Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. 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 Arguments
2. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 29, and 30 have been considered but are moot based on the new grounds of rejection necessitated by applicant’s amendments.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
3. In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
4. 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
5. Claim(s) 1, 4, 29, and 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 2024/0244654 A1 by Kim et al. (hereafter referred to as Kim).
Regarding claim 1, Kim teaches A repeater (see at least Figs. 12 and 14 (1430); repeater and new type of repeater), comprising:
one or more memories (see at least ¶ [0324]- [0326; memories 104) storing computer executable code thereon; and
one or more processors (see at least ¶ [0324]- [0326; processors 102) coupled with the one or more memories (see at least ¶ [0324]- [0326]; “The first wireless device 100 may include one or more processors 102 and one or more memories 104”) and configured to, individually or collectively, execute the computer executable code to cause the repeater to:
receive, from a network entity via a backhaul link, control information indicating a time period for the repeater to perform a beam management procedure with a user equipment (UE) (see at least ¶ [0248] and ¶ [0330]-[0331]; “For example, the base station may transmit information related to a beam indication on the basis of the above-described examples. Here, the information related to the beam indication may be information related to at least one of a periodic beam indication, an aperiodic beam indication, or a semi-static beam indication. In this regard, information related to the beam indication may be transmitted in at least one of an RRC, an MAC-CE, and DCI. The beam indication may be understood as a beam indication for a beam between the new type of repeater and the UE. The information related to the beam indication may include a field indicating beam information and a field indicating a time resource. Here, the beam information may be information related to the beam indication.”);
perform, based on the control information, the beam management procedure with the UE during the time period (see at least ¶ [0248] and ¶ [0330]- [0331]; “The beam indication may be understood as a beam indication for a beam between the new type of repeater and the UE. The information related to the beam indication may include a field indicating beam information and a field indicating a time resource. Here, the beam information may be information related to the beam indication.”);
determine a beam for communicating with the UE based on the beam management procedure (see at least ¶ [0248] and ¶ [0330]- [0331]; “Here, the information related to the beam indication may be information related to at least one of a periodic beam indication, an aperiodic beam indication, or a semi-static beam indication. In this regard, information related to the beam indication may be transmitted in at least one of an RRC, an MAC-CE, and DCI.”); and
communicate with the UE using the beam (see at least Fig. 22).
Regarding claim 4, Kim teaches the repeater of claim 1. In addition, Kim teaches wherein; the one or more processors are further configured to cause the repeater to receive, from the network entity via the backhaul link, signaling scheduling the repeater to forward a downlink transmission from the network entity to the UE or forward an uplink transmission from the UE to the network entity, wherein the signaling indicates an identification information of the UE; and
to communicate with the UE using the beam, the one or more processors are configured to cause the repeater to forward the downlink transmission from the network entity to the UE or forward the uplink transmission from the UE to the network entity using the beam based on the identification information of the UE (see at least ¶ [0248] and ¶ [0330]-[0331]; “For example, the base station may transmit information related to a beam indication on the basis of the above-described examples. Here, the information related to the beam indication may be information related to at least one of a periodic beam indication, an aperiodic beam indication, or a semi-static beam indication. In this regard, information related to the beam indication may be transmitted in at least one of an RRC, an MAC-CE, and DCI. The beam indication may be understood as a beam indication for a beam between the new type of repeater and the UE. The information related to the beam indication may include a field indicating beam information and a field indicating a time resource. Here, the beam information may be information related to the beam indication.”).
Regarding claim 29, Kim teaches A network entity (see at least Figs. 12 and 14 (1430); repeater and new type of repeater), comprising:
one or more memories (see at least ¶ [0324]- [0326; memories 104) storing computer executable code thereon; and
one or more processors (see at least ¶ [0324]- [0326; processors 102) coupled with the one or more memories (see at least ¶ [0324]- [0326]; “The first wireless device 100 may include one or more processors 102 and one or more memories 104”) and configured to, individually or collectively, execute the computer executable code to cause the repeater to:
transmit, to a repeater via a backhaul link, control information indicating a time period for the repeater to perform a beam management procedure with a user equipment (UE) (see at least ¶ [0248] and ¶ [0330]-[0331]; “For example, the base station may transmit information related to a beam indication on the basis of the above-described examples. Here, the information related to the beam indication may be information related to at least one of a periodic beam indication, an aperiodic beam indication, or a semi-static beam indication. In this regard, information related to the beam indication may be transmitted in at least one of an RRC, an MAC-CE, and DCI. The beam indication may be understood as a beam indication for a beam between the new type of repeater and the UE. The information related to the beam indication may include a field indicating beam information and a field indicating a time resource. Here, the beam information may be information related to the beam indication.”);
configure one or more resources for the repeater to perform the beam management procedure with the UE (see at least ¶ [0248] and ¶ [0330]- [0331]; “The beam indication may be understood as a beam indication for a beam between the new type of repeater and the UE. The information related to the beam indication may include a field indicating beam information and a field indicating a time resource. Here, the beam information may be information related to the beam indication.”); and
obtain and indication of beam used for communications between the repeater and UE (see at least Fig. 22 and ¶ [0248], ¶ [0330]- [0331]; “Here, the information related to the beam indication may be information related to at least one of a periodic beam indication, an aperiodic beam indication, or a semi-static beam indication. In this regard, information related to the beam indication may be transmitted in at least one of an RRC, an MAC-CE, and DCI.”).
Regarding claim 30, Kim teaches A method for wireless communications by a repeater (see at least Figs. 12 and 14 (1430); repeater and new type of repeater), the method comprising:
receiving, from a network entity via a backhaul link, control information indicating a time period for the repeater to perform a beam management procedure with a user equipment (UE) (see at least ¶ [0248] and ¶ [0330]-[0331]; “For example, the base station may transmit information related to a beam indication on the basis of the above-described examples. Here, the information related to the beam indication may be information related to at least one of a periodic beam indication, an aperiodic beam indication, or a semi-static beam indication. In this regard, information related to the beam indication may be transmitted in at least one of an RRC, an MAC-CE, and DCI. The beam indication may be understood as a beam indication for a beam between the new type of repeater and the UE. The information related to the beam indication may include a field indicating beam information and a field indicating a time resource. Here, the beam information may be information related to the beam indication.”);
performing, based on the control information, the beam management procedure with the UE during the time period (see at least ¶ [0248] and ¶ [0330]- [0331]; “The beam indication may be understood as a beam indication for a beam between the new type of repeater and the UE. The information related to the beam indication may include a field indicating beam information and a field indicating a time resource. Here, the beam information may be information related to the beam indication.”);
determining a beam for communicating with the UE based on the beam management procedure (see at least ¶ [0248] and ¶ [0330]- [0331]; “Here, the information related to the beam indication may be information related to at least one of a periodic beam indication, an aperiodic beam indication, or a semi-static beam indication. In this regard, information related to the beam indication may be transmitted in at least one of an RRC, an MAC-CE, and DCI.”); and
communicating with the UE using the beam (see at least Fig. 22).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
7. 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.
8. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
. 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.
9. Claim(s) 2-3, and 5-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim as applied to claim 1, in view of WO 2024/031684 A1 by Zhang et al. (hereafter referred to as Zhang).
Regarding claim 2, Kim teaches the repeater of claim 1.
Kim does not appear to specifically disclose wherein:
to perform the beam management procedure with the UE, the one or more processors are configured to cause the repeater to:
transmit signals to the UE during the time period with a plurality of different transmit beams using downlink beam sweeping; and
decode a report from the UE indicating one or more of the transmit beams; and
to determine the beam for communicating with the UE, the one or more processors are configured to cause the repeater to determine the beam based on the report from the UE.
In the same field of endeavor, Zhang teaches wherein:
to perform the beam management procedure with the UE, the one or more processors are configured to cause the repeater to:
transmit signals to the UE during the time period with a plurality of different transmit beams using downlink beam sweeping (see at least ¶ [0050]; The beam measurement and reporting procedure might be based on the UE 102 measuring a plurality of downlink reference signals (e.g. synchronization signal b lock (SSB) and/or channel state information-reference signal (CSI-RS)) , where different beams of the base station 104 can be associated with different signals. For example, the UE 102 might perform a beam sweeping operation to measure signal strength and/or interference of reference signals (e.g., SSB/CSI-RS) at different time instances/different symbols associated with the downlink reference signal and report the measurement results.”); and
decode a report from the UE indicating one or more of the transmit beams (see at least Fig. 3A-D (390); Beam measurement, Beam report); and
to determine the beam for communicating with the UE, the one or more processors are configured to cause the repeater to determine the beam based on the report from the UE (see at least Fig. 3A-D (314); Beam prediction).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Kim with Zang in order to improve beam quality.
Regarding claim 3, Kim teaches the repeater of claim 1.
Kim does not appear to specifically disclose wherein:
to perform the beam management procedure with the UE, the one or more processors are configured to cause the repeater to measure signals transmitted from the UE during the time period with a plurality of different transmit beams using uplink beam sweeping; and
to determine the beam for communicating with the UE, the one or more processors are configured to cause the repeater to determine the beam based on the measuring.
In the same field of endeavor, Zhang teaches wherein:
to perform the beam management procedure with the UE, the one or more processors are configured to cause the repeater to measure signals transmitted from the UE during the time period with a plurality of different transmit beams using uplink beam sweeping; and
to determine the beam for communicating with the UE, the one or more processors are configured to cause the repeater to determine the beam based on the measuring (see at least ¶ [0052] and [0053]; uplink TCI).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Kim with Zang in order to improve beam quality.
Regarding claim 5, Kim teaches the repeater of claim 1.
Kim does not appear to specifically disclose wherein to determine the beam for communicating with the UE, the one or more processors are configured to cause the repeater to determine the beam using a machine learning model.
In the same field of endeavor, Zhang teaches wherein the determining the beam for communicating with the UE comprises determining the beam using a machine learning model (see at least Fig. 2B and ¶ [0013], [0056], and [0130]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Kim with Zang in order to improve beam quality.
Regarding claim 6, Kim, in view of Zhang teaches the repeater of claim 5. In the obvious combination, Zhang further teaches wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the repeater to: receive beam measurement training information from the network entity; and input the beam measurement training information to train the machine learning model (see at least ¶ [0055]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Kim with Zang in order to improve beam quality.
Regarding claim 7, Kim in view of Zhang teaches the repeater of claim 5. In the obvious combination, Zhang teaches wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the repeater to: input beam measurement information to the machine learning model; and obtain, from the machine learning model in response to the inputting the beam measurement information, a predicted beam for communicating with the UE (see at least ¶ [0039], and [0055]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Kim with Zang in order to improve beam quality.
Regarding claim 8, Kim in view of Zhang teaches the repeater of claim 5. In the obvious combination, Zhang teaches wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the repeater to: perform, during one or more measurement gaps, one or more beam management procedures with the UE (see at least ¶ [0076]; In other words, there is a time gap between 325 and 326. If the UE 102 detects that the predicted beam does not satisfy the activation condition, the UE 102 may transmit an indication to the network entity 304 on an uplink beam associated to the current serving beam to indicate to the network entity 304 that the predicted beam does not satisfy the activation condition.”); and train the machine learning model based on the one or more beam management procedures (see at least ¶ [0055]; artificial intelligence/machine learning (AI/ML)).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Kim with Zang in order to improve beam quality.
Regarding claim 9, Kim teaches the repeater of claim 1.
Kim does not appear to specifically disclose wherein to determine the beam for communicating with the UE, the one or more processors are configured to cause the repeater to: report beam training data to the network entity; and receive signaling from the network entity indicating the beam.
In the same field of endeavor, Zhang teaches wherein to determine the beam for communicating with the UE, the one or more processors are configured to cause the repeater to: report beam training data to the network entity; and receive signaling from the network entity indicating the beam (see at least Figs. 3A-3D (390, 314); Beam measurement, Beam report, Beam prediction).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Kim with Zang in order to improve beam quality.
Regarding claim 10, Kim teaches the repeater of claim 1.
Kim does not appear to specifically disclose wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the repeater to obtain, from the UE, a beam failure recovery request (BFRQ) message indicating failure of the beam and indicating a replacement beam.
In the same field of endeavor, Zhang teaches wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the repeater to obtain, from the UE, a beam failure recovery request (BFRQ) message indicating failure of the beam and indicating a replacement beam (see at least ¶ [0077]; beam failure).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Kim with Zang in order to improve beam quality.
10. Claim(s) 11-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Zhang, as applied to claim 10 above, further in view of US 2018/0368124 A1 by Liu et al. (hereafter referred to as Liu).
Regarding claim 11, Kim in view Zhang teaches the repeater of claim 10.
Kim in view of Zang does not appear to specifically disclose wherein the replacement beam comprises a second beam of the repeater on a same component carrier as the failed beam.
In the same field of endeavor, Liu teaches wherein the replacement beam comprises a second beam of the repeater on a same component carrier as the failed beam (see at least ¶ [0082]; “If the receiving device is an access node, completing the beam failure recovery procedure may include the access node setting up a new channel in a new beam, while if the receiving device is a UE, completing the beam failure recovery procedure may include the UE detecting a new beam and recovering the link along the newly detected beam. In either situation, a new connection may be established between the receiving device and the transmitting device on the new beam to replace the failed beam. The receiving device returns to block 505 to continue monitoring a transmission on the new beam.”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the failure taught by Kim in view of Zhang with the failure taught by Liu in order to provide mechanisms for supporting BFRQ reporting.
Regarding claim 12, Kim in view of Zhang teaches the repeater of claim 10.
Kim in view of Zhang does not appear to specifically disclose wherein obtaining the BFRQ message from the UE comprises receiving the BFRQ message forwarded via the network entity.
In the same field of endeavor, Liu teaches wherein obtaining the BFRQ message from the UE comprises receiving the BFRQ message forwarded via the network entity (see at least ¶ [0080]- [0081]; “In a situation where the receiving device is a UE, the UE may monitor downlink control channels, downlink data channels, or reference signals, such as SS, CSI-RS, PDCCH DMRS, and so on. In a situation where the receiving device is an access node, the access node may monitor uplink control channels, uplink data channels, or uplink reference signals, such as sounding reference signals (SRS). The receiving device derives a reliability measure of the monitored one or more beams (block 507).”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the failure taught by Kim in view of Zhang with the failure taught by Liu in order to provide mechanisms for supporting BFRQ reporting.
Regarding claim 13, Kim in view of Zhang teaches the repeater of claim 10.
Kim in view Zhang does not appear to specifically teach wherein obtaining the BFRQ message from the UE comprises receiving the BFRQ message from the UE.
In the same field of endeavor, Liu teaches wherein obtaining the BFRQ message from the UE comprises receiving the BFRQ message from the UE (see at least ¶ [0077]-[0082]; “UE 410 may use a PUCCH resource for BFRQ reporting.”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the failure taught by Zhang in view of Wanuga with the failure taught by Liu in order to provide mechanisms for supporting BFRQ reporting.
Regarding claim 14, Kim in view of Zhang and Liu teaches the repeater of claim 13. In the obvious combination, Liu teaches wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the repeater to forward the BFRQ message to the network entity (see at least ¶ [0081]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the failure taught by Kim in view of Zhang with the failure taught by Liu in order to provide mechanisms for supporting BFRQ reporting.
Regarding claim 15, Kim in view of Zhang and Liu teaches the repeater of claim 13. In the obvious combination, Liu teaches wherein to receive the BFRQ message from the UE, the one or more processors are configured to cause the repeater to receive the BFRQ message from the UE on a first component carrier, wherein the failed beam is on a second component carrier (see at least ¶ [0107]; “The index of the failed component carrier can also be reported late in a PUSCH resource together with candidate beams or a BSR in the second component carrier scheduled by access node in a BFRQ response, for example. Candidate beam information of the first component carrier (the failed component carrier) may also be reported in the second component carrier (or any other available component carrier).” ).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the failure taught by Zhang with the failure taught by Liu in order to provide mechanisms for supporting BFRQ reporting.
11. Claim(s) 16-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim as applied to claim 1 above, in view of US 2019/0053072 A1 by Kundargi et al. (hereafter referred to as Kundargi).
Regarding claim 16, Kim teaches the repeater of claim 1.
Kim does not appear to specifically disclose wherein the determined beam comprises a coarse beam; and the one or more processors are further configured to cause the repeater to: determine a refined beam within the coarse beam; and switch to the refined beam without signaling the refined beam to the network entity or the UE.
In the same field of endeavor, Kundargi teaches wherein the determined beam comprises a coarse beam (see at least ¶ [0030]-[0033], [0037], and [0039]; coarse beam); and the one or more processors are further configured to cause the repeater to: determine a refined beam within the coarse beam; and switch to the refined beam without signaling the refined beam to the network entity or the UE (see at least ¶ [0030]-[0033], [0037], and [0039]; coarse beam selected via beam sweeping).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Kim in view of Kundargi in order to aid in performing radio frequency beam management and recovery in communication.
Regarding claim 17, Kim in view of Kundargi teaches the repeater of claim 16. In the obvious combination, Kundargi teaches wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the repeater to: transmit, to the UE, first one or more tracking reference signals (TRSs) associated with a first beam for data transmission to the UE; and transmit to the UE, after determining the refined beam, transmit second one or more TRSs associated with the refined beam, wherein the first one or more TRSs and the second one or more TRSs are associated with the same coarse beam (see at least ¶ [0041] and [0077]-[0079]; coarse beams and PTRS).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Kim with Kundargi in order to aid in performing radio frequency beam management and recovery in communication.
Allowable Subject Matter
12. Claims 18-24, 26, and 28 are allowed.
Conclusion
13. 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 NATASHA W COSME whose telephone number is (571)270-7225. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-4.
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 at 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.
/NATASHA W COSME/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2465
Prosecution Insights