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 Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 04/13/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The reason is set forth below:
Applicant’s Arguments and the Examiner’s Response:
Applicant’s Arguments: Applicant’s Arguments, recited in page 11 of the Remarks, “However, Hui does not teach or suggest a base station receiving report information that specifies a particular resource, among a plurality of resources, having received power of a reference signal for interference measurement lower than or equal to a threshold. Therefore, the Applicant submits that the combination of Takano and Hui has not been shown to teach, suggest, or render obvious at least, for example, the feature of "[a] first base station, comprising . . . a reception unit configured to receive first report information that includes information specifying, among the plurality of first resources, a second resource for which the received power is lower than or equal to a threshold value," as recited in amended independent claim 1”.
Examiner’s Response: The Examiner respectfully disagrees. The examiner’s rejection is based on the recited claim limitations and the examiner must interpret the claim limitations under the broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI). In reference to the arguments filed by the applicant, Applicant argues that Hui does not teach a base station that receives the required information. However, "receiving" is not limited to something sending the information to the base station, as implied by applicant. The broadest reasonable interpretation of the term "receive" includes the base station acquiring the information on its own. Because the base station retrieves the claimed information, it is receiving (or acquiring) it and therefore anticipates the claim limitation. Therefore, Hui teaches the limitations as argued above. Hence the arguments are traversed and maintained the rejection.
All the remaining arguments are based on the arguments above and are responded to in full.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takano et al (US 10,587,326 B2), hereinafter, “Takano” in view of Hui et al (US 11,419,096 B2), hereinafter, “Hui”.
Regarding claim 1, Takano discloses: A first base station (Takano: fig 5, base station 200, Section (112), col 9, lines 32-43), comprising: a transmission unit configured to transmit (Takano: fig 5 and 14, base station 200 and Wireless Communication Unit 220 (equivalent to “transmission unit”), Section (112), col 9, lines 32-43), setting information that includes an instruction (Takano: fig 5, base station 200, and UE 100A, Section (112), col 9, lines 32-43, where, in section (8)-(10), where, the base station 200 transmit control information for setting up the UE 100A), on measurement of received power of a first reference signal for interference measurement, measurement, wherein the first reference signal for interference measurement is transmitted via each resource of a plurality of first resources (Takano: fig 5, base station 200, and UE 100A, Section (112), col 9, lines 32-43, and section (8)-(10), col 2, lines 1-32, where, the base station configures the UE and sends a reference signal for interference measurement); and
a reception unit configured to receive first report information that includes information specifying, among the plurality of first resources (Takano: fig 11-12, steps S301-S305, section (334)-(335), col 26, lines 63-67, where, “The information acquiring unit 143 acquires first received power information indicating received power of a reference signal for measurement transmitted by a target base station using a weight set for beamforming in the terminal device 100-1 (S301)”), a second resource (Takano: fig 11-12, steps S301-S305, section (334)-(337), col 26, lines 63-67 and col 27, lines 1-7, where, “received quality in the target base station is calculated based on received power (that is, received power indicated by first received power information) in the target base station and interference (that is, received power indicated by second received power information) in the environment in which beamforming is performed. Therefore, the received quality may be close to received quality when the terminal device 100-1 performs wireless communication in the environment in which beamforming is performed”), Takano does not explicitly teach: receive first report information for a second resource for which the received power is lower than or equal to a threshold value.
Hui teaches: receive first report information for a second resource for which the received power is lower than or equal to a threshold value (Hui: section (247)-(250), col 58-59, lines 65-67 and lines 1-2, where, “the wireless device may determine to retrieve (equivalent to “acquire”) the third resources from the second resources based on the receiving (equivalent to “acquiring”) the one or more control information scheduling the third resources (equivalent to “second resource”, as recited in the claim limitation), if an RSRP of the third resources is lower than a RSRP threshold” para (114), where, the base station receives (equivalent to “acquires”) a measurement report from the UE with RSRP).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use “receive first report information for a second resource for which the received power is lower than or equal to a threshold value or is relatively low” as taught by Hui into Takano in order to facilitate detection of transmission errors (Hui: Section (143).
Regarding claims 2 and 4-5, Takano modified by Hui disclose: The first base station according to claim 1, wherein the setting information includes the threshold value and information associated with an instruction on use of the threshold value (Hui: section (250), col 58-59, lines 65-67 and lines 1-2, where, “the wireless device may determine to retrieve the third resources from the second resources based on the receiving the one or more control information scheduling the third resources, if an RSRP of the third resources is lower than a RSRP threshold”).
Regarding claims 3, 7 and 9, Takano modified by Hui disclose: wherein the transmission unit is further configured to transmit transmits a second reference signal for quality measurement through a second beam using a third resource, [[and]] the setting information further includes information giving an instruction on use of a third beam to receive the first reference signal transmitted through each of the plurality of different first beams, and the second reference signal, transmitted through the second beam, is received by a terminal via the third beam having been used to receive the second reference signal transmitted through the second beam (Hui: fig 20, Section (184), col 44, lines 3-11, where, “The wireless device may transmit a second retransmission (2.sup.nd re-Tx in FIG. 20) of the first TB via a third resource of the three resources. A time duration between a starting time of the initial transmission of the first TB and the second retransmission of the first TB may be smaller than or equal to 32 sidelink slots (e.g., T≤32 slots in FIG. 20). A first SCI may associate with the initial transmission of the first TB”).
Regarding claim 6, Takano modified by Hui disclose: The first base station according to claim 1, wherein a plurality of the first reference signals transmitted via each first resource of the plurality of first resources is transmitted through a corresponding first beam plurality of different first beams (Takano: fig 5, Section (112), where, “FIG. 5 is a secondary explanatory diagram for describing an example of large-scale MIMO beamforming. Referring to FIG. 5, the beams 21A and 21B described with reference to FIG. 4 are shown. For example, the beam 21A reaches an area 23A and the beam 21B reaches an area 23B. Therefore, a terminal device 100A positioned within the area 23A can receive a signal transmitted as the beam 21A. In addition, a terminal device 100B positioned within the area 23B can receive a signal transmitted as the beam 21B. The base station 200 transmits a signal addressed to the terminal device 100A as the beam 21A and transmits a signal addressed to the terminal device 100B as the beam 21B”).
Regarding claims 8 and 12, Takano modified by Hui disclose: wherein the transmission unit is further configured to transmit a plurality of second reference signals for quality measurement through a plurality of different second beams using a plurality of third resources, the setting information further includes information giving an instruction on reception of the first reference signal, transmitted through each of the plurality of different first beams, by using a third beam of a plurality of third beams used by a terminal to receive the plurality of second reference signals transmitted through the plurality of different second beams (Hui: fig 20, Section (184), col 44, lines 3-11, where, “The wireless device may transmit a second retransmission (2.sup.nd re-Tx in FIG. 20) of the first TB via a third resource of the three resources. A time duration between a starting time of the initial transmission of the first TB and the second retransmission of the first TB may be smaller than or equal to 32 sidelink slots (e.g., T≤32 slots in FIG. 20). A first SCI may associate with the initial transmission of the first TB”), and the third beam has a received power of a corresponding second reference signal, of the plurality of one of the second reference signals, that is one of maximum or larger than or equal to a determined value among the plurality of third beams used to receive the second reference signals transmitted through the plurality of second beams (Hui: fig 31, Section (247), col 58, lines 32-33, where, “the wireless device may not exclude the second resources in slot 2 from the candidate resource set based on a size of the second resources being larger than or equal to a size of a candidate resource in the candidate resource set. In an example, the wireless device may not exclude the second resources in slot 2 from the candidate resource set based on an RSRP of the second resources being less than a RSRP threshold”).
Regarding claims 10-11 and, 13-15, Takano modified by Hui disclose: wherein the first report information includes an identification (ID) of the second resource as information specifying the second resource (Hui: Section (153), col 36, lines 29-57, where, the first and second resources are identified by identifier).
Regarding claims 16-17, Takano modified by Hui disclose: The base station according to claim 1, wherein the transmission unit is further configured to transmit transmits the setting information to a communication device, and the reception unit is further configured to receive receives the first report information from the communication device (Takano: fig 5, base station 200, and UE 100A, Section (112), col 9, lines 32-43, and section (8)-(10), col 2, lines 1-32, where, the base station configures the UE and sends a reference signal for interference measurement).
Regarding claim 18, the claim of a first base station includes features identical to the subject matter mentioned in the rejection to claim 1 above. The claims are mere reformulation of claim 1 in order to define the transmission and receiving signals for the base station, and the rejection to claim 1 is applied hereto.
Regarding claims 19 and 20, the claim related to a method and a second base station includes features identical to the subject matter mentioned in the rejection to claim 1 above. The claims are mere reformulation of claim 1 in order to define the transmission and receiving signals for the base station using first and second reference signal, and the rejection to claim 1 is applied hereto.
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 NIZAM U AHMED whose telephone number is (571)272-9561. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fry, 7:00 AM-6:00 PM PST.
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, Huy Vu can be reached at 571-272-3155. 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.
/NIZAM U AHMED/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2461
Prosecution Insights