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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. INDIA 202321010921 filed on 2/17/2023.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) has not been submitted.
Claim Objections
Claim 13 is objected because of the following informalities:
In claim 13, it is suggested to replace “one or more physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) resources” (line 3) with “one or more physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) resources” for clarity.
Appropriate correction is required.
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, 7-9, 11-13, and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim et al. (US 2022/0046459 A1, hereinafter Kim).
Regarding claim 1:
Kim teaches a method (see, Kim: Abstract), comprising:
detecting, by a processor of a user equipment (UE) (see, Kim: Fig. 2, UE 110, Processor 155), that a value of an interference measurement for at least one of one or more reference signals or one or more channels (e.g., DM-RS, CSI-RS, or SRS) used by the UE to communicate with a network node indicates that an interference has exceeded an interference threshold (see, Kim: para. [0012], “a method of reporting measurement information by a user equipment (UE), including receiving interference measurement resource (IMR) configuration information or sounding reference signal (SRS) configuration information, for UE-to-UE cross-link interference measurement, from a base station (BS); measuring UE-to-UE cross-link interference based on the IMR configuration information or the SRS configuration information; ...”; para. [0283], “The UE may report the measured cross-link interference value to the eNB only when the measured value is greater than a preset threshold”); 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, Kim: para. [0012], “…; measuring UE-to-UE cross-link interference based on the IMR configuration information or the SRS configuration information; and transmitting a report including a measured UE-to-UE cross-link interference value to the BS.”).
Regarding claim 7:
As discussed above, Kim teaches all limitations in claim 1.
Kim further 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).”).
Regarding claim 8:
Kim teaches a method (see, Kim: Abstract), comprising:
determining, by a processor of a user equipment (UE) (see, Kim: Fig. 2, UE 110, Processor 155), 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 (e.g., DM-RS, CSI-RS, or SRS) used by the UE to communicate with a network node indicates that an interference has exceeded an interference threshold (see, Kim: para. [0012], “a method of reporting measurement information by a user equipment (UE), including …; measuring UE-to-UE cross-link interference based on the IMR configuration information or the SRS configuration information; ...”; para. [0283], “The UE may report the measured cross-link interference value to the eNB only when the measured value is greater than a preset threshold”, wherein the determining step that an entering condition for triggering reporting of UE-to-UE CLI by the UE is satisfied is inherent.); 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, Kim: para. [0012], “…; and transmitting a report including a measured UE-to-UE cross-link interference value to the BS.”).
Regarding claim 9:
As discussed above, Kim teaches all limitations in claim 8.
Kim 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, Kim: para. [0012], “transmitting a report including a measured UE-to-UE cross-link interference value to the BS.”; para. [0179], “a resource corresponding to a DL data region may be configured as the IMR to estimate a channel of cross-link interference from a neighbor aggressor UL or predict the amount of interference.”; para. [0181], “aggressor UEs may transmit an IMR RS in the form of a channel state information-RS (CSI-RS).”).
Regarding claim 11:
As discussed above, Kim teaches all limitations in claim 8.
Kim 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, and wherein the entering condition is satisfied when the value of the interference measurement exceeds a corresponding value threshold (see, Kim: para. [0294], “The UE may receive configuration information for SRS transmission from the eNB (or serving cell) through a PDCCH or a PDSCH.”; 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.”).
Regarding claim 12:
As discussed above, Kim teaches all limitations in claim 8.
Kim further 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.”).
Regarding claim 13:
As discussed above, Kim teaches all limitations in claim 8.
Kim further 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 downlink control channel (PDCCH) 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.”).
Regarding claim 16:
As discussed above, Kim teaches all limitations in claim 8.
Kim further 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.”).
Regarding claim 17:
As discussed above, Kim teaches all limitations in claim 8.
Kim further 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.”).
Regarding claim 18:
As discussed above, Kim teaches all limitations in claim 8.
Kim further 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.”).
Regarding claim 19:
As discussed above, Kim teaches all limitations in claim 8.
Kim 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, Kim: para. [0287], “The UE may aperiodically report the measured value to the eNB by request based on event-trigger, without periodically reporting the measured value to the eNB through the PUCCH or the PUSCH.”).
Regarding claim 20:
As discussed above, Kim teaches all limitations in claim 8.
Kim 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, Kim: para. [0330], “the eNB may inform the UE of a signal capable of disabling periodic UE-to-UE cross-link interference measurement through predefined signaling.”; para. [0331], “the eNB may signal information indicating that IMR is invalid as in Proposal 11-2 to the UE. Furthermore, the eNB may inform the UE of information indicating that the IMR is invalid only during a specific time among time periods together with a specific time value.”).
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 Kim in view of Haustein et al. (US 2023/0189315 A1, hereinafter Haustein).
Regarding claim 2:
As discussed above, Kim teaches all limitations in claim 1.
Kim teaches wherein the one or more reference signals include a demodulation reference signal (DMRS) (see, Kim: para. [0181], “the IMR may be configured on a transmission resource of a DM-RS or an SRS transmitted by the aggressor UEs.”).
Kim 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 Kim 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, Kim teaches all limitations in claim 8.
Kim teaches wherein the one or more reference signals include a demodulation reference signal (DMRS) (see, Kim: para. [0181], “the IMR may be configured on a transmission resource of a DM-RS or an SRS transmitted by the aggressor UEs.”).
Kim 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).
Kim 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 Kim 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]).
Kim 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).
Kim 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, 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.”; para. [0294], “The UE may receive configuration information for SRS transmission from the eNB (or serving cell) through a PDCCH or a PDSCH. The configuration information may be used for UE-to-UE cross-link interference measurement as well as for sounding for measurement.”), and wherein the entering condition is satisfied when the value of the interference measurement exceeds a corresponding value threshold (see, Kim: para. [0016], “The report may be aperiodically transmitted when the measured UE-to-UE cross-link interference value is greater than a preset threshold or when a difference between the measured UE-to-UE cross-link interference value and a previously reported measured value is greater than a preset threshold difference.”).
Claims 3-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Medles et al. (US 2018/0176059 A1, hereinafter Medles).
Regarding claim 3:
As discussed above, Kim teaches all limitations in claim 1.
Kim 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 Kim 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, Kim in view of Medles teaches all limitations in claim 3.
Medles in view of Kim 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, Kim in view of Medles teaches all limitations in claim 4.
Medles in view of Kim 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, Kim in view of Medles teaches all limitations in claim 4.
Medles in view of Kim 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).”).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Ibrahim et al. (US 2026/0005779 A1, hereinafter Ibrahim).
Regarding claim 14:
As discussed above, Kim teaches all limitations in claim 8.
Kim 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 Kim 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 Kim in view of Zhang et al. (US 2024/0146446 A1, hereinafter Zhang).
Regarding claim 15:
As discussed above, Kim teaches all limitations in claim 8.
Kim 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 Kim 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
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