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 .
This office action is in response to remarks filed on 02/24/2026.
Claims 14, 15, 21, 22, 28, 29, and 34-43 are pending and presented for examination. Claims 14, 15, 21, 22, 28, and 29 are amended. Claims 16-20, 23-27, and 30-33 are canceled. Claims 34-43 are added.
Response to Amendments
Claims 14, 15, 21, 22, 28, and 29 have been considered based on amendments.
Claims 34-43 have been added and considered.
112(b) rejection for claims 14-16, 18-23, 25-30, and 32-33 is withdrawn.
The Examiner acknowledges that in the non-final Office Action, for the rejections of claims 19, 26, and 33, WO2021030583A1 is incorrectly attributed to Behravan. As the Applicant noted, the cited Behravan reference should correspond to US20140094125A1. Form PTO-892 has the names and documents correctly associated.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 5, filed 02/24/2026, with respect to rejection have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 USC 103 rejection of claims 14-15, 21-22, and 28-29 has been withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 14, 15, 21, 22, 28, 29, and 34-43 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 14, the original filed specification fails to disclose "… verify the reconstructed set of nonreduced radio signal measurements … ." Applicant asserts that the amended subject matter is supported by at least claims 16-20, 23-27, and 30-33 and paragraphs [0011]-[0014], [0016], [0017], [0071], [0074], [0082], [0084], [0085], [0088]-[0091], [0103], [0104], [0106], [0111], [0113], and [0117] of the Applicant's published application among other portions. However, the cited paragraphs and claims do not discuss verifying or confirming the reconstructed set of nonreduced radio signal measurements. Furthermore, the Examiner has not found support for this limitation in the specifications.
Regarding claim 21, the original filed specification fails to disclose "… verify the reconstructed set of nonreduced radio signal measurements … ." Applicant asserts that the amended subject matter is supported by at least claims 16-20, 23-27, and 30-33 and paragraphs [0011]-[0014], [0016], [0017], [0071], [0074], [0082], [0084], [0085], [0088]-[0091], [0103], [0104], [0106], [0111], [0113], and [0117] of the Applicant's published application among other portions. However, the cited paragraphs and claims do not discuss verifying or confirming the reconstructed set of nonreduced radio signal measurements. Furthermore, the Examiner has not found support for this limitation in the specifications.
Regarding claim 28, the original filed specification fails to disclose "… verify the reconstructed set of nonreduced radio signal measurements … ." Applicant asserts that the amended subject matter is supported by at least claims 16-20, 23-27, and 30-33 and paragraphs [0011]-[0014], [0016], [0017], [0071], [0074], [0082], [0084], [0085], [0088]-[0091], [0103], [0104], [0106], [0111], [0113], and [0117] of the Applicant's published application among other portions. However, the cited paragraphs and claims do not discuss verifying or confirming the reconstructed set of nonreduced radio signal measurements. Furthermore, the Examiner has not found support for this limitation in the specifications.
Regarding claim 36, the original filed specification fails to disclose "… location information, velocity information, direction information, or historical movement data of the client device." Applicant asserts that the amended subject matter is supported by at least claims 16-20, 23-27, and 30-33 and paragraphs [0011]-[0014], [0016], [0017], [0071], [0074], [0082], [0084], [0085], [0088]-[0091], [0103], [0104], [0106], [0111], [0113], and [0117] of the Applicant's published application among other portions. However, the cited paragraphs and claims do not discuss location, position, velocity, direction, speed, or historical movement data of the client device. Furthermore, the Examiner has not found support for this limitation in the specifications.
Regarding claim 37, the original filed specification fails to disclose "… learn temporal correlations … ." Applicant asserts that the amended subject matter is supported by at least claims 16-20, 23-27, and 30-33 and paragraphs [0011]-[0014], [0016], [0017], [0071], [0074], [0082], [0084], [0085], [0088]-[0091], [0103], [0104], [0106], [0111], [0113], and [0117] of the Applicant's published application among other portions. However, the cited paragraphs and claims do not discuss a trained machine learning model configured to learn temporal correlations in the radio signal measurements associated with the beam or to associate radio signal measurements with time/sequence/duration. Furthermore, the Examiner has not found support for this limitation in the specifications.
Regarding claim 38, the original filed specification fails to disclose "… receiving, from the network node device, configuration information identifying parameters of the autoencoder, including at least one of a compression ratio, latent space dimension, or activation configuration." Applicant asserts that the amended subject matter is supported by at least claims 16-20, 23-27, and 30-33 and paragraphs [0011]-[0014], [0016], [0017], [0071], [0074], [0082], [0084], [0085], [0088]-[0091], [0103], [0104], [0106], [0111], [0113], and [0117] of the Applicant's published application among other portions. However, the cited paragraphs and claims do not discuss a network node transmitting autoencoder configuration parameters that include compression ratio, latent space dimension, or activation configuration. Furthermore, the Examiner has not found support for this limitation in the specifications.
Regarding claim 40, the original filed specification fails to disclose "… an indication of a sampling period corresponding to the sampling rate applied to the radio signal measurements." Applicant asserts that the amended subject matter is supported by at least claims 16-20, 23-27, and 30-33 and paragraphs [0011]-[0014], [0016], [0017], [0071], [0074], [0082], [0084], [0085], [0088]-[0091], [0103], [0104], [0106], [0111], [0113], and [0117] of the Applicant's published application among other portions. However, the cited paragraphs and claims do not discuss an indication within the reduced radio signal measurement report that indicates a sampling period. Furthermore, the Examiner has not found support for this limitation in the specifications.
Regarding claim 41, the original filed specification fails to disclose "… normalizing the set of non-reduced radio signal measurements prior to applying the encoder." Applicant asserts that the amended subject matter is supported by at least claims 16-20, 23-27, and 30-33 and paragraphs [0011]-[0014], [0016], [0017], [0071], [0074], [0082], [0084], [0085], [0088]-[0091], [0103], [0104], [0106], [0111], [0113], and [0117] of the Applicant's published application among other portions. However, the cited paragraphs and claims do not discuss the normalization of the set of non-reduced radio signal measurements. Furthermore, the Examiner has not found support for this limitation in the specifications.
Regarding claim 43, the original filed specification fails to disclose "… transmitted using uplink control signaling associated with mobility measurement reporting." Applicant asserts that the amended subject matter is supported by at least claims 16-20, 23-27, and 30-33 and paragraphs [0011]-[0014], [0016], [0017], [0071], [0074], [0082], [0084], [0085], [0088]-[0091], [0103], [0104], [0106], [0111], [0113], and [0117] of the Applicant's published application among other portions. However, the cited paragraphs and claims do not discuss using uplink control signaling for the transmission of the reduced radio signal measurement report. Furthermore, the Examiner has not found support for this limitation in the specifications.
Dependent claims 15, 22, 29, 34-35, 39, and 42 are rejected as depending from base independent claims
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 D. Little whose telephone number is (571)272-5748. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8-6 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, Nishant Divecha can be reached at 571-270-3125. 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.
/D LITTLE/Examiner, Art Unit 2419
/Nishant Divecha/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2419
Prosecution Insights