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 .
DETAILED OFFICE ACTION
This action is responsive to the communication received April 3rd, 2026. Claims 1-20 have been entered and presented for examination.
Application 18/495,212 claims benefit of Korean Application 10-2022-0145143 11/03/2022.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed April 3rd, 2026, have been fully considered, but deemed moot in view of the new grounds of rejection which has been necessitated by Applicant’s amendment.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1, 4, 6, 9, 11, 14, 16, 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Zhang et al. (US 2026/0113654).
Regarding claims 1, 6, 11, 16, Zhang et al. discloses a method performed by a user equipment (UE) in a wireless communication system (see Figure 2 [WD in a wireless system]), the method comprising: transmitting, to a base station, capability information on at least one artificial intelligence (AI)-based channel state information (CSI) feedback mode supported by an Al model of the UE (paragraph 0159, 0163 [the WD 22 may transmit an indication to the network node, e.g., using WD capability signaling indicating that WD 22 supports an AI-CPU type, which may be used to capture (i.e., perform) the AI/ML based processing. In some embodiments, if the WD 22 reports the WD capability, the WD 22 may comprise dedicated hardware and software, e.g., WD CSI processing unit 34, to run the AI/ML based operations (such as a neural network engine). The legacy CPU and AI-CPU may be used in parallel for (or by) WD 22, where an AI/ML based CSI report such as CSI prediction or CSI compression may use the AI-CPU, while legacy CSI reporting may use the legacy framework with CPU]), wherein the at least one AI-based CSI feedback mode includes at least one of an AI-based channel prediction mode or an AI-based CSI compression mode (paragraph 0159 [AI/ML based CSI report such as CSI prediction or CSI compression may use the AI-CPU]); receiving, from the base station, an indicator indicating a CSI feedback mode (paragraph 0041 [ receive, from the network node, signaling usable by the WD to generate at least the first CSI report using the first CPU.]) and configuration information corresponding to the CSI feedback mode (paragraph 0127 [Network node 16 such as via processing circuitry 68 and/or processor 70 and/or radio interface 62 and/or communication interface 60 is configured to cause (Block S134), based on a at least one of a first indication and second indication, the WD to determine at least a first channel state information (CSI) processing unit (CPU) of a first type of CPU based at least on a WD capability.]), wherein the CSI feedback mode being one of the AI-based channel prediction mode, the AI-based CSI compression mode, or an AI-based channel prediction and CSI compression mode is determined based on the capability information performed (paragraph 0159 [the WD 22 may transmit an indication to the network node, e.g., using WD capability signaling indicating that WD 22 supports an AI-CPU type, which may be used to capture (i.e., perform) the AI/ML based processing. In some embodiments, if the WD 22 reports the WD capability, the WD 22 may comprise dedicated hardware and software, e.g., WD CSI processing unit 34, to run the AI/ML based operations (such as a neural network engine). The legacy CPU and AI-CPU may be used in parallel for (or by) WD 22, where an AI/ML based CSI report such as CSI prediction or CSI compression may use the AI-CPU, while legacy CSI reporting may use the legacy framework with CPU]); generating CSI, based on the configuration information and a CSI-reference signal (RS) (see Figure 1 [CSI-RS]); and transmitting, to the base station, the CSI (see Figure 1 [CSI Report in the PUCCH/PUSCH]).
Regarding claims 4, 9, 14, 19, Zhang et al. discloses all the recited subject matter in claims 1, 6, 11, 16, and further discloses transmitting, to the base station, information indicating whether to independently compress channels for which the UE has performed based on the AI-based channel prediction independently, or to compress the channels in combination (paragraphs 0160, 0163 [[0165] parameter simultaneousCSI-ReportsPerCC-Compression-AIML in a component carrier, and [0166] parameter simultaneousCSI-ReportsAllCC-Compression-AIML across all component carriers; he WD 22 may also indicate to the network node 16 the maximum number of simultaneous AI/ML-based CSI calculations WD 22 can support, e.g., denoted by N.sub.AI-CSI. The maximum number may be for each component carrier and/or across all component carriers. The maximum numbers could be indicated to the network node 16 (e.g., gNB) via parameters: [0161] simultaneousCSI-ReportsPerCC-AIML in a component carrier [0162] simultaneousCSI-ReportsAllCC-AIML across all component carriers]).
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 for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 2, 7, 12, 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al. (US 2026/0113654) in view of R1-2208635.
Regarding claims 2, 7, 12, 17, Zhang et al. discloses all the recited subject matter in claims 1, 6, 11, 16, and further dsiclsoes wherein in case that the CSI feedback mode is the AI-based channel prediction mode or the AI-based channel prediction and CSI compression mode (paragraph 0159 [the WD 22 may transmit an indication to the network node, e.g., using WD capability signaling indicating that WD 22 supports an AI-CPU type, which may be used to capture (i.e., perform) the AI/ML based processing. In some embodiments, if the WD 22 reports the WD capability, the WD 22 may comprise dedicated hardware and software, e.g., WD CSI processing unit 34, to run the AI/ML based operations (such as a neural network engine). The legacy CPU and AI-CPU may be used in parallel for (or by) WD 22, where an AI/ML based CSI report such as CSI prediction or CSI compression may use the AI-CPU, while legacy CSI reporting may use the legacy framework with CPU]), but does not discloses the configuration information includes information on a prediction interval and information on a number of prediction times and prediction steps.
However, R1-2208635 discloses the configuration information includes information on a prediction interval and information on a number of prediction times and prediction steps (section 3.2, page 9 [alignment configuration information including the number and the time ID of historical and future CSIs]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teachings of R1-2208635 to the teachings of Zhang et al. One would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it would enhance data collection and training (R1-2208635, page 3, section 3.1.1).
Claim(s) 3, 8, 13, 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al. (US 2026/0113654) in view of Zhang (US 2025/0220480).
Regarding claims 3, 8, 13, 18, Zhang et al. discloses all the recited subject matter in claims 1, 6, 11, 16 and further discloses wherein in case that the CSI feedback mode is the AI-based CSI compression mode or the AI-based channel prediction and CSI compression mode (paragraph 0159 [the WD 22 may transmit an indication to the network node, e.g., using WD capability signaling indicating that WD 22 supports an AI-CPU type, which may be used to capture (i.e., perform) the AI/ML based processing. In some embodiments, if the WD 22 reports the WD capability, the WD 22 may comprise dedicated hardware and software, e.g., WD CSI processing unit 34, to run the AI/ML based operations (such as a neural network engine). The legacy CPU and AI-CPU may be used in parallel for (or by) WD 22, where an AI/ML based CSI report such as CSI prediction or CSI compression may use the AI-CPU, while legacy CSI reporting may use the legacy framework with CPU]), the configuration information includes information on a report mode indicating at least one of a wideband report or a subband report (paragraph 0003 [each CSI-ReportConfig may be associated with a bandwidth part (BWP)]), but does not explicitly disclose information on a compression mode indicating a compression ratio.
However, Zhang discloses information on a compression mode indicating a compression ratio (paragraph 0026-0027 [CSI reports according to an AI/ML based CSI feedback, wherein each of the one or more CSI reports contains an output of an auto-encoder, a compression ratio]).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to recognize the configuration information can include compression ratio such then the network node and the WD can be synchronized.
Claim(s) 5, 10, 15, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al. (US 2026/0113654) in view of Yang et al. (US 2022/0030650).
Regarding claims 5, 10, 15, 20, Zhang et al. discloses all the recited subject matter in claims 1, 6, 11, 16, but does not explicitly disclose identifying whether to change the AI-based CSI feedback mode, based on a channel estimation result; and transmitting, to the base station, ana preferred AI-based CSI feedback mode preferred by the UE or a parameter corresponding to the preferred AI-based CSI feedback mode preferred by the UE, based on a result of the identification.
However, Yang et al. discloses identifying whether to change the AI-based CSI feedback mode, based on a channel estimation result (paragraphs 0085, 0094-0095 [RRC reconfiguration based on measurement report]); and transmitting, to the base station, a preferred AI-based CSI feedback mode preferred by the UE or a parameter corresponding to the preferred AI-based CSI feedback mode preferred by the UE, based on a result of the identification (paragraphs 0085, 0094-0095, 0116 [the UE 120 may transmit the assistance information in at least one of an uplink MAC-CE, a CSI report, or an RRC communication during an ongoing call. The assistance information may include the SN configuration preference and/or other UE-specific preferences relating to multiple connectivity for the UE 120; The first base station 110-1 and/or the second base station 110-2 may determine a configuration of a feedback mode for the UE 120 based on the one or more UE 120 feedback preferences included in the SN configuration preference]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to recognize the feedback mode of the UE can be based on a WD preference. The motivation for this is to feedback the report based on the user preference.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER T WYLLIE whose telephone number is (571)270-3937. The examiner can normally be reached 4pm-11:30pm.
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.
/CHRISTOPHER T WYLLIE/Examiner, Art Unit 2465
Prosecution Insights