure a user equipment (UE) 702 with up to 128 trigger states (e.g., a higher layer parameter AperiodicTriggerStateList). This indicates the initial configuration of trigger states is done by RRC. Fig. 11 and [0156] states “A TCI state for each of the CSI-RS resources may be indicated as part of trigger state configuration. At 1108, a MAC-CE may activate a subset (e.g., up to 64) of the configured trigger states.” Both these parts how preconfigured the UE through mapping the trigger state identifier to the first subset and the second subset, where each TCI state is linked to the CSI-RS resource set/ antenna ports).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kwak1 in view of Nimbalker to incorporate the teachings of khoshnevisan (in analogous art) by adding receiving, by the UE, from a network node (gNB), a trigger state identifier to enhance signal quality and coverage (khoshnevisan, [0004], lines 13-15).
Regarding claim 16 (Original), Kwak1 and Nimbalker teach the UE of claim 11, wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, further cause performance of:
Kwak1 and Nimbalker do not explicitly teach determining, based on the trigger state identifier, the first subset and the second subset, receiving, by the UE, in a Media Access Control control element (MAC CE), a trigger state identifier.
However, khoshnevisan teaches determining, based on the trigger state identifier, the first subset and the second subset (Fig. 8, [0126] states “the DCI, received at 810, may indicate a TCI state for the scheduled A-CSI-RS. The DCI may be received in a CORESET associated with one of the index values (e.g., index value 0 in the example in FIG. 8). Thus, the UE 802 identifies the CORESET and index value associated with the DCI. “ Where the multi-TCI states can be used by UE to identify the different subsets of antenna ports as stated in [0080], “ Multi-TCI state transmission may be associated with multiple beam pairs, multiple antenna panels” and “that a user equipment (UE) may use for channel estimation.”), receiving, by the UE, in a Media Access Control control element (MAC CE), a trigger state identifier (Figs. 7A and 7B, Fig. 8, step 808, Fig. 12 Step 1205, [0112], lines 9-13, “a medium access control (MAC) control element (CE) may activate up to 64 of the configured trigger states.” [0123], lines 12-16, UE can receive MAC-CE that includes a trigger state identifier, where transmission configuration indicator (TCI) can be considered a trigger state identifier, [0080], lines 3-5. Claim 19 explicitly states “the MAC-CE activates a subset of the plurality of TCI states for receiving a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) transmission; the MAC-CE maps a plurality of TCI codepoints to one or more TCI states of the subset of the plurality of TCI state” which implies the determining, based on the trigger state identifier, the different subset for receiving PDSCH).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kwak1 in view of Nimbalker to incorporate the teachings of khoshnevisan (in analogous art) by adding receiving, by the UE, from a network node (gNB), a trigger state identifier to enhance signal quality and coverage (khoshnevisan, [0004], lines 13-15).
Regarding claim 17 (Original), Kwak1, Nimbalker and khoshnevisan teach the UE of claim 16.
Kwak1 and Nimbalker do not explicitly teach wherein the UE is preconfigured with an association mapping the trigger state identifier to the first subset and the second subset.
However, khoshnevisan teaches wherein the UE is preconfigured with an association mapping the trigger state identifier to the first subset and the second subset (Fig. 7A and [0112] states “As shown in FIG. 7A, at 706, a radio resource control (RRC) configured CSI reporting configuration may configure a user equipment (UE) 702 with up to 128 trigger states (e.g., a higher layer parameter AperiodicTriggerStateList). This indicates the initial configuration of trigger states is done by RRC. Fig. 11 and [0156] states “A TCI state for each of the CSI-RS resources may be indicated as part of trigger state configuration. At 1108, a MAC-CE may activate a subset (e.g., up to 64) of the configured trigger states.” Both these parts describe how preconfigured the UE through mapping the trigger state identifier to the first subset and the second subset, where each TCI state is linked to the CSI-RS resource set/ antenna ports).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kwak1 in view of Nimbalker to incorporate the teachings of khoshnevisan (in analogous art) by adding receiving, by the UE, from a network node (gNB), a trigger state identifier to enhance signal quality and coverage (khoshnevisan, [0004], lines 13-15).
Regarding claim 18 (Original), Kwak1 and Nimbalker teach the UE of claim 11, wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, further cause performance of:
Kwak1 and Nimbalker do not explicitly teach receiving, by the UE, in a Downlink Control Information (DCI), a trigger state identifier; determining, based on the trigger state identifier, the first subset; and receiving, by the UE, a Physical Downlink Shared Channel (PDSCH) transmitted over the first subset.
However, khoshnevisan teaches receiving, by the UE, in a Downlink Control Information (DCI), a trigger state identifier ([0113] states “ the UE 702 receives a DCI (with a last symbol of the DCI at t1) from the BS 704 triggering an A-CSI-RS (with a first symbol of the A-CSI-RS at t2). The DCI may indicate one of the active trigger states. “ That’s implies the UE receives a trigger state identifier through DCI); determining, based on the trigger state identifier, the first subset ( Fig. 8, [0126] states “the DCI, received at 810, may indicate a TCI state for the scheduled A-CSI-RS. The DCI may be received in a CORESET associated with one of the index values (e.g., index value 0 in the example in FIG. 8). Thus, the UE 802 identifies the CORESET and index value associated with the DCI. “ Where the multi-TCI states can be used by UE to identify the different subsets of antenna ports as stated in [0080], “ Multi-TCI state transmission may be associated with multiple beam pairs, multiple antenna panels” and “that a user equipment (UE) may use for channel estimation.”) ; and receiving, by the UE, a Physical Downlink Shared Channel (PDSCH) transmitted over the first subset ([0080], lines 3-8, [0106], lines 6-7, states “the UE 602 may apply the TCI state indicated in the DCI for the PDSCH, at 610a. For example, the UE 602 can determine the receive beam for receiving the PDSCH based on the indicated TCI state, at 612.” Claim 19, lines 4-6. UE can receive a PDSCH transmitted over a subset of antenna ports by activation a subset of TCI, where the TCI states being associated with antenna ports).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kwak1 in view of Nimbalker to incorporate the teachings of khoshnevisan (in analogous art) by adding receiving, by the UE, from a network node (gNB), a trigger state identifier to enhance signal quality and coverage (khoshnevisan, [0004], lines 13-15).
Regarding claim 19 (Original), Kwak1 and Nimbalker teach the UE of claim 11, wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, further cause performance of:
Kwak1 further teaches and reporting, by the UE, the first channel property indicator and the second channel property indicator ([0281] states the UE may generate the feedback information rank, PMI, and CQI using the received feedback configuration and based on the estimated channel and may select the optimal CRI based thereupon.” And Claim 1, lines 16-17, generating feedback information based on the estimated aperiodic channel status; and transmitting the feedback information to the BS based on the feedback transmission timing. That implies several types of channel property indicators , such as RI, PMI, CQI, and CRI can be reported by UE).
Kwak1 does not explicitly teach receiving, by the UE, from a network node (gNB), a trigger state identifier; determining, based on the trigger state identifier, the first subset and the second subset.
However, khoshnevisan teaches receiving, by the UE, from a network node (gNB), a trigger state identifier ([0231], gNB is designed to support 5GNR technology, enabling higher data rate, and lower latency. Both gNB and BS can be used interchangeably to describe the entity responsible for communication with the UE. [0112], Figs. 7A and 7B each trigger state in a list is linked to a CSI-RS resource set, each CSI-RS resource set has multiple CSI-RS resources, and a transmission configuration indicator (TCI) state for each of the CSI-RS resources is indicated as part of trigger state configuration); determining, based on the trigger state identifier, the first subset and the second subset (Fig. 8, [0126] states “the DCI, received at 810, may indicate a TCI state for the scheduled A-CSI-RS. The DCI may be received in a CORESET associated with one of the index values (e.g., index value 0 in the example in FIG. 8). Thus, the UE 802 identifies the CORESET and index value associated with the DCI. “ Where the multi-TCI states can be used by UE to identify the different subsets of antenna ports as stated in [0080], “ Multi-TCI state transmission may be associated with multiple beam pairs, multiple antenna panels” and “that a user equipment (UE) may use for channel estimation.”);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kwak1 in view of Nimbalker to incorporate the teachings of khoshnevisan (in analogous art) by adding receiving, by the UE, from a network node (gNB), a trigger state identifier to enhance signal quality and coverage (khoshnevisan, [0004], lines 13-15).
9. Claims 4, 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwak1 et al. (US-20190053089-A1) here in referred to as Kwak1, in view of Nimbalker et al. (US-20250350333-A1), here in referred to as Nimbalker, in view of khoshnevisan et al. (US-20210258964-A1), further in view of Cirik et al. (US-20210378004-A1).
As to claim 4, see similar rejection to claim 14. The apparatus teaches the method.
Regarding claim 14 (Original), Kwak1, Nimbalker and khoshnevisan teach the UE of claim 13.
Kwak1, Nimbalker and khoshnevisan do not explicitly teach wherein the DCI is a group common DCI.
However, Cirik teaches wherein the DCI is a group common DCI ([0190], lines 8-12, states “The payload transmitted on the PDCCH may be referred to as downlink control information (DCI). In some scenarios, the PDCCH may be a group common PDCCH (GC-PDCCH) that is common to a group of UEs.” Which explicitly that the DCI can be transmitted on a group common PDCCH, which is a share data among a group of UEs to make the as a group of DCI).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kwak1 in view of Nimbalker in view of khoshnevisan to incorporate the teachings of Cirik (in analogous art) by adding the DCI is a group common DCI for efficient resources management (Cirik, [0271], lines 3-6).
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwak1 et al. (US-20190053089-A1), here in referred to as Kwak1, in view of Nimbalker et al. (US-20250350333-A1), here in referred to as Nimbalker, further in view of Kim et al. (US-20140241201-A1).
Regarding claim 21 (Currently Amended), Kwak1 and Nimbalker teach the method of claim 1.
Kwak1 does not explicitly teach wherein the light-weight feedback comprises spatial muting parameters based on throughput.
However, Nimbalker teaches wherein the light-weight feedback comprises spatial muting parameters based on throughput ([0005] describes to provide high-rate cell-edge coverage and high spatial resolution, an NR network node (e.g., gNB) may deploy large antenna arrays with hundreds of antenna elements and up to 32 ports, which increases the energy and the processing, as described in [0003]-[0004], “the additional TX/RX ports may result in additional power consumption, i.e., to transmit a larger number of CSI-RS to the WDs. Furthermore, it should also be noted that the larger number of CSI-RS transmissions may also consume resources (e.g., valuable NW resources).” That implies the more spatial resources may increase the power consumption with higher data rate/throughput and in the same time, the BS can mute part of the antenna panel and use a subset of antenna port while maintaining the required performance/ throughput, see also [0303]. [0021] provides it also allows the UE to request different muting pattern based on its uplink buffer state, which is the traffic demand data that related to data rate of the system.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kwak1 to incorporate the teachings of Nimbalker (in analogous art) by adding light weight feedback comprising one or more spatial muting parameters indicating muting patterns based on the first subset of the first plurality of antenna ports and the second subset of the first plurality of antenna ports to reduce network power and enable efficient resource usage (Nimbalker, [0004], [0077]).
Kwak1 and Nimbalker do not explicitly teach signal to interference and noise ratio (SINR) loss, and SINR gain which are relative to a baseline.
However, Kim teaches signal to interference and noise ratio (SINR) loss, and SINR gain ([0168] lines 1-5 states “When the UE feeds back the muting point information, the UE may apply one of the following methods as an SINR calculation method for CQI calculation. The UE may calculate SINR by excluding interference generated from a muting point from entire interference signal power” which implies CQI calculation, that included in the CSI feedback, is applied through the SINR by excluding the interference from a muting point, and “the UE may calculate SINR on the basis of the entire interference signal power. Furthermore, the UE may use a difference between SINR calculated on the basis of the entire interference signal power and SINR calculated by excluding interference generated from the muting point from the entire interference signal power.” [0165] states “the muting reference value is a basis for determination of whether SINR gain obtained when the muting point is applied is sufficiently large.” These parts indicates that the difference in SINR values , which can be SINR loss or SINR gain, are considered to determine whether muting is useful).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Kwak1 in view of Nimbalker to incorporate the teachings of Kim (in analogous art) by adding the CSI feedback comprises spatial muting parameters based on relative throughput, signal to interference and noise ratio (SINR) loss, and SINR gain for transmitting muting point information determined on the basis of the channel state values and indicating a preferred base station not-participating in CoMP transmission from among the plurality of base stations (Kim, Claim 1, lines 10-13).
Relevant Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's
disclosure.
KWAK et al. (US-20190068343-A1), KWAK et al. (US-20190174440-A1), NOH et al. (US-20200136690-A1), YUAN et al. (US-20230216640-A1) and Forenza et al. (US-20140016499-A1) teach methods and apparatus for system energy managements in wireless communication systems.
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 SANAA S AL SAMAHI whose telephone number is (571)272-4171. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5 EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Asad Nawaz can be reached at (571) 272-3988. 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.
/SANAA AL SAMAHI/Examiner, Art Unit 2463
/ASAD M NAWAZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2463
