DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed 02/06/2026 has been entered. Claims 1, 16 and 20 have been amended. Claims 10-13, 15 and 19 are canceled. Claims 1-9, 14, 16-18 and 20 are currently pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 02/06/2026 have been fully considered. Regarding independent claims 1, 16 and 20; they are not persuasive/moot based on the new ground of rejection.
First argument,
Claims 1-2, 6, 16-17, and 20 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. §102 as being allegedly anticipated by the Kim et al. patent (U.S. Patent No. 10,812,248, hereinafter "Kim"). In response, the Applicant has amended independent claims 1, 16, and 20 to more clearly recite aspects of the present disclosure.
In particular, the Applicant submits that Kim fails to disclose or suggest at least "disabling, ... in response to the detecting the presence of a plurality of user devices [in a cell of a mobile network that deploys at least two instances of a carrier that supports beamforming], a carrier aggregation in the cell for a first subset of the plurality of user devices that supports multi-user multiple input, multiple output communications ... [,] activating, ... after disabling the carrier aggregation, multi user multiple input, multiple output communications for the first subset of the plurality of user devices on the at least two instances, such that each instance of the at least two instances supports up to four user devices of the plurality of user devices ... [,] and applying ... the carrier aggregation for a second subset of the plurality of user devices that does not support multi-user multiple input, multiple output communications, wherein the applying includes utilizing at least one spectrum band of an instance of a carrier that does not support beamforming and that is not utilized for applying the carrier aqqreqation to support at least one device of the first subset that cannot be supported by the at least two instances,"
as recited by the Applicant's independent claims 1, 16, and 20.
By contrast, the cited portions of Kim do not appear to disclose the specific instance in which: (1) more than eight user devices are detected in a cell; (2) the cell deploys two or more mid-band TDD carriers; and (3) a base station serving the cell activates MU-MIMO on each of the mid-band TDD carriers in a manner such that each mid-band carrier that is deployed with MU-MIMO may support up to four UEs and any FDD spectrum bands that are saved from carrier aggregation may be utilized for user devices beyond the first eight user devices that share the mid- band TDD carriers (i.e., four UEs per each mid-band TDD carrier, assuming two mid-band TDD carriers).
Reply, examiner respectfully disagrees.
Regarding the claimed feature stating "disabling, by the processing system in response to the detecting the presence of the plurality of user devices, a carrier aggregation in the cell for a first subset of the plurality of user devices that supports multi-user multiple input, multiple output communications;”, Kim teaches switching to a second mode not invoking carrier aggregation in response to detecting that a base station is operating in an operational state, where that operational state is characterized by detecting the presence of a threshold quantity of user devices in connected mode and a utilization of a threshold quantity of resources, as cited below.
[Column 11; lines 14-28]-“As shown in FIG. 3, at block 32, the method includes detecting that the base station is operating in an operational state including (i) the base station serving at least a predefined threshold quantity of connected-mode devices and (ii) the base station allocating at least a predefined threshold quantity of the air-interface resource per unit time. And at block 34, the method includes, responsive to detecting that the base station is operating in the operational state, disabling carrier-aggregation service by the base station, including transitioning the base station from a first mode in which the base station is configured to invoke carrier-aggregation when a carrier-aggregation trigger condition exists to a second mode in which the base station is configured to not invoke carrier-aggregation even when the carrier-aggregation trigger condition exists.”
In the disclosure of Kim, the wireless communication device, WCDs, are assumed to support MU-MIMO by default. The main problem that Kim seeks to address is suboptimal spectral efficiency caused by the fact that secondary component carriers, SCCs, are used for carrier aggregation and, hence, cannot be used for MU-MIMO transmission, as cited below.
[column 4; lines 27-38]-“Unfortunately, this could be a problem in a scenario where the base station has very high air-interface resource utilization across its multiple carriers and where the base station is serving many WCDs so that application of MU-MIMO service may be beneficial. In that scenario, the base station's inability to include a WCD in a MU-MIMO group on the carrier being used as the WCD's SCC would result in sub-optimal spectral efficiency on that carrier, since the air-interface resources that the base station allocates for data transmission to the WCD on that carrier could not be used concurrently for data transmission to one or more other WCDs.”
Regarding the remaining features argued in the amended independent claims, they are moot based on new grounds of rejection. Furthermore, the arguments for claims 3-5, 7-9, 10-15 and 18-19 are also moot based on new grounds of rejection. Please refer to section 4 below pertaining to claim rejections under 35 USC 103 for additional details.
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.
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 non-obviousness.
Claims 1-2, 6, 16-17, 20, 21, 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable by Kim et al (US 10812248 B1) hereinafter Kim in view of Sung et al. (US 20190268054 A1) hereinafter Sung in further view of Park et al. (US 20140119248 A1) hereinafter Park in further view of Pedersen et al. (US 20120327878 A1) hereinafter Pedersen.
Regarding claim 1,
Kim teaches a method (Citation: [column 11: lines 14-16]-“As shown in FIG. 3, at block 32, the method includes detecting that the base station is operating in an operational state…”; also refer to column 11, lines 14-28; column 12, lines 1-5; Figs. 3 and 4. Examiner comment: method.) comprising: detecting, by a processing system including at least one processor, a presence of a plurality of user devices in a cell of a mobile network that deploys a carrier that supports beamforming (Citation: [Column 11; lines 14-28]-“As shown in FIG. 3, at block 32, the method includes detecting that the base station is operating in an operational state including (i) the base station serving at least a predefined threshold quantity of connected-mode devices and (ii) the base station allocating at least a predefined threshold quantity of the air-interface resource per unit time. And at block 34, the method includes, responsive to detecting that the base station is operating in the operational state, disabling carrier-aggregation service by the base station, including transitioning the base station from a first mode in which the base station is configured to invoke carrier-aggregation when a carrier-aggregation trigger condition exists to a second mode in which the base station is configured to not invoke carrier-aggregation even when the carrier-aggregation trigger condition exists.” ; column 11, lines 14-28; Figs. 3 and 5. Examiner comment: detecting, by a base station including a controller, a number of devices in connected-mode above a certain threshold, where the devices use carriers supporting beamforming.), wherein the plurality of user devices includes more than eight user devices (Citation: [Column 11; lines 14-28]-“In operation of this process, the base station could regularly monitor how many connected-mode WCDs the base station is serving, such as with how many WCDs the base station has an established RRC connection. At issue could be whether this quantity of connected-mode WCDs is at least as high as a predefined threshold quantity. The predefined threshold quantity could be at least five connected-mode WCDs (and could thus be set to a value that is five or more). And the base station could be pre-programmed or otherwise provisioned with this threshold value to facilitate the process.”; also refer to column 10; lines 19-29 and column 3; lines 20-25. Examiner comment: The WCD devices could be five or more.); disabling, by the processing system in response to the detecting the presence of the plurality of user devices, carrier aggregation in the cell for a first subset of the plurality of user devices that supports multi-user multiple input, multiple output communications (Citation: [Column 11; lines 14-28]-“As shown in FIG. 3, at block 32, the method includes detecting that the base station is operating in an operational state including (i) the base station serving at least a predefined threshold quantity of connected-mode devices and (ii) the base station allocating at least a predefined threshold quantity of the air-interface resource per unit time. And at block 34, the method includes, responsive to detecting that the base station is operating in the operational state, disabling carrier-aggregation service by the base station, including transitioning the base station from a first mode in which the base station is configured to invoke carrier-aggregation when a carrier-aggregation trigger condition exists to a second mode in which the base station is configured to not invoke carrier-aggregation even when the carrier-aggregation trigger condition exists.” ; also refer to column 9, lines 40-44; column 11, lines 14-65; Fig. 3. Examiner comment: transitioning, by the base station, to a second mode of operation in response to the detection by refraining from invoking carrier aggregation.); and activating, by the processing system after disabling the carrier aggregation, multi user multiple input, multiple output communications for the first subset of the plurality of user devices (Citation: [column 11; lines 62-65]-“And as additionally discussed above, the operational state when the carrier-aggregation service will be disabled could further include the base station having MU-MIMO service enabled.”; column 11, lines 62-65; Fig. 3. Examiner comment: having MU-MIMO enabled on a base station after transitioning to a second mode of operation for the devices in connected-mode.).
Kim does not explicitly teach the mobile network deploys at least two carrier instances that support beamforming, the first subset of the plurality of user devices on at least two instances, such that each instance of the at least two instances supports up to four user devices of the plurality of user devices; applying, by the processing system, the carrier aggregation for a second subset of the plurality of user devices that does not support multi-user multiple input, multiple output communications, wherein the applying includes utilizing at least one spectrum band of another carrier that is not utilized for applying the carrier aqqreqation to support at least one user device of the first subset that cannot be supported by the at least two instances.
Sung teaches applying, by the processing system, the carrier aggregation for a second subset of the plurality of user devices that does not support multi-user multiple input, multiple output communications (Citation: [0037]-“For the DL, baseband circuitry 313 receives DL data from the wireless network elements. The DL data mainly comprises user data but also indicates which UEs are CA capable and/or MU-MIMO capable. The DL data could transport a data structure to translate MU-MIMO loads into CA RF thresholds. Baseband circuitry 313 processes the DL data through the network applications—PHY, MAC, IP, GTP, 51, RRC, PDCP, RLC, to the MAC. The MAC selects CA-eligible UEs for CA service when their RF signal strength exceeds the CA RF threshold—and possibly other factors. The MAC selects MU-MIMO-eligible UEs for MU-MIMO service based on factors like MU-MIMO bandwidth requirements, access point load, and the like.” ; also refer to [0037]-[0047]. Examiner comment: selecting CA-eligible UEs for CA service when the CA-eligible UEs do not support MU-MIMO.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Sung to the teachings of Kim. One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would enhance service quality (Sung [0006]).
Kim and Sung do not explicitly teach the mobile network deploys at least two carrier instances that support beamforming, the first subset of the plurality of user devices on at least two instances, such that each instance of the at least two instances supports up to four user devices of the plurality of user devices; wherein the applying includes utilizing at least one spectrum band of another carrier that is not utilized for applying the carrier aqqreqation to support at least one user device of the first subset that cannot be supported by the at least two instances.
Park teaches the mobile network deploys at least two carrier instances that support beamforming (Citation: [0074]-“The BS sets a TDD scheme of a first component carrier and that of a second component carrier and gives an instruction on the set TDD schemes to the UE, in step S710. The term "TDD configuration (or TDD setting)" refers to the configuration of uplink/downlink subframes as described above in Table 1. Then, the BS transmits a wireless signal including data to the UE through any one or more component carriers from among a component carrier set including the first and second component carriers, in step S720. In FIG. 7, the wireless signal including data signifies the transmission of a PDSCH in downlink. The first component carrier may be a PCell, and the second component carrier may be an SCell.”; [0074]. Examiner comment: Park teaches first and second TDD component carriers supporting uplink and downlink transmission, which agrees with what the specification of the current application says at paragraph [0043] about the type of component carrier supporting beamforming. Kim teaches using them to be utilized for beamforming (Kim [column 3, lines 1-20]). Also, examiner interprets a beamforming layer in Kim [column 3 lines 20-25] to mean beamforming channel, which is a closely related concept to the “carrier instance” claimed, though not identical as layers are shared between all WCDs within the group. Kim [column 3 lines 20-25]-“With this arrangement, if 4 transmit antennas are used per layer (e.g., to facilitate beamforming), the massive-MIMO antenna array might support on the order of 16 layers, which may facilitate concurrent service of 8 WCDs with 2 layers apiece or 16 WCDs with 1 layer apiece, among other possibilities. Examiner interprets this as a “WCD with 2 layers” in each direction as MIMO antenna.”),
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Park to the teachings of Kim and Sung. One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would enhance uplink control information transmission (Park [0006]).
Kim and Sung and Park do not explicitly teach the first subset of the plurality of user devices on at least two instances, such that each instance of the at least two instances supports up to four user devices of the plurality of user devices; wherein the applying includes utilizing at least one spectrum band of another carrier that is not utilized for applying the carrier aqqreqation to support at least one user device of the first subset that cannot be supported by the at least two instances.
Pedersen teaches the first subset of the plurality of user devices on at least two instances, such that each instance of the at least two instances supports up to four user devices of the plurality of user devices (Citation: [0063]-“The parameter D may vary between each component carrier but usually parameter D is the same for each component carrier. Similar to step 704, the step of determining the maximum number of user equipment to be assigned to the component carriers may comprise retrieving parameter D from memory. In some embodiments the parameter D corresponds to a desirable number of user equipments assigned to each component carrier to provide good multi-user frequency domain packet scheduling. In some embodiments the processor sets D=6 to 8.” ; also refer to [0060]-[0068] and [0104]-[0105]; Figs. 9-11 . Examiner comment: the first subset may correspond to any of the UEs shown on Figs. 9-11.); wherein the applying includes utilizing at least one spectrum band of another carrier that is not utilized for applying the carrier aqqreqation to support at least one user device of the first subset that cannot be supported by the at least two instances (Citation: [0051]-“Having determined the loading of the component carriers and the capability of the user equipment for carrier aggregation, the processor 14 initiates assigning the user equipment to one or more component carriers on the basis of the determined loading of the component carriers and the capability of the user equipment 1 as shown in step 506.”; also refer to [0045]-[0052], [0060]-[0068], and [0104]-[0105]; Figs. 5-11. Examiner comment: Assigning user equipments requesting connection to new component carrier that have not been previously assigned to any UE when the maximum load on any prior component carrier has been reached.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Pedersen to the teachings of Kim and Sung and Park. One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would provide allocation fairness (Pedersen [0052]).
Please note that while Pedersen does not explicitly say each instance supports up to four user devices, Pedersen teaches that the maximum number user equipments to be assigned to the component carriers can be six ([0063]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to change the maximum number of user equipment devices that can be allocated to each component carrier from six to four as Pedersen teaches the maximum number can vary based on eNB load condition ([0063] and [0104]-[0105]; Figs. 9-11).
Regarding claim 2,
Kim and Sung and Park and Pedersen teach all the features of claim 1, as outlined above.
Kim teaches further teaches the carrier that supports beamforming is a time division duplexing carrier (Citation: [column 3, lines 57-66] and [column 4, lines 1-4]-“ This evaluation of uplink transmission from the WCD to facilitate configuring downlink beamformed transmission from the base station may be frequency-dependent. In particular, the channel frequency response, angle of arrival, and/or other such information associated with the air-interface path between the base station and the WCD may vary from frequency to frequency, due to differences in refraction and/or other factors. Therefore, the process of configuring downlink beamforming to a WCD based on evaluation of uplink transmission from the WCD may work best where the WCD's uplink transmission is on the same carrier as the base station's downlink transmission. (Moreover, the process may work best where the carrier is a TDD carrier, with the same frequency channel being used for both downlink and uplink transmission.”; also refer to; Examiner comment: beamforming carrier using TDD.).
Regarding claim 6,
Kim and Sung and Park and Pedersen teach all the features of claim 1, as outlined above.
Kim further teaches at least one base station serving cell is equipped with a multiple input, multiple output antenna (Citation: [Column 2, lines 61-67] and [column 3, lines 1-10]-“ This evaluation of uplink transmission from the WCD to facilitate configuring downlink beamformed transmission from the base station may be frequency-dependent. In particular, the channel frequency response, angle of arrival, and/or other such information associated with the air-interface path between the base station and the WCD may vary from frequency to frequency, due to differences in refraction and/or other factors. Therefore, the process of configuring downlink beamforming to a WCD based on evaluation of uplink transmission from the WCD may work best where the WCD's uplink transmission is on the same carrier as the base station's downlink transmission. (Moreover, the process may work best where the carrier is a TDD carrier, with the same frequency channel being used for both downlink and uplink transmission.”; Examiner comment: beamforming carrier using TDD.).
Claims [16 and 17] “…non-transitory computer-readable medium…” are rejected under the same reasoning as claims [1 and 2] “method”, respectively.
Claim 20 “device” is rejected under the same reasoning as claim 1 “method”.
Regarding claim 21,
Kim and Sung and Park and Pedersen teach all the features of claim 1, as outlined above.
Kim and Sung and Park do not explicitly teach wherein the at least one spectrum band of another carrier is further utilized to support at least one user device of the plurality of user devices that does not support the carrier that supports beamforming.
Pedersen teaches wherein the at least one spectrum band of another carrier is further utilized to support at least one user device of the plurality of user devices that does not support the carrier that supports beamforming (Citation: [0051]-“Having determined the loading of the component carriers and the capability of the user equipment for carrier aggregation, the processor 14 initiates assigning the user equipment to one or more component carriers on the basis of the determined loading of the component carriers and the capability of the user equipment 1 as shown in step 506.”; also refer to [0045]-[0052], [0060]- [0067], Figure 7 and [0068] – “If the user equipment is already assigned to the component carrier, the processor 14 then selects another component carrier as shown in step 716. In some embodiments another component carrier is selected on the basis of having the next lowest load.” , and [0104]-[0105]; Figs. 5-11. Examiner comment: Assigning user equipments requesting connection to new component carrier that have not been previously assigned to any UE when the maximum load on any prior component carrier has been reached. The carriers that support beamforming are interpreted as those that get assigned first. While Pedersen is silent about whether or not user devices support beamforming, the deficiency is cured by Sung [0037]-[0047].).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Pedersen to the teachings of Kim and Sung and Park. One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would provide allocation fairness (Pedersen [0052]).
Regarding claim 26,
Kim and Sung and Park and Pedersen teach all the features of claim 1, as outlined above.
Kim further teaches repeating the detecting, the disabling, the activating, and the applying as new user devices enter the cell and user devices of the plurality of user devices leave the cell (Citation: [column 5; lines 1-12]-“In an example implementation of this process, for instance, the base station could regularly monitor its operational state to make a determination of whether the operational state includes (i) the base station serving at least a predefined threshold quantity of connected-mode WCDs and (ii) the base station allocating at least a predefined threshold quantity of air-interface resources per unit time. And at times when the determination is affirmative, the base station could responsively operate with carrier-aggregation service disabled. Whereas, at times when the determination is negative, the base station could responsively operate with carrier-aggregation service enabled.” And [column 10; lines 48-58]-“Note also that, since a technical rationale for disabling carrier-aggregation in this scenario may be to facilitate more MU-MIMO service, the base station could further condition its disabling of carrier-aggregation service on a determination that the base station has MU-MIMO service enabled—i.e., that the base station is currently configured to provide MU-MIMO service when appropriate. In an example implementation, for instance, there may be times or situations when the base station may have MU-MIMO service enabled and there may be other times or situations when the base station may MU-MIMO service disabled.”; also refer to column 10; lines 48-58 and column 11; lines 62-65. Examiner comment: the base station regular monitors how many WCDs are in a connected state, disable carrier aggregation, and activating MU-MIMO.).
Claims 3-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim and Sung and Park and Pedersen in further view of GHEORGHIU et al. (US 20240056134 A1) hereinafter GHEORGHIU.
Regarding claim 3,
Kim and Sung and Park and Pedersen teach all the features of claim 2, as outlined above.
Kim and Sung and Park and Pedersen do not explicitly teach the time division duplexing carrier operates in a frequency spectrum falling within a range of 1 gigahertz to 7.125 gigahertz.
GHEORGHIU teaches the time division duplexing carrier operates in a frequency spectrum falling within a range of 1 gigahertz to 7.125 gigahertz (Citaiton: [0101]-“When network entities are located near each other (e.g., collocated), multiple concurrent transmissions of the same signals will arrive at the UE 602 at approximately the same time. For instance, some operators may have multiple channels in Frequency Range 1 (FR1), covering 410 MHz . Examiner comment: channels using TDD within FR1 ranging from 410MHz to 7.125Ghz.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of GHEORGHIU to the teachings of Kim and Sung and Park and Pedersen. One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would improve reception (GHEORGHIU [0002]).
Examiner points out that frequency range FR1 covers 410 MHz to 7125 MHz not 410 GHz to 7.125 GHz. as stated in GHEORGHIU
Regarding claim 4,
Kim and Sung and Park and Pedersen and GHEORGHIU teach all the features of claim 3, as outlined above.
Kim and Sung and Park and Pedersen do not explicitly teach the time division duplexing carrier comprises an n77 carrier.
GHEORGHIU further teaches the time division duplexing carrier comprises an n77 carrier (Citation: [0101]-“ When network entities are located near each other (e.g., collocated), multiple concurrent transmissions of the same signals will arrive at the UE 602 at approximately the same time. For instance, some operators may have multiple channels in Frequency Range 1 (FR1), covering 410 MHz . Examiner comment: channels using TDD within n77 band.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of GHEORGHIU to the teachings of Kim and Sung and Park and Pedersen. One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would improve reception (GHEORGHIU [0002]).
Regarding claim 5,
Kim and Sung and Park and Pedersen teach all the features of claim 1, as outlined above.
Kim further teaches the first subset of the plurality of user devices (Citation: [column 11, lines 14-28]-“As shown in FIG. 3, at block 32, the method includes detecting that the base station is operating in an operational state including (i) the base station serving at least a predefined threshold quantity of connected-mode devices and (ii) the base station allocating at least a predefined threshold quantity of the air-interface resource per unit time. And at block 34, the method includes, responsive to detecting that the base station is operating in the operational state, disabling carrier-aggregation service by the base station, including transitioning the base station from a first mode in which the base station is configured to invoke carrier-aggregation when a carrier-aggregation trigger condition exists to a second mode in which the base station is configured to not invoke carrier-aggregation even when the carrier-aggregation trigger condition exists.”; column 11, lines 14-28; Figs. 3 and 5. Examiner comment: a number of devices in connected-mode.).
Kim and Sung and Park and Pedersen do not explicitly teach at least one user device in the first subset of the plurality of user devices is equipped with a multiple input, multiple output antenna.
GHEORGHIU teaches at least one user device in the first subset of the plurality of user devices is equipped with a multiple input, multiple output antenna (Citation: [0076]-“In some aspects of the disclosure, the scheduling entity (e.g., a network entity) and/or scheduled entity (e.g., a UE) may be configured for beamforming and/or multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) technology. FIG. 5 illustrates an example of a wireless communication system 500 supporting MIMO. In a MIMO system, a transmitter 502 includes multiple transmit antennas 504 (e.g., N transmit antennas) and a receiver 506 includes multiple receive antennas 508 (e.g., M receive antennas). Thus, there are N×M signal paths 510 from the transmit antennas 504 to the receive antennas 508. Each of the transmitter 502 and the receiver 506 may be implemented, for example, within a network entity (e.g., scheduling entity 108), a scheduled entity 106, UE, or any other suitable wireless communication device.”; [0076]; Fig. 5. Examiner comment: transmitter and receiver including multiple transmit and receive antennas which may be implemented within a UE (or a WCD as termed by Kim).).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of GHEORGHIU to the teachings of Kim and Sung and Park and Pedersen. One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would improve reception (GHEORGHIU [0002]).
Claims 7 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim and Sung and Park and Pedersen in further view of Hunkeler et al. (US 20040008647 A1) hereinafter Hunkeler.
Regarding claim 7,
Kim and Sung and Park and Pedersen teach all the features of claim 1, as outlined above.
Kim and Sung and Park and Pedersen do not explicitly teach the disabling further comprises configuring a handover to a frequency division duplexing carrier at an edge of the cell.
Hunkeler teaches the disabling further comprises configuring a handover to a frequency division duplexing carrier at an edge of the cell (Citation: [0031]-“To further illustrate the system 100, there is shown a multimode WTRU 110 which is a candidate for a handover from TDD to FDD (i.e., a TDD-FDD handover). In this example, it is assumed that the WTRU 110 is operating in the TDD system, but is being evaluated for handover to the FDD system. To evaluate the handover, the RNC 102 sets a minimum TDD quality level based on the P-CCPCH-RSCP that was used for internal TDD-TDD handovers. The RNC 102 will also instruct all of the multimode WTRUs 109, 110 to report the extent of FDD coverage. The threshold used for determining the extent of FDD coverage is used as the minimum FDD quality level. Once the RNC 102 has both of the necessary quality levels, they are forwarded to the WTRU 110. The WTRU 110 then uses the quality levels to determine if Event 2b is satisfied. If Event 2b is satisfied, the WTRU 110 will be handed over from TDD to FDD. If not, the WTRU 110 will remain in TDD mode.” ; also refer to [0006] and [0030]-[0031]; Figs. 1, 2 and 4, specifically, see Figure 4 – WTRUs 109 and 110 are at the cell edge. Examiner comment: multimode system with handover from TDD to FDD within a cell including the cell border area.).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Hunkeler to the teachings of Kim and Sung and Park and Pedersen. One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would enhance connection quality (Hunkeler [0005]-[0006]).
Regarding claim 9,
Kim and Sung and Park and Pedersen and Hunkeler teach all the features of claim 7, as outlined above.
Kim and Sung and Park and Pedersen do not explicitly teach the handover extends a coverage of the cell.
Hunkeler teaches the handover extends a coverage of the cell (Citation: [0031]-“To further illustrate the system 100, there is shown a multimode WTRU 110 which is a candidate for a handover from TDD to FDD (i.e., a TDD-FDD handover). In this example, it is assumed that the WTRU 110 is operating in the TDD system, but is being evaluated for handover to the FDD system. To evaluate the handover, the RNC 102 sets a minimum TDD quality level based on the P-CCPCH-RSCP that was used for internal TDD-TDD handovers. The RNC 102 will also instruct all of the multimode WTRUs 109, 110 to report the extent of FDD coverage. The threshold used for determining the extent of FDD coverage is used as the minimum FDD quality level. Once the RNC 102 has both of the necessary quality levels, they are forwarded to the WTRU 110. The WTRU 110 then uses the quality levels to determine if Event 2b is satisfied. If Event 2b is satisfied, the WTRU 110 will be handed over from TDD to FDD. If not, the WTRU 110 will remain in TDD mode.” ; also refer to [0006] and [0030]-[0031]; Figs. 1 and 2. Examiner comment: the handover causes a switch to FDD which has greater coverage than TDD where figure 1 shows FDD operating at edge of TDD system).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Hunkeler to the teachings of Kim and Sung and Park and Pedersen. One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would enhance connection quality (Hunkeler [0005]-[0006]).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim and Sung and Park and Pedersen and Hunkeler, in further view of Sienkiewicz et al. (US 20150372396 A1) hereinafter Sienkiewicz.
Regarding claim 8,
Kim and Sung and Park and Pedersen and Hunkeler teach all the features of claim 7, as outlined above.
Kim and Sung and Park and Pedersen and Hunkeler do not explicitly teach the frequency division duplexing carrier operates in a frequency spectrum falling below 1 gigahertz.
Sienkiewicz teaches the frequency division duplexing carrier operates in a frequency spectrum falling below 1 gigahertz (Citation: [0007]-“ [0007] In prior art there are also antennas which are used for multiple frequency band operation in FDD system for receiving and transmitting signals at the same time. The advantage with FDD systems is that one utilizes the bandwidth in a better way since it may be used for receiving and transmitting at the same time. Normally the same antenna is used for receiving and transmitting, and hence a duplex filter is generally needed to avoid interference from the transmitted signal at the receiver side. For example, Band 17 as specified in the 3.sup.rd Generation Partnership Project (3 GPP) TS 36.104, Rel. 11.2.0, Table 5.5-1, uses 704-716 MHz as an Uplink (UL) band and 734-746 MHz as a Downlink (DL) band. Thus, for this particular band a duplex gap of 30 MHz is used. Since the received signal could be 100 dB smaller than the transmitted signal the received signal will be blocked out by emissions from the transmitter if not a duplex filter is used. The duplex filter should protect the receiver band from the out of band emissions from the transmitter. In general, this requires a filter with sharp edges and high attenuation in the stop band which require large and bulky cavity filters if there is a high output from the transmitter. A typical filter size for radio base station antennas using FDD and suitable for frequencies below 1 GHz, may for example be 35 cm×30 cm×17 cm and weigh about 5.5 kg. If many filters are required, e.g. in the case of a multi-band or wideband antenna system, the physical size of the total antenna arrangement will become large or very large. In case of multi-band antennas it is also possible to use a separate aperture for each supported frequency band in order to minimize interference between the frequency bands. Such a solution would of cause contribute to even larger and bulkier antenna solutions.”; [0007]. Examiner comment: FDD operating below 1 GHz .).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Sienkiewicz to the teachings of Kim and Sung and Park and Pedersen and Hunkeler. One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would extend radio coverage (Sienkiewicz [0005]-[0006]).
Claims 14 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim and Sung and Park and Pedersen in view of Burgess et al. (US 20170181010 A1) hereinafter Burgess.
Regarding claim 14,
Kim and Sung and Park and Pedersen teach all the features of claim 1, as outlined above.
Kim and Sung and Park and Pedersen do not explicitly teach a separation between user devices in the first subset of the plurality of user devices is at least fifteen degrees of angular separation on a horizontal direction for downlink.
Burgess teaches a separation between user devices in the first subset of the plurality of user devices is at least fifteen degrees of angular separation on a horizontal direction for downlink (Citation: [0041]-“FIG. 11 depicts an exemplary base station simultaneously scheduling multiple User Equipment (UE) devices to use the same frequency resources, based on the multiple UE signals arriving to at least two spatially separated base station antennas at an angle greater than a predetermined minimum angle. In FIG. 11, UE2 1105 transmits to the base station 105 from location L1 1110. In the depicted example, the UE2 1105 transmitter signal arrives to the base station 105 antenna array 145 at Angle of Arrival AoA2 1115. UE1 1120 transmits to the base station 105 from location L2 1125. In the depicted example, the UE1 1120 transmitter signal arrives to the base station 105 antenna array 145 at Angle of Arrival AoA1 1130. In the depicted example, the UE1 1120 transmitter signal and the UE2 1105 transmitter signal arrive to the base station with differential Angle of Separation 1135 between UE1 1120 transmitter signal and the UE2 1105 transmitter signal. In the depicted example, the UE1 1120 transmitter signal and the UE2 1105 transmitter signal are received on at least two spatially separated base station 105 antennas. In the illustrated example, the Angle of Separation 1135 between UE1 1120 transmitter signal and the UE2 1105 transmitter signal at the base station 105 is greater than a predetermined Minimum Angle of Separation 1140. In the depicted embodiment, the MAC Scheduler 130 is aware of the Angle of Separation 1135 and the Minimum Angle of Separation 1140. In the illustrated example, the MAC Scheduler 130 may simultaneously schedule uplink of UE1 1120 and UE2 1105, based on the Angle of Separation 1135. In some embodiments, the MAC Scheduler 130 may simultaneously schedule multiple UE devices to use the same uplink frequency resources at the same time, as a function of the Angles of Arrival AoA1 1130, AoA2 1115, and the Angle of Separation 1135, determined as a function of the separately demodulated and jointly decoded UE transmitter signals received on at least two spatially separated base station antennas. In an illustrative example, a joint decoder 555 may decode multiple UE signals separately although the signals arrive on the same frequencies at the same time. In various examples, a joint decoder 555 may identify each UE signal, decoding and recovering each UE signal arriving from different Angles of Arrival AoA1 1130 and AoA2 1115, based on the phase differentiation of the signals at the physical layer. In some designs, the MAC Scheduler 130 may double up, or simultaneously schedule, uplink transmissions to share the same time and frequency resources with the constraint that the Angle of Separation 1135 between the UE signals is greater than predetermined Minimum Angle of Separation 1140. In an illustrative example, the Minimum Angle of Separation may be defined as one-hundred and eighty degrees divided by the number of receive antennas. For example, in an embodiment system having two receive antennas, an Angle of Separation 1135 of more than ninety degrees may be sufficient for the MAC Scheduler 130 to simultaneously schedule multiple UE devices to use the same frequency resources at the same time, as a function of Angles of Arrival and Angles of Separation. In various embodiments, the MAC Scheduler 130 may optimize uplink capacity by coalescing UEs into groups having larger angle spread, based on scheduling decisions determined as a function of Angles of Arrival and Angles of Separation.”; [0041] and [0060]-[0071]; Fig. 11 .Examiner comment: minimum angle of separation between two UEs being 90 degrees on the azimuth).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of Burgess to the teachings of Kim and Sung and Park and Pedersen. One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would enhance bandwidth efficiency (Burgess [0005]).
Claim [18] “…non-transitory computer-readable medium…” is rejected under the same reasoning as claim [14] “method”.
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim and Sung and Park and Pedersen in further view of view of non-patent literature authored by H. -W. Liang et al. and titled "FDD-RT: A Simple CSI Acquisition Technique via Channel Reciprocity for FDD Massive MIMO Downlink," in IEEE Systems Journal, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 714-724, March 2018 hereinafter NPL Liang.
Regarding claim 14,
Kim and Sung and Park and Pedersen teach all the features of claim 1, as outlined above.
Kim and Sung and Park and Pedersen do not explicitly teach wherein the carrier that supports beamforming is a frequency division duplexing carrier.
NPL Liang teaches wherein the carrier that supports beamforming is a frequency division duplexing carrier (“The FDD-RT contributes in providing a simple and practical solution to enable massive MIMO in FDD, where only low complexity modifications are required to upgrade user equipments; we will show that the performance of FDD-RT is better than other solutions to FDD massive MIMO in prior research works. The cost of minor modification in user equipments is lower than the cost of changing FDD to TDD, where frequency band rearrangement is required. Unlike TDD, the UL/DL channel reciprocity in FDD-RT does not hold, which renders the BS in FDD-RT unable to obtain DL CSI by the pilots sent in UL channel from terminals. However, the channel reciprocity indeed holds between the forward link (BS to terminals) and reverse link (terminals to BS) of DL band in FDD-RT since both the forward link and the reverse link are in the same frequency band (i.e., DL channel). The terminals in FDD-RT are specified to send pilot symbols in DL frequency band to BS, and the BS is thus capable of estimating DL channel by applying CSI estimation algorithm such as minimum mean square error (MMSE) estimation.”; page 715. Examiner comment: While Kim; column 3; lines 39-67; and column 4; lines 1-4 mentions that TDD component carriers are better suited for MU-MIMO due to ease of channel estimation “In order to beamform MU-MIMO transmissions respectively to each such WCD in the MU-MIMO group, the base station may need to evaluate uplink transmission that the base station receives from the WCD, to determine a channel frequency response, an angle of arrival, and/or other information associated with the air-interface path between the base station and the WCD, so that the base station can use that information as a basis to configure downlink beamformed transmission to the WCD….”, NPL Liang addresses this by transmitting uplink pilot symbols through the downlink FDD channel of the component carrier since the carrier utilizes a different frequency channel for uplink and downlink transmissions. Although the channel estimation process is not identical to that of TDD as shown by Kim, other channel estimation approaches would apply, such as the one(s) shown in NPL Liang, because reciprocity holds between the forward and backward transmissions on the DL FDD channel.).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 22-25 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form.
Reason for allowing claim 23 is as follows:
While Kim teaches a carrier aggregation disabling mechanism, Kim teaches that it occurs at the base station level where the base station determines and implements the actions required for disabling carrier aggregation. Neither Kim nor any other reference cited or considered teaches or renders obvious that the disabling occurs on the cell level. While Sung teaches the baseband unit circuitry manages which UEs are selected for which type of service (carrier aggregation or MU-MIMO), (Sung [0029]-“FIG. 2 illustrates the operation of wireless access point 110 to control CA for wireless UEs based on MU-MIMO. Baseband Unit circuitry (BBU) 113 selects Carrier Aggregation User Equipment (CA UEs) based on Radio Frequency (RF) signal strengths for the CA UEs exceeding a CA RF threshold (201). The CA UEs may report their signal strengths to BBU 113 and/or transceiver circuitry (XCVR) 111 may detect corresponding signal strengths from the CA UEs on the UL. XCVR 111 wirelessly transfers user data to the selected CA UEs over CA links (202). XCVR 111 wirelessly transfers user data to the selected MU-MIMO UEs over Multi-User Multiple Input Multiple Output (MU-MIMO) links (202). BBU 113 monitors MU-MIMO loading and when the loading changes (203), BBU 113 adjusts the CA RF threshold based on the changed MU-MIMO load (204). The operation then returns to process block 201. When a MU-MIMO loading change does not occur (203), the operation returns to process block 201 without adjusting the CA RF threshold. In some examples, MU-MIMO load ranges are correlated to various CA RF thresholds in a data structure in BBU 113. Advantageously, wireless access point 110 protects MU-MIMO quality for some UEs while optimizing CA bandwidth for other UEs.”), Sung also teaches that such a decision is determined at the access point level. None of the other prior art cited or considered teach or suggest the Reason for allowing claim 24 is as follows:
Claim 24 is dependent on claim 23, hence, contains the allowable subject matter of claim 23, as outlined above.
Reason for allowing claim 25 is as follows:
While Sung teaches grouping devices based on capability (Sung [0037]-“For the DL, baseband circuitry 313 receives DL data from the wireless network elements. The DL data mainly comprises user data but also indicates which UEs are CA capable and/or MU-MIMO capable. The DL data could transport a data structure to translate MU-MIMO loads into CA RF thresholds. Baseband circuitry 313 processes the DL data through the network applications—PHY, MAC, IP, GTP, 51, RRC, PDCP, RLC, to the MAC. The MAC selects CA-eligible UEs for CA service when their RF signal strength exceeds the CA RF threshold—and possibly other factors. The MAC selects MU-MIMO-eligible UEs for MU-MIMO service based on factors like MU-MIMO bandwidth requirements, access point load, and the like.”), Sung does not explicitly teach that such grouping occurs based on cross-referencing make and model information for the user device. None of the prior art cited or considered teach or suggest such feature.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 20220394433 A1 teaches carrier aggregation in a cooperative environment, where, depending on what layer the splitting and combining takes places, enhanced MIMO can be implemented [0195].
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 ABDUL AZIZ SANTARISI whose telephone number is (703)756-4586. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 AM - 5:00 PM 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, Ayman Abaza can be reached on (571)270-0422. 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.
/ABDUL AZIZ SANTARISI/Examiner, Art Unit 2465
/AYMAN A ABAZA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2465