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 .
Applicant’s amendment filed 6/15/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 1, 8, and 13 are amended.
Response to Amendment
Amendments filed on 6/15/2026 are entered for prosecution. Claims 1-20 remain pending in the application.
Applicant’s amendment to claim 13 has overcome the objection to claim 13 previously set forth in the Non-Final Action mailed on 4/2/2026.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to independent claims 1 and 8 (pages 8-12) in a reply filed 6/15/2026 have been considered but are moot because the arguments are based on newly changed limitations in the amendment and new ground of rejections using newly introduced references or a newly introduced portion of an existing reference are applied in the current rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 8, 9, 11, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kang et al. (US 2020/0169435 A1, hereinafter Kang).
Regarding claim 1:
Kang teaches a method (see, Kang: Fig. 5), comprising:
detecting, by a processor of a user equipment (UE) (see, Kang: Fig. 6, UE 12, Processor(s) 22), that a value of an interference measurement for at least one of one or more reference signals or one or more channels used by the UE to communicate with a network node indicates that an interference has exceeded an interference threshold (see, Kang: para. [0045], “The present disclosure proposes signaling and methods for measurement reports based on reference signals, e.g., Reference Signal Received Power (RSRP) measurement and report from the UE to a serving gNB for the purpose of cross-link interference management”; para. [0047], “In the following, embodiments of the present disclosure are described using RSRP as an example of a measurement that is made based on a known Reference Signal (RS), e.g., the Sounding Reference Signal (SRS) or the Demodulation Reference Signal (DMRS).”; para. [0049], “As shown in FIG. 4, a victim UE 12-1 (i.e., the SRS measuring UE) measures one or multiple SRS transmissions corresponding to one or multiple aggressor UEs 12-2 (i.e., SRS transmitting UEs) in order to estimate RSRP for each aggressor UE 12-2.”; para. [0069], “the report condition is predefined with a table and the index corresponding to each condition defined in a table can be signaled to UEs 12.”; para. [0072], “Aggregate cross-link interference exceeds a certain threshold. The aggregate cross-link interference can be obtained by measuring all indicated SRS resource elements of aggressor UEs 12-2”), wherein the interference measurement is performed without using any dedicated measurement resources configured for cross-link interference (CLI) measurement (see, Kang: para. [0005], “In NR, data transmissions by the UE carried by the Physical Uplink Shared Channel (PUSCH) also contain a Demodulation Reference Signal (DMRS) that is used by the gNB to perform channel estimation in order to demodulate and decode the data.”, wherein the DMRS is part of an ordinary communication channel rather than a separately transmitted CLI-dedicated measurement resource.; para. [0047], “embodiments of the present disclosure are described using RSRP as an example of a measurement that is made based on a known Reference Signal (RS), e.g., the Sounding Reference Signal (SRS) or the Demodulation Reference Signal (DMRS).”; para. [0057], “measurements on the DMRS are made opportunistically by the UE 12-1 by blindly attempting to detect a DMRS from the set of DMRSs.”; In para. [0076-0077], Kang discloses that the victim UE may receive the information of SRS or DMRS configuration and use to perform measurement on aggressor UEs.); and
in response to the detecting, reporting, by the processor, the value of the interference measurement to the network node as a cross link interference (CLI) measurement of UE-to-UE CLI experienced by the UE (see, Kang: para. [0009], “the method further comprises receiving, from the serving AP, one or more triggering conditions for aperiodic measurement reporting of SRS or DMRS transmitted by one or more aggressor wireless devices served by one or more other APs. In some embodiments, the one or more triggering conditions comprise: a triggering condition that Reference Signal Received Power (RSRP) from the serving cell of the wireless device is below a certain threshold; a triggering condition that an aggregate cross-link interference exceeds a certain threshold; a triggering condition that a ratio of the aggregate cross-link interference and overall aggregate interference exceeds a threshold; and/or a triggering condition that is based on an estimated value of a parameter that is related to a burstiness of the RSRP from the serving cell, the aggregate cross-link interference, and/or the ratio of the aggregate cross-link interference and the overall aggregate interference. In some embodiments, reporting the at least one of the one or more measurements to the serving AP comprises reporting the at least one of the one or more measurements to the serving AP upon occurrence of at least one of the one or more triggering conditions.”; Fig. 5, Step 108 and para. [0087], “The victim UE 12-1 sends a measurement report to the serving AP 14-1, as described above (step 108).”; [0088], “the present disclosure teaches signaling and methods for measurements based on reference signals such as the SRS and DMRS and reporting of these measurements in order to manage UE to UE interference in a dynamic TDD system.”).
Regarding claim 8:
Kang teaches a method, comprising: determining, by a processor of a user equipment (UE) (see, Kang: Fig. 6, UE 12, Processor(s) 22), that an entering condition for triggering reporting of UE-to-UE cross link interference (CLI) experienced by the UE is satisfied when a value of an interference measurement for at least one of a reference signal or a channel used by the UE to communicate with a network node indicates that an interference has exceeded an interference threshold (see, Kang: para. [0009], “the method further comprises receiving, from the serving AP, one or more triggering conditions for aperiodic measurement reporting of SRS or DMRS transmitted by one or more aggressor wireless devices served by one or more other APs. In some embodiments, the one or more triggering conditions comprise: a triggering condition that Reference Signal Received Power (RSRP) from the serving cell of the wireless device is below a certain threshold; a triggering condition that an aggregate cross-link interference exceeds a certain threshold; a triggering condition that a ratio of the aggregate cross-link interference and overall aggregate interference exceeds a threshold; and/or a triggering condition that is based on an estimated value of a parameter that is related to a burstiness of the RSRP from the serving cell, the aggregate cross-link interference, and/or the ratio of the aggregate cross-link interference and the overall aggregate interference.”), wherein the interference measurement is performed without using any dedicated measurement resources configured for cross-link interference (CLI) measurement measurement (see, Kang: para. [0005], “In NR, data transmissions by the UE carried by the Physical Uplink Shared Channel (PUSCH) also contain a Demodulation Reference Signal (DMRS) that is used by the gNB to perform channel estimation in order to demodulate and decode the data.”, wherein the DMRS is part of an ordinary communication channel rather than a separately transmitted CLI-dedicated measurement resource.; para. [0047], “embodiments of the present disclosure are described using RSRP as an example of a measurement that is made based on a known Reference Signal (RS), e.g., the Sounding Reference Signal (SRS) or the Demodulation Reference Signal (DMRS).”; para. [0057], “measurements on the DMRS are made opportunistically by the UE 12-1 by blindly attempting to detect a DMRS from the set of DMRSs.”; In para. [0076-0077], Kang discloses that the victim UE may receive the information of SRS or DMRS configuration and use to perform measurement on aggressor UEs.); and
in response to the determining, sending, by the processor, one or more reports of CLI experienced by the UE that include one or more CLI measurements to a network node (see, Kang: para. [0009], “In some embodiments, reporting the at least one of the one or more measurements to the serving AP comprises reporting the at least one of the one or more measurements to the serving AP upon occurrence of at least one of the one or more triggering conditions.”).
Regarding claim 9:
As discussed above, Kang teaches all limitations in claim 8.
Kang further teaches wherein the one or more CLI measurements include the value of the interference measurement for the interference to the at least one of the reference signal or the channel (see, Kang: para. [0047], “embodiments of the present disclosure are described using RSRP as an example of a measurement that is made based on a known Reference Signal (RS), e.g., the Sounding Reference Signal (SRS) or the Demodulation Reference Signal (DMRS).”; para. [0060], “The estimated value of a parameter related to the received interference”; and para. [0088], “the present disclosure teaches signaling and methods for measurements based on reference signals such as the SRS and DMRS and reporting of these measurements in order to manage UE to UE interference”).
Regarding claim 11:
As discussed above, Kang teaches all limitations in claim 8.
Kang further teaches wherein the value of the interference measurement is an interference value or an error rate value measured during a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) reception (see, Kang: para. [0060], “The estimated value of a parameter related to the received interference”), and wherein the entering condition is satisfied when the value of the interference measurement exceeds a corresponding value threshold (see, Kang: para. [0009], “a triggering condition that an aggregate cross-link interference exceeds a certain threshold;”).
Regarding claim 19:
As discussed above, Kang teaches all limitations in claim 8.
Kang further teaches wherein the sending includes performing semi-persistent sending of the one or more reports using resources that are configured via a higher layer signaling by the network node (see, Kang: para. [0052], “Signaling from a serving gNB 14-1 to its UE 12-1 to provide measurement triggering condition related information for an aperiodic measurement report of SRS or DMRS transmitted by potential aggressor UEs 12-2 in other cells”; para. [0057], “The signaling to the UE 12-1 may be delivered via higher layer signaling, physical layer signaling, or a combination thereof.”).
Regarding claim 20:
As discussed above, Kang teaches all limitations in claim 8.
Kang further teaches wherein the sending of the one or more reports is further deactivated or activated by the network node using Layer 1 signaling (see, Kang: para. [0057], “The signaling to the UE 12-1 may be delivered via higher layer signaling, physical layer signaling, or a combination thereof.”; para. [0058], “The details of a SRS or DMRS measurement report request for a periodic report and triggering conditions that a gNB 14-1 uses to send the request are now described. The request can be UE specific or broadcast to enable reports from all associated UEs 12 in a serving gNB 14-1. The signal can be sent via higher layer (Radio Resource Control (RRC)) signaling, physical layer signaling (Downlink Control Information (DCI) messages), or via a combination of higher layer and physical layer (DCI messages) signaling.”, wherein the physical layer signaling is an L1 signaling.).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, 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.
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 2 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kang further in view of Haustein et al. (US 2023/0189315 A1, hereinafter Haustein).
Regarding claim 2:
As discussed above, Kang teaches all limitations in claim 1.
Kang further teaches wherein the one or more reference signals include a demodulation reference signal (DMRS) (see, Kang: para. [0006], “a method of operation of a wireless device in a wireless system comprises receiving, from a serving Access Point (AP), wireless device specific Sounding Reference Signal (SRS) or Demodulation Reference Signal (DMRS) configuration information for one or more potential aggressor wireless devices.”; para. [0047], “embodiments of the present disclosure are described using RSRP as an example of a measurement that is made based on a known Reference Signal (RS), e.g., the Sounding Reference Signal (SRS) or the Demodulation Reference Signal (DMRS).”).
Kang does not explicitly teach wherein a demodulation reference signal (DMRS) that is transmitted as a part of a physical data shared channel (PDSCH) or a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH).
In the same field of endeavor, Haustein teaches wherein a demodulation reference signal (DMRS) that is transmitted as a part of a physical data shared channel (PDSCH) or a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) (see, Haustein: para. [0029], “Demodulation Reference Signal (DMRS): Reference signals which are UE specific and could be beam formed, will be used for data and control demodulation. They are transmitted only on the PRBs upon which the corresponding PDSCH is mapped [3].”).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Kang in combination of the teachings of Haustein in order to use UE specific reference signals such as DM-RS transmitted on PDSCH (see, Haustein: para. [0029]).
Regarding claim 10:
As discussed above, Kang teaches all limitations in claim 8.
Kang further teaches wherein the one or more reference signals include a demodulation reference signal (DMRS) (see, Kang: para. [0006], “a method of operation of a wireless device in a wireless system comprises receiving, from a serving Access Point (AP), wireless device specific Sounding Reference Signal (SRS) or Demodulation Reference Signal (DMRS) configuration information for one or more potential aggressor wireless devices.”; para. [0047], “embodiments of the present disclosure are described using RSRP as an example of a measurement that is made based on a known Reference Signal (RS), e.g., the Sounding Reference Signal (SRS) or the Demodulation Reference Signal (DMRS).”).
Kang does not explicitly teach wherein a demodulation reference signal (DMRS) that is transmitted as a part of a physical data shared channel (PDSCH) or a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH).
In the same field of endeavor, Haustein teaches wherein a demodulation reference signal (DMRS) that is transmitted as a part of a physical data shared channel (PDSCH) or a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) (see, Haustein: para. [0029], “Demodulation Reference Signal (DMRS): Reference signals which are UE specific and could be beam formed, will be used for data and control demodulation. They are transmitted only on the PRBs upon which the corresponding PDSCH is mapped [3].”).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Kang in combination of the teachings of Haustein in order to use UE specific reference signals such as DM-RS transmitted on PDSCH (see, Haustein: para. [0029]).
Kang in view of Haustein teaches wherein the value of the interference measurement is measured during a reception of a demodulation reference signal (DMRS) for a physical data shared channel (PDSCH) or during a reception of an additional DMRS for a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH).
Kang further teaches wherein the value of the interference measurement is an interference value or a value for a number of channel estimation errors measured (see, Kang: para. [0059], “The request also specifies a report period. As a non-limiting example, there are several triggering conditions at a gNB side to send the UE specific measurement request signal (i.e., used by the gNB 14-1 to trigger the sending of the UE specific measurement request), which include any one or more of the following:”; para. [0060], “The estimated value of a parameter related to the received interference.”), and wherein the entering condition is satisfied when the value of the interference measurement exceeds a corresponding value threshold (see, Kang: para. [0009], “the method further comprises receiving, from the serving AP, one or more triggering conditions for aperiodic measurement reporting of SRS or DMRS transmitted by one or more aggressor wireless devices served by one or more other APs. In some embodiments, the one or more triggering conditions comprise: …; a triggering condition that an aggregate cross-link interference exceeds a certain threshold; …”).
Claims 3-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kang in view of Medles et al. (US 2018/0176059 A1, hereinafter Medles).
Regarding claim 3:
As discussed above, Kang teaches all limitations in claim 1.
Kang does not explicitly teach wherein the one or more reference signals include a demodulation reference signal (DMRS) sequence.
In the same field of endeavor, Medles teaches wherein the one or more reference signals include a demodulation reference signal (DMRS) sequence (see, Medles: Claim 1, “receiving from a base station a candidate demodulation reference signal (DMRS) sequence that is carried in a subframe and associated with a PDCCH carried in the subframe”).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Kang in combination of the teachings of Medles in order to calculate a correlation-based quality metric indicating a correlation between the received candidate DMRS sequence and a local DMRS sequence, and performing a PDCCH decoding process to decode the PDCCH when the quality metric is greater than a threshold (see, Medles: para. [0005]).
Regarding claim 4:
As discussed above, Kang in view of Medles teaches all limitations in claim 3.
Medles in view of Kang further teaches wherein the DMRS sequence is an orthogonal DMRS sequence that is orthogonal to a DMRS used in a physical data shared channel (PDSCH) or a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) by the network node or another network node (see, Medles: para. [0007], “the local or candidate DMRS sequence is one of a set of orthogonal or quasi-orthogonal sequences that are orthogonal or quasi-orthogonal across connected UEs in a cell of the base station and PDCCH aggregation levels.”).
Regarding claim 5:
As discussed above, Kang in view of Medles teaches all limitations in claim 4.
Medles in view of Kang further teaches wherein the orthogonal DMRS sequence enables detection of the UE-to-UE CLI by exploiting a low cross-correlation property between two orthogonal DMRS sequences (para. [0053], “the set of orthogonal or quasi-orthogonal sequences can be orthogonal or quasi-orthogonal across different UEs 121-123, or across different UE groups.”; para. [0011], “The method can include receiving from a base station a set of candidate demodulation reference signal (DMRS) sequences that are carried in a subframe and each associated with a PDCCH carried in the subframe, calculating a correlation-based quality metric indicating a correlation between a received candidate DMRS sequence and a local DMRS sequence for received candidate DMRS sequences, ranking the correlation-based quality metrics according to values of the correlation-based quality metrics, and decoding PDCCHs that are associated with a predetermined number of the received candidate DMRS sequences that have highest ranked quality metric values.”).
Regarding claim 6:
As discussed above, Kang in view of Medles teaches all limitations in claim 4.
Medles in view of Kang further teaches wherein the orthogonal DMRS sequence is provided to the UE via a higher layer signaling (e.g., RRC) by the network node (see, Medles: para. [0053], “the DMRS sequence allocation configuration can be signaled from the base station 110 to the UE 121 when an RRC connection is initially established between the UE 121 and the base station 110. The UE 121 can be one of a plurality of UEs 121-123 that are belong to a cell of the base station 110 and are in RRC connected mode. The DMRS sequence allocation configuration can indicate one or more DMRS sequences that are members of a set of orthogonal or quasi-orthogonal sequences, and are allocated to the UE 121.” See, Kim: para. [0013], “The IMR configuration information may include information about a location of an IMR, and the UE-to-UE cross-link interference may be measured at the location of the IMR. The IMR configuration information or the SRS configuration information may be cell-specifically, group-specifically, or UE-specifically configured. The IMR configuration information or the SRS configuration information may be received through radio resource control (RRC) signaling, downlink control information (DCI), or a group-common physical downlink control channel (PDCCH).”).
Claims 7, 12, 13, and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kang in view of Kim et al. (US 2022/0046459 A1, hereinafter Kim).
Regarding claim 7:
As discussed above, Kang teaches all limitations in claim 1.
Kang does not explicitly teach wherein the one or more reference signals include a channel state information reference signal (CSI-RS).
In the same field of endeavor, Kim teaches wherein the one or more reference signals include a channel state information reference signal (CSI-RS) (see, Kim: para. [0181], “The IMR may be a resource for measurement in a UE. In this case, aggressor UEs may transmit an IMR RS in the form of a channel state information-RS (CSI-RS).”).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Kang in combination of the teachings of Kim in order to measure UE-to-UE CLI using a CSI-RS (see, Kim: para. [0181]).
Regarding claim 12:
As discussed above, Kang teaches all limitations in claim 8.
Kang does not explicitly teach wherein the value of the interference measurement is an interference value measured during a generation of a channel quality indicator (CQI) report.
In the same field of endeavor, Kim teaches wherein the value of the interference measurement is an interference value measured during a generation of a channel quality indicator (CQI) report (see, Kim: para. [0181], “One or more IMRs and subframe sets to which the IMRs are applied may be separately configured so that limited measurement may be performed during measurement of a received signal strength indicator (RSSI) or measurement of a CQI caused by interference.”), and wherein the entering condition is satisfied when the value of the interference measurement exceeds a corresponding value threshold (see, Kim: para. [0286], “The UE performs reporting to the eNB only when the measured cross-link interference value is greater than the preset threshold or when there is a preset threshold error as compared with a previously measured/reported value.”).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Kang in combination of the teachings of Kim in order to perform measurement during measurement of a CQI caused by interference (see, Kim: para. [0181]).
Regarding claim 13:
As discussed above, Kang teaches all limitations in claim 8.
Kang does not explicitly teach wherein the sending includes sending the one or more reports via one or more slots, one or more symbols, one or more resource blocks, one or more physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) resources, or one or more physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) resources that are configured by the network node.
In the same field of endeavor, Kim teaches wherein the sending includes sending the one or more reports via one or more slots, one or more symbols, one or more resource blocks, one or more physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) resources, or one or more physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) resources that are configured by the network node (see, Kim: para. [0284], “The UE may periodically report the measured value to the eNB at given periods through a PUCCH or a PUSCH.”).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Kang in combination of the teachings of Kim in order for the UE to periodically report the measured value to the eNB at given periods through a PUCCH or a PUSCH (see, Kim: para. [0284]).
Regarding claim 16:
As discussed above, Kang teaches all limitations in claim 8.
Kang does not explicitly teach wherein stopping, by the processor, the sending of the one or more reports to the network node when a leaving condition is satisfied, and wherein the leaving condition is satisfied when the value of an interference measurement no longer exceeds the interference threshold.
In the same field of endeavor, Kim teaches wherein stopping, by the processor, the sending of the one or more reports to the network node when a leaving condition is satisfied, and wherein the leaving condition is satisfied when the value of an interference measurement no longer exceeds the interference threshold (see, Kim: para. [0284], “in order to reduce power consumption of the UE, only when the measured value is greater than the preset threshold, the UE may report the measured value to the eNB at a corresponding period among the given periods and, otherwise, the UE may not perform reporting to the eNB.”).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Kang in combination of the teachings of Kim in order to reduce power consumption of the UE (see, Kim: para. [0284]).
Regarding claim 17:
As discussed above, Kang teaches all limitations in claim 8.
Kang does not explicitly teach wherein stopping, by the processor, the sending of the one or more reports to the network node when a preconfigured number of reports are sent.
In the same field of endeavor, Kim teaches wherein stopping, by the processor, the sending of the one or more reports to the network node when a preconfigured number of reports are sent (see, Kim: para. [0331], “if a handover request is reported as many times as a specific number of times within a specific time …, the eNB may command the UE not to perform cross-link interference measurement.”).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Kang in combination of the teachings of Kim in order to reduce power consumption of the UE (see, Kim: para. [0284]).
Regarding claim 18:
As discussed above, Kang teaches all limitations in claim 8.
Kang does not explicitly teach wherein the sending includes sending consecutive reports according to a reporting interval configured by the network node.
In the same field of endeavor, Kim teaches wherein the sending includes sending consecutive reports according to a reporting interval configured by the network node (see, Kim: para. [0284], “The UE may periodically report the measured value to the eNB at given periods through a PUCCH or a PUSCH.”).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Kang in combination of the teachings of Kim in order to reduce power consumption of the UE (see, Kim: para. [0284]).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kang further in view of Ibrahim et al. (US 2026/0005779 A1, hereinafter Ibrahim).
Regarding claim 14:
As discussed above, Kang teaches all limitations in claim 8.
Kang does not explicitly teach wherein the sending includes sending a report that includes a bit value that indicates a level of the UE-to-UE CLI or a bit value that serves as a pointer to a table that defines different UE-to-UE CLI levels or different UE-to-UE CLI values for various bit values.
In the same field of endeavor, Ibrahim teaches wherein the sending includes sending a report that includes a bit value that indicates a level of the UE-to-UE CLI or a bit value that serves as a pointer to a table that defines different UE-to-UE CLI levels or different UE-to-UE CLI values for various bit values (see, Ibrahim: para. [0087], “The CLI level may be indicated using one or more bits.”; para. [0088], “the UE 720 may quantize a CLI measurement before reporting. For example, the CLI level may be a quantized value of a CLI measurement, an average of CLI measurements, a maximum of CLI measurements, a minimum of CLI measurements, or another value associated with CLI. In one option for reporting, as shown by MAC CE 702, a CLI measurement may be quantized into 6 bits.”; para. [0110], “a UE may indicate a CLI report ID using a bitmap instead of using an explicit CLI report ID.”).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Kang in combination of the teachings of Ibrahim in order to reduce signaling overhead by using a bitmap (see, Ibrahim: para. [0110]).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kang further in view of Zhang et al. (US 2024/0146446 A1, hereinafter Zhang).
Regarding claim 15:
As discussed above, Kang teaches all limitations in claim 8.
Kang does not explicitly teach wherein the sending includes sending a report that indicates a resource on which the UE-to-UE CLI is detected, the resource including one or more slots, one or more symbols, one or more resource blocks, or one or more transport blocks.
In the same field of endeavor, Zhang teaches wherein the sending includes sending a report that indicates a resource on which the UE-to-UE CLI is detected, the resource including one or more slots, one or more symbols, one or more resource blocks, or one or more transport blocks (see, Zhang: para. [0104], “The UE may measure the characteristic of the UE-to-UE CLI reference signal in the plurality of sub-SBs of the symbol (e.g., according to the configuration). The UE may then transmit, and the network node may receive, a report including information associated with the characteristic of the UE-to-UE CLI reference signal in the plurality of sub-SBs.”).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Kang in combination of the teachings of Zhang in order to measure and report the characteristic of the UE-to-UE CLI according to the configuration received from the network node (see, Zhang: para. [0104]).
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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JI-HAE YEA whose telephone number is (571) 270-3310. The examiner can normally be reached on MON-FRI, 7am-3pm, 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, SUJOY K KUNDU can be reached on (571) 272-8586. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JI-HAE YEA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2471
Prosecution Insights