DETAILED ACTION
This communication is response to the amendment filed 03/31/2026. Claims 1-9 and 12-15 are pending and presented for examination.
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 with respect to claim(s) 1, 5-9, and 15 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 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) 1, 5, 6, 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2020/0228272 to SORIAGA et al. (hereafter Soriaga) in view of US 2024/0063957 to ZHANG et al. (hereafter Zhang).
Regarding claim 1, Soriaga discloses a method of identifying, by a base station (BS), a line-of-sight (LOS) channel between the base station and a user equipment (UE) in a wireless communication system (see Soriaga, ¶ 0006: a method of determining a line-of-sight (LOS) path between a transmitter and a wireless device), the method comprising:
receiving, from the UE, a reference signal for measuring a channel in each of multiple bands (see Soriaga, ¶ 0006: receiving, at the wireless device, a second reference signal on a second frequency band at a second time);
determining, based on the reference signal, whether the channel is an LOS or a non-line-of-sight (NLOS) in each of the multiple bands (see Soriaga, ¶ 0006: determining, by the wireless device, at least based on the comparison of the first time to the second time, which of the first reference signal and/or the second reference signal followed the LOS path between the transmitter and the wireless device);
when the channel is determined as the LOS in each of the multiple bands, identifying the channel as the LOS channel (see Soriaga, Fig 5; ¶ 0070: both the high frequency band (HB) reference signal and the low frequency band (LB) reference signal follow the LOS path between the transmitter (e.g., a base station 402) and the receiver (e.g., a UE 204), arriving at the receiver at the same time, and thereby having the same ToA); and
transmitting, to the UE, at least one of identification result information about the LOS channel, or a signal generated based on the LOS channel (see Soriaga, ¶ 0090: the wireless device optionally reports, to a positioning entity (e.g., the serving base station or a location server) the transmitter, which of the first reference signal and/or the second reference signal followed the LOS path),
Soriaga does not explicitly disclose wherein a resource for transmitting the reference signal for measuring the channel in each of the multiple bands is determined based on whether multi-band uplink simultaneous transmission is possible for the UE with respect to each of the multiple bands, and whether the multi-band uplink simultaneous transmission is possible for the UE with respect to each of the multiple bands is determined based on UE capability information.
However, Zhang discloses wherein a resource for transmitting the reference signal for measuring the channel in each of the multiple bands is determined based on whether multi-band uplink simultaneous transmission is possible for the UE with respect to each of the multiple bands, and whether the multi-band uplink simultaneous transmission is possible for the UE with respect to each of the multiple bands is determined based on UE capability information (see Zhang, ¶ 0003: sounding reference signal (SRS) carrier-based switching and simultaneous UL transmissions in aggregated component carriers (CCs) scheduled by a base station. A UE may be assigned a set of aggregated CCs, and the base station may transmit downlink signaling over one or more of those carriers. The UE may transmit sounding reference signal (SRS) symbols over the CCs so that the base station can generate a channel estimate for the CCs. In some examples, a UE may switch from the current CC to a target CC without a configured PUCCH/PUSCH, and then transmit SRS symbol over the target CC during a time period. A base station can schedule the transmission of SRS at the target CC as well as other uplink (UL) transmissions. Accordingly, carrier switching from current CC to a target CC for SRS transmission in the target CC may impact other simultaneous UL transmissions in multiple CCs besides the current CC and target CC. In some scenarios, a UE may not be able of simultaneously transmit uplink signaling over all CCs assigned to the UE, e.g., due to limits on UE capability; ¶ 0031: If UE 101 reports the target cell for SRS carrier switching as part of UE's UL-CA capability reports, the simultaneous transmissions only on the reported bands, or Band Combination (BC), or Feature Set (FS), or Feature Set Per Component-carrier FSPC is assumed to be under UE's capability, otherwise the base station can consider all simultaneous transmissions on other UL carriers as being beyond UE's capability. In some examples, target cell for SRS carrier switching can be a DL carrier that is not configured with PUCCH/PUSCH (UE only switches to this carrier for SRS transmission). Other UL carriers can be regular UL carriers that can be inter-band or intra-band with the source carrier or the current carrier. For example, UE 101 can indicate parallelTxSRS-PUCCH-PUSCH for band combination C1 and C2 (both UL carriers), but not for C0 and C2 (C0 is DL carrier). If UE 101 is indicated to switch from C1 to C0, base station 103 cannot assume that UE is capable to simultaneously transmit SRS on C0 and PUCCH/PUSCH on C2. In some other examples, UE 101 indicates parallelTxSRS-PUCCH-PUSCH for band combination C1 and C2 (both UL carriers), and for C0 and C2 (C0 is DL carrier). If UE is indicated to switch from C1 to C0, base station 103 can assume UE is capable to simultaneously transmit SRS on C0 and PUCCH/PUSCH on C2).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the above teaching as taught by Zhang and incorporate it into the system of Soriaga achieve improved reference signal transmission (see Zhang, ¶ 0021).
Regarding claim 5, Soriaga in view of Zhang discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the determining of, based on the reference signal, whether the channel is the LOS or the NLOS in each of the multiple bands comprises: determining a delay power value of a reference signal received in a first frequency band, based on a channel impulse response of the reference signal received in the first frequency band; and determining a delay power value of a reference signal received in a second frequency band, based on a channel impulse response of the reference signal received in the second frequency band, and wherein the identifying of the channel as the LOS channel comprises: when the delay power value of the reference signal received in the first frequency band is greater than a threshold power value determined for the first frequency band, and the delay power value of the reference signal received in the second frequency band is greater than a threshold power value determined for the second frequency band, determining the channel as the LOS channel (see Soriaga, ¶ 0068 and ¶ 0074).
Regarding claim 6, Soriaga in view of Zhang discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the determining of, based on the reference signal, whether the channel is the LOS or the NLOS in each of the multiple bands comprises: based on a channel impulse response of a reference signal received in a first frequency band, determining first effective NLOSs as paths having a power value corresponding to a difference value between a maximum reception delay power value of the reference signal received in the first frequency band and a threshold power value; and based on a channel impulse response of a reference signal received in a second frequency band, determining second effective NLOSs as paths having a power value corresponding to a difference value between a maximum reception delay power value of the reference signal received in the second frequency band and a threshold power value, and wherein the identifying of the channel as the LOS channel comprises: when the number of the first effective NLOSs is smaller than a reference number of effective NLOSs determined for the first frequency band, and the number of the second effective NLOSs is smaller than a reference number of effective NLOSs determined for the second frequency band, identifying the channel as the LOS channel (see Soriaga, ¶ 0068 and ¶ 0074).
Regarding claim 15, it is rejected for the same reasons as set forth in claim 1. Although phrased as an apparatus claim, the claim is nevertheless simple repetitions of the subject matter of claim 1.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2020/0228272 to SORIAGA et al. (hereafter Soriaga) in view of US 2024/0063957 to ZHANG et al. (hereafter Zhang) and further in view of “Blockage Identification in Indoor UWB Ranging Using Multi Band OFDM Signals” by ALSINDI et al. (hereafter Alsindi), see IDS date 11/25/2024.
Regarding claim 7, Soriaga in view of Zhang discloses the method of claim 1, Soriaga does not explicitly disclose wherein the determining of, based on the reference signal, whether the channel is the LOS or the NLOS in each of the multiple bands comprises: determining, based on a channel impulse response of a reference signal received in a first frequency band, a first root mean squared (RMS) delay spread value of the reference signal received in the first frequency band; and determining, based on a channel impulse response of a reference signal received in a second frequency band, a second RMS delay spread value of the reference signal received in the second frequency band, and wherein the identifying of the channel as the LOS channel comprises: when the first RMS delay spread value is smaller than a reference delay spread value for the first frequency band, and the second RMS delay spread value is smaller than a reference delay spread value for the second frequency band, determining the channel as the LOS channel.
However, Alsindi discloses wherein the determining of, based on the reference signal, whether the channel is the LOS or the NLOS in each of the multiple bands comprises: determining, based on a channel impulse response of a reference signal received in a first frequency band, a first root mean squared (RMS) delay spread value of the reference signal received in the first frequency band; and determining, based on a channel impulse response of a reference signal received in a second frequency band, a second RMS delay spread value of the reference signal received in the second frequency band, and wherein the identifying of the channel as the LOS channel comprises: when the first RMS delay spread value is smaller than a reference delay spread value for the first frequency band, and the second RMS delay spread value is smaller than a reference delay spread value for the second frequency band, determining the channel as the LOS channel (see Alsindi, page 3233, section IIIB).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the above teaching as taught by Alsindi and incorporate it into the system of Soriaga to improve communication system performance (see Alsindi, page 3236, 1st paragraph).
Claim(s) 8 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Soriaga in view of Zhang and further in view of WO 2020/229902 A1 by LM ERICSON (hereafter Ericson), see IDS dated 12/20/2023.
Regarding claim 8, Soriaga in view of Zhang discloses the method of claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose wherein the transmitting of, to the UE, at least one of the identification result information about the LOS channel, or the signal generated based on the LOS channel comprises: determining a value of at least one of a cyclic prefix (CP) size or a reference signal density, based on the characteristic of the LOS channel; generating data or a signal comprising the reference signal, based on the determined value; and transmitting the signal to the UE.
However, Ericson discloses wherein the transmitting of, to the UE, at least one of the identification result information about the LOS channel, or the signal generated based on the LOS channel comprises: determining a value of at least one of a cyclic prefix (CP) size or a reference signal density, based on the characteristic of the LOS channel; generating data or a signal comprising the reference signal, based on the determined value; and transmitting the signal to the UE (see Ericson, Fig 6-9; claim 1).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the above teaching as taught by Ericson and incorporate it into the system of Soriaga to improve system performance (see Ericson, ¶ 0007).
Regarding claim 9, Soriaga in view of Zhang discloses the method of claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose further comprising: receiving, from the UE, a reference signal request for measuring a location of the UE; transmitting, to the UE, a reference signal for measuring a location of the UE; and receiving, from the UE, information about existence or non-existence of an LOS channel between the UE and the BS, and location information of the UE, based on the reference signal for measuring the location of the UE, wherein existence or non-existence of the LOS channel and the location information of the UE are determined based on the reference signal.
However, Ericson discloses receiving, from the UE, a reference signal request for measuring a location of the UE; transmitting, to the UE, a reference signal for measuring a location of the UE; and receiving, from the UE, information about existence or non-existence of an LOS channel between the UE and the BS, and location information of the UE, based on the reference signal for measuring the location of the UE, wherein existence or non-existence of the LOS channel and the location information of the UE are determined based on the reference signal (see Ericson, Fig 7-10; ¶ 0086: the processing circuitry 703 may perform positioning measurements. The positioning measurements may include measurements from the LOS detection measurements. In operation 1013, the processing circuitry 703 may estimate a position of the UE using results of the LOS detection measurements and the positioning measurements).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the above teaching as taught by Ericson and incorporate it into the system of Soriaga to improve system performance (see Ericson, ¶ 0007).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 12-14 are allowed.
Claims 2-4 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening 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 RASHEED GIDADO whose telephone number is (571)270-7645. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8AM-5PM EST.
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, Ricky Ngo can be reached at 571-272-3139. 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.
/RASHEED GIDADO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2464
Prosecution Insights