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 .
Status of the Claims
Based on the current set of claims (Claims, 17 March 2026), Claims 20-39 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments regarding the objection of Claims 21-27 and Claims 29-33 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection of Claims 21-27 and Claims 29-33 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments regarding the objection of Claim 21 and Claim 29 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection of Claim 21 and Claim 29 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments regarding the objection of Claim 24 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection of Claim 24 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments regarding the objection of Claim 25, Claim 26, and Claim 32 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection of Claim 25, Claim 26, and Claim 32 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments regarding the objection of Claim 30 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection of Claim 30 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments regarding the objection of Claim 32 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection of Claim 32 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments regarding the objection of Claims 35-37 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection of Claims 35-37 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments regarding the rejection of Claims 20-22, 27, 28-29, 33-34, and 39 under 35 U.S.C. §102(a)(2) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Objections
Claim 28 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 28 recites a redundant recitation, namely Claim 28 recites “a second set of parameters of a second codeword for transmission of a second set of layers of the PUSCH and a second set of parameters of a second codeword for transmission of a second set of layers of the PUSCH”. Here, Applicant has inadvertently included an identical limitation. Examiner respectfully suggests amending to delete the redundant recitation. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (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.
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.
Claims 20-22, 27, 28-29, 33-34, and 39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Yuan et al. (US 20240214041 A1; hereinafter referred to as “Yuan”).
Regarding Claim 20, Yuan discloses one or more non-transitory computer-readable media having instructions, stored thereon, that when executed by one or more processors cause a user equipment (UE) (¶42-43 & Fig. 2 & ¶9, Yuan discloses a non-transitory computer-readable medium having one or more instructions, stored thereon, that when executed by one or more processors of a user equipment (UE), will cause the UE to perform a method) to:
receive a downlink control information (DCI) to schedule a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) (¶58-62 & Fig. 5 (505), Yuan discloses receiving, by the UE from the BS, a downlink control information (DCI) to schedule an uplink communication, such as a Physical Uplink Shared Channel (PUSCH), using parameters indicated in the DCI), wherein a presence of one or more fields in the DCI for a second codeword is configurable (¶58-62 & Fig. 5 (505), Yuan discloses that one or more fields for each codeword in the DCI is configurable by optionally including multiple fields corresponding each codeword. Here, the presence of fields is configurable in that the number of fields is dependent upon the number of codewords. A DCI indicating three codewords would have more fields than a DCI indicating two codewords);
identify a first codeword for transmission of a first set of layers of a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) and a second codeword for transmission of a second set of layers of the PUSCH (¶94 & Fig. 6 (610) & ¶23, Yuan discloses determining, by the UE, multiple codewords where the first codeword is transmitted using multiple transmission layers of a first antenna panel (group) and the second codeword is transmitted using multiple transmission layers of a second antenna panel (group));
encode the first set of layers of the PUSCH for transmission based on the first codeword (¶94 & Fig. 6 (610) & ¶41, Yuan discloses encoding, by the UE, the first codeword corresponding to multiple transmission layers of the first antenna panel (group)); and
encode the second set of layers of the PUSCH for transmission based on the second codeword (¶94 & Fig. 6 (610) & ¶41, Yuan discloses encoding, by the UE, the second codeword corresponding to multiple transmission layers of the second antenna panel (group)).
Regarding Claim 21, Yuan discloses the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 20.
Yuan further discloses a total number of layers in the first set of layers and the second set of layers is greater than 4 (¶78, Yuan discloses that the total number of layers can exceed two layers).
Regarding Claim 22, Yuan discloses the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 20.
Yuan further discloses the instructions, when executed, are further to cause the UE to receive a downlink control information (DCI) (¶58 & Fig. 5 (505), Yuan discloses receiving, by the UE, downlink control information (DCI)) to indicate one or more parameters of the first codeword and one or more parameters of the second codeword (¶59-63, Yuan discloses that the DCI indicates a first parameter, such as a first uplink precoding indicator (TPMI) corresponding to the first codeword and a second uplink precoder indicator (TPMI) corresponding to the second codeword).
Regarding Claim 27, Yuan discloses the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 20.
Yuan further discloses the first set of layers are transmitted to a first transmission-reception point (TRP) and the second set of layers are transmitted to a second TRP (¶94 & Fig. 6 (610) & ¶91 & Fig. 5 (515), Yuan discloses that the multiple transmission layers corresponding to the first codeword are mapped to a first PUSCH for transmission to a first TRP and that the multiple transmission layers corresponding to the second codeword are mapped to a second PUSCH for transmission to a second TRP).
Regarding Claim 28, Yuan discloses one or more non-transitory computer-readable media having instructions, stored thereon, that when executed by one or more processors cause a next generation Node B (gNB) (¶42-43 & Fig. 2 & ¶9, Yuan discloses a non-transitory computer-readable medium having one or more instructions, stored thereon, that when executed by one or more processors of a user equipment (UE), will cause the UE to perform a method) to:
encode a downlink control information (DCI) for transmission to a UE (¶94 & Fig. 6 (610) & ¶41 & ¶58 & Fig. 5 (505), Yuan discloses encoding, by the BS, control information into a downlink control information for transmission to a user equipment (UE)), the DCI to indicate a first set of parameters of a first codeword for transmission of a first set of layers of a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) and a second set of parameters of a second codeword for transmission of a second set of layers of the PUSCH (¶94 & Fig. 6 (610) & ¶23, Yuan discloses the DCI indicating a first set of parameters corresponding to the codeword and a second set of parameters corresponding to a second codeword where the first codeword is transmitted using multiple transmission layers of a first antenna panel (group) and the second codeword is transmitted using multiple transmission layers of a second antenna panel (group)) and a second set of parameters of a second codeword for transmission of a second set of layers of the PUSCH (¶94 & Fig. 6 (610) & ¶23, Yuan discloses the DCI indicating the second set of parameters corresponding to a second codeword for transmission of the second codeword using multiple transmission layers of a second antenna panel (group)), wherein a presence of one or more fields in the DCI for the second codeword is configurable (¶58-62 & Fig. 5 (505), Yuan discloses that one or more fields for each codeword in the DCI is configurable by optionally including multiple fields corresponding each codeword); and
receive the first set of layers and/or the second set of layers of the PUSCH based on the respective first or second codeword (¶94 & Fig. 6 (610) & ¶91 & Fig. 5 (515), Yuan discloses that the multiple transmission layers corresponding to the first codeword are mapped to a first PUSCH for reception by a first TRP and that the multiple transmission layers corresponding to the second codeword are mapped to a second PUSCH for reception by a second TRP).
Regarding Claim 29, Yuan discloses the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 28.
Yuan further discloses the first set of layers and the second set include 4 layers (¶78, Yuan discloses that the total number of layers can exceed two layers. Here, if there are 8 layers total, then each set of layers would include 4).
Regarding Claim 33, Yuan discloses the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 28.
Yuan further discloses the first set of layers are to be transmitted to a first transmission-reception point (TRP) and the second set of layers are to be transmitted to a second TRP (¶94 & Fig. 6 (610) & ¶91 & Fig. 5 (515), Yuan discloses that the multiple transmission layers corresponding to the first codeword are mapped to a first PUSCH for transmission to a first TRP and that the multiple transmission layers corresponding to the second codeword are mapped to a second PUSCH for transmission to a second TRP).
Regarding Claim 34, Yuan discloses an apparatus to be implemented in a user equipment (UE), the apparatus comprising:
a memory (¶42-43 & Fig. 2 & ¶9, Yuan discloses a user equipment (UE) comprising memory) to store parameters for a codeword to be used for transmission of a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) (¶8-9, Yuan discloses that the memory stores the DCI information) with more than four layers (¶78, Yuan discloses that the total number of layers can exceed two layers); and
processor circuitry (¶42-43 & Fig. 2 & ¶9, Yuan discloses the UE further comprising one or more processors) to:
receive a downlink control information (DCI) to schedule the PUSCH (¶58-62 & Fig. 5 (505), Yuan discloses receiving, by the UE from the BS, a downlink control information (DCI) to schedule an uplink communication, such as a Physical Uplink Shared Channel (PUSCH), using parameters indicated in the DCI), wherein a presence of one or more fields in the DCI for a second codeword is configurable (¶58-62 & Fig. 5 (505), Yuan discloses that one or more fields for each codeword in the DCI is configurable by optionally including multiple fields corresponding each codeword);
determine, based on the parameters, a precoder for the PUSCH (¶59-63, Yuan discloses determining, based on a first uplink precoding indicator (TPMI) corresponding to the a codeword and a second TPMI corresponding to a second codeword, at least one precoder for a PUSCH transmission) with more than four layers (¶78, Yuan discloses that the total number of layers can exceed two layers); and
encode the PUSCH for transmission based on the precoder (¶94 & Fig. 6 (610) & ¶41, Yuan discloses encoding, by the UE, the first codeword corresponding to multiple transmission layers of the first antenna panel (group)).
Regarding Claim 39, Yuan discloses the apparatus of claim 34.
Yuan further discloses the parameters are received via a downlink control information (DCI) (¶59-63, Yuan discloses that the first TPMI corresponding to the first codeword and the second TPMI corresponding to the second codeword are obtained from the DCI).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
Claims 23-26 and 30-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yuan in view of Yuan et al. (US 20230208568 A1; hereinafter referred to as “Yuan2”).
Regarding Claim 23, Yuan discloses the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 22.
Yuan further discloses the one or more parameters include a transmission precoding matrix indicator (TPMI) (¶59-63, Yuan discloses that the DCI indicates a first parameter, such as a first uplink precoding indicator (TPMI) corresponding to the first codeword and a second uplink precoder indicator (TPMI) corresponding to the second codeword).
However, Yuan does not disclose [the one or more parameters further include] a modulation and coding scheme (MCS), a new data indicator (NDI), and a redundancy version.
Yuan2, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, teaches [the one or more parameters further include] a modulation and coding scheme (MCS) (¶90, Yuan2 discloses a downlink control information (DCI) comprising a modulation and coding scheme (MCS) index), a new data indicator (NDI) (¶90, Yuan2 discloses that the DCI further includes a first new data indicator (NDI) for the first codeword and a second NDI for the second codeword), and a redundancy version (¶90, Yuan2 discloses that the DCI further includes a first redundancy version (RV) for the first codeword and a second RV for the second codeword).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yuan by requiring that [the one or more parameters further include] a modulation and coding scheme (MCS), a new data indicator (NDI), and a redundancy version as taught by Yuan2 because repeating transmission of a transport block (TB) using spatial division multiplexing (SDM) improves reliability and throughput (Yuan2, ¶1-2 & ¶72).
Regarding Claim 24, Yuan in view of Yuan2 discloses the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 23.
Yuan further discloses the DCI includes different fields for the one or more parameters of the first codeword and the one or more parameters of the second codeword (¶59-63, Yuan discloses using different TPMI fields for the first codeword and the second codeword).
Regarding Claim 25, Yuan in view of Yuan2 discloses the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 24.
Yuan2, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, teaches the DCI further includes different sounding reference signal (SRS) resource indicator (SRI) fields to indicate respective SRIs for the first codeword and the second codeword (¶90, Yuan2 discloses that the DCI further includes a first sounding reference signal (SRS) resource indicator (SRI) field for the first codeword and a SRI for the second codeword).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yuan in view of Yuan2 by requiring that the DCI further includes different sounding reference signal (SRS) resource indicator (SRI) fields to indicate respective SRIs for the first codeword and the second codeword as taught by Yuan2 because repeating transmission of a transport block (TB) using spatial division multiplexing (SDM) improves reliability and throughput (Yuan2, ¶1-2 & ¶72).
Regarding Claim 26, Yuan discloses the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 22.
However, Yuan does not disclose the DCI further indicates one or more parameters that are used for both the first and second codewords.
Yuan2, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, teaches the DCI indicates one or more parameters that are used for both the first codeword and the second codeword (¶101 & ¶9-10, Yuan2 discloses that the DCI indicates one or more same parameters that are used for the first codeword and the second codeword).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yuan by requiring that the DCI indicates one or more parameters that are used for both the first codeword and the second codeword as taught by Yuan2 because repeating transmission of a transport block (TB) using spatial division multiplexing (SDM) improves reliability and throughput (Yuan2, ¶1-2 & ¶72).
Regarding Claim 30, Yuan discloses the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 28.
Yuan further discloses each set of the first set of parameters and the second set of parameters include a transmission precoding matrix indicator (TPMI) (¶59-63, Yuan discloses that the DCI indicates a first parameter, such as a first uplink precoding indicator (TPMI) corresponding to the first codeword and a second uplink precoder indicator (TPMI) corresponding to the second codeword).
However, Yuan does not disclose [each set of the first set of parameters and the second set of parameters] include a modulation and coding scheme (MCS), a new data indicator (NDI), and a redundancy version.
Yuan2, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, teaches [each set of the first set of parameters and the second set of parameters] include a modulation and coding scheme (MCS) (¶90, Yuan2 discloses a downlink control information (DCI) comprising a modulation and coding scheme (MCS) index), a new data indicator (NDI) (¶90, Yuan2 discloses that the DCI further includes a first new data indicator (NDI) for the first codeword and a second NDI for the second codeword), and a redundancy version (¶90, Yuan2 discloses that the DCI further includes a first redundancy version (RV) for the first codeword and a second RV for the second codeword).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yuan by requiring that [each set of the first set of parameters and the second set of parameters] include a modulation and coding scheme (MCS), a new data indicator (NDI), and a redundancy version as taught by Yuan2 because repeating transmission of a transport block (TB) using spatial division multiplexing (SDM) improves reliability and throughput (Yuan2, ¶1-2 & ¶72).
Regarding Claim 31, Yuan in view of Yuan2 discloses the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 28.
Yuan further discloses the DCI includes different fields for the parameters of the first codeword and the parameters of the second codeword (¶59-63, Yuan discloses using different TPMI fields for the first codeword and the second codeword).
Regarding Claim 32, Yuan discloses the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 28.
However, Yuan does not disclose the DCI indicates one or more parameters that are used for both the first and second codewords.
Yuan2, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, teaches the DCI indicates one or more parameters that are used for both the first codeword and the second codeword (¶101 & ¶9-10, Yuan2 discloses that the DCI indicates one or more same parameters that are used for the first codeword and the second codeword).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yuan by requiring that the DCI indicates one or more parameters that are used for both the first codeword and the second codeword as taught by Yuan2 because repeating transmission of a transport block (TB) using spatial division multiplexing (SDM) improves reliability and throughput (Yuan2, ¶1-2 & ¶72).
Claims 35-36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yuan in view of Yang et al. (US 20180368083 A1; hereinafter referred to as “Yang”) in further view of Meltzer et al. (US 20100172430 A1; hereinafter referred to as “Meltzer”).
Regarding Claim 35, Yuan discloses the apparatus of claim 34.
However, Yuan does not disclose the transmission of the PUSCH transmission has a rank x with eight antenna ports, wherein x is 1, 2, 3, or 4.
Yang, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, teaches the transmission of the PUSCH transmission has a rank x with eight antenna ports (¶33, Yang discloses a PUSCH transmission having a lower rank with eight antenna ports), [and] wherein x is 1, 2, 3, or 4 (¶33, Yang discloses that the value of a lower rank may be 8 or less).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yuan by requiring that the PUSCH transmission has a rank x with eight antenna ports and wherein x is 1, 2, 3, or 4 as taught by Yang because uplink (UL) transmission in mobile communications is improved by weakening the strong correlation of densely packed antennas on the UE (Yang, ¶2 & ¶16-17).
However, Yuan in view of Yang does not disclose wherein the precoder is determined according to a Kronecker product of a rank-1 precoder with 2 ports and a rank-x precoder with 4 ports.
Meltzer, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, teaches the precoder is determined according to a Kronecker product of a rank-1 precoder with 2 ports and a rank-x precoder with 4 ports (¶53-56 & Fig. 3 & ¶19, Melzer discloses that a precoding matrix is determined by computing Kronecker delta products between 2Tx precoding matrix and a 4Tx precoding matrix. Examiner correlates 2Tx precoding matrix to "a rank-1 precoder with 2 ports" and correlates 4Tx precoding matrix to "a rank-x precoder with 4 ports").
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yuan in view of Yang by requiring that the precoder is determined according to a Kronecker product of a rank-1 precoder with 2 ports and a rank-x precoder with 4 ports as taught by Meltzer because communication using multiple antennas achieves high throughput, in beam-forming schemes that achieve high antenna directivity and in spatial diversity schemes that achieve high resilience against channel fading and multipath (Meltzer, ¶2-3).
Regarding Claim 36, Yuan discloses the apparatus of claim 34.
However, Yuan does not disclose the transmission of the PUSCH transmission has a rank x with eight antenna ports, wherein x is 6 or 8.
Yang, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, teaches the transmission of the PUSCH transmission has a rank x with eight antenna ports (¶33, Yang discloses a PUSCH transmission having a lower rank with eight antenna ports), wherein x is 6 or 8 (¶33, Yang discloses that the value of a lower rank may be 8 or less).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yuan by requiring that the transmission of the PUSCH transmission has a rank x with eight antenna ports and wherein x is 1, 2, 3, or 4 as taught by Yang because uplink (UL) transmission in mobile communications is improved by weakening the strong correlation of densely packed antennas on the UE (Yang, ¶2 & ¶16-17).
However, Yuan in view of Yang does not disclose wherein the precoder is determined according to a Kronecker product of a rank-2 precoder with 2 ports and a rank-(x/2) precoder with 4 ports.
Meltzer, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the precoder is determined according to a Kronecker product of a rank-2 precoder with 2 ports and a rank-(x/2) precoder with 4 ports (¶53-56 & Fig. 3 & ¶19, Melzer discloses that a precoding matrix is determined by computing Kronecker delta products between 2Tx precoding matrix and a 4Tx precoding matrix. Examiner correlates 2Tx precoding matrix to "a rank-1 precoder with 2 ports" and correlates 4Tx precoding matrix to "a rank-x precoder with 4 ports").
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yuan in view of Yang by requiring that the precoder is determined according to a Kronecker product of a rank-2 precoder with 2 ports and a rank-(x/2) precoder with 4 ports as taught by Meltzer because communication using multiple antennas achieves high throughput, in beam-forming schemes that achieve high antenna directivity and in spatial diversity schemes that achieve high resilience against channel fading and multipath (Meltzer, ¶2-3).
Claim 37 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yuan in view of Yang in further view of Frenne et al. (US 20120063494 A1; hereinafter referred to as “Frenne”).
Regarding Claim 37, Yuan discloses the apparatus of claim 34.
However, Yuan does not disclose wherein the transmission of the PUSCH transmission has a rank x with eight antenna ports, wherein x is 5 or 7.
Yang, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, teaches the transmission of the PUSCH transmission has a rank x with eight antenna ports (¶33, Yang discloses a PUSCH transmission having a lower rank with eight antenna ports), wherein x is 5 or 7 (¶33, Yang discloses that the value of a lower rank may be 8 or less).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yuan by requiring that the transmission of the PUSCH transmission has a rank x with eight antenna ports and wherein x is 1, 2, 3, or 4 as taught by Yang because uplink (UL) transmission in mobile communications is improved by weakening the strong correlation of densely packed antennas on the UE (Yang, ¶2 & ¶16-17).
However, Yuan in view of Yang wherein the precoder is determined based on a rank-(x+1) precoder with one column removed.
Frenne, a prior art reference int eh same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the precoder is determined based on a rank-(x+1) precoder with one column removed (¶68, Frenne discloses that the precoding matrix is generated from a full rank precoder by removing columns until the desired precoding matrix is achieved).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yuan in view of Yang by requiring that the precoder is determined based on a rank-(x+1) precoder with one column removed as taught by Frenne because codebook generation and design for the single base station scenario and COMP scenario (and other scenarios as well) employ the same general method, since codebooks for different number of antenna ports can be obtained with low complexity (Frenne, ¶36).
Claim 38 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yuan in view of Rahman et al. (US 20200186215 A1; hereinafter referred to as “Rahman”).
Regarding Claim 38, Yuan discloses the apparatus of claim 34.
However, Yuan does not disclose the processor circuitry is further to encode a report for transmission, wherein the report indicates whether the UE supports two-port coherence or four-port coherence for the antenna ports.
Rahman, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, teaches the processor circuitry is further to encode a report for transmission (¶297 & Fig. 12 (1202), Rahman discloses encoding a user equipment (UE) capability information comprising a full power transmission capability at the UE), wherein the report indicates whether the UE supports two-port coherence or four-port coherence for the antenna ports (¶297 & Fig. 12 (1202) & Table 12, Rahman discloses that the full power transmission capability at the UE may indicate a full coherent of two ports or four ports).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yuan by requiring that the processor circuitry is further to encode a report for transmission, wherein the report indicates whether the UE supports two-port coherence or four-port coherence for the antenna ports as taught by Yang because codebook selection to enable UL MIMO operation for next generation cellular systems is improved by enabling the he gNB to select appropriate communication parameters to efficiently and effectively perform wireless data communication with the UE in the UL (Rahman, ¶2-3).
Internet Communications
Applicant is encouraged to submit a written authorization for Internet communications (PTO/SB/439, http://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/sb0439.pdf) in the instant patent application to authorize the examiner to communicate with the applicant via email. The authorization will allow the examiner to better practice compact prosecution. The written authorization can be submitted via one of the following methods only: (1) Central Fax which can be found in the Conclusion section of this Office action; (2) regular postal mail; (3) EFS WEB; or (4) the service window on the Alexandria campus. EFS web is the recommended way to submit the form since this allows the form to be entered into the file wrapper within the same day (system dependent). Written authorization submitted via other methods, such as direct fax to the examiner or email, will not be accepted. See MPEP § 502.03.
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 ERIC NOWLIN whose telephone number is (313)446-6544. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 12:00PM-10:00PM.
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, Michael Thier can be reached at (571) 272-2832. 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.
/ERIC NOWLIN/Examiner, Art Unit 2474
Prosecution Insights