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 communications filed on 1/9/2024
Claims 1-15 are pending and presented for examination.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. 10-2021-0097337, filed on 7/23/2021.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 1/9/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 6, 11 & 15 objected to because of the following informalities: claims 1, 6, 11 & 15 recite “a channel state information (CSI) report includes indicators indicating the amplitude coefficients associated with the multiple TPRs”, which includes a typographical error. Appropriate correction is required. For the purpose of this review, examiner is interpreting this limitation in claims 1, 6, 11 & 15 as “a channel state information (CSI) report includes indicators indicating the amplitude coefficients associated with the multiple TRPs”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 3, 4, 8, 9, 12 & 13 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 3, 8 & 12 recite the limitation "wherein the CSI report includes an indicator indicating the strongest TRP among the multiple TRPs, and a co-scaling amplitude coefficient for the strongest TRP being not reported by the CSI report". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of this review, examiner is interpreting this limitation in these claims as "wherein the CSI report includes an indicator indicating a strongest TRP among the multiple TRPs, and a co-scaling amplitude coefficient for the strongest TRP being not reported by the CSI report".
Claims 4, 9 & 13 recite the limitation "wherein the CSI report includes an indicator indicating the strongest coefficient per layer across the multiple TRPs, or an indicator indicating the strongest coefficient per layer per TRP". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of this review, examiner is interpreting this limitation in these claims as "wherein the CSI report includes an indicator indicating a strongest amplitude coefficient per layer across the multiple TRPs, or an indicator indicating a strongest amplitude coefficient per layer per TRP".
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claims because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claims. See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1, 2, 4-7, 9-11 & 13-15, provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 6 & 11 respectively of copending Application No. 19/300419 (herein after “Lee”) in view of Wu et al. (US 20230062132)(herein after “Wu”). This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Regarding claims 1, 6, 11 & 15, although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1, 6, 11 & 15 of the current application merely broaden the scope of claims 1, 6 & 11 of the Lee patent application by eliminating the elements and their functions of the claims as set forth below, and otherwise would have been obvious in view of Wu.
Claims 1, 6, 11 & 15 of current application
Claims 1, 6 & 11 of Lee
Claim 1 Preamble: A user equipment (UE) in a communication system, the UE comprising:
Claim 6 Preamble: A base station in a communication system, the UE comprising:
Claim 11 Preamble: A method performed by a user equipment (UE) in a communication system, the UE, the method comprising:
Claim 15 Preamble: A method performed by a base station in a communication system, the UE, the method comprising:
Claim 1 Preamble: A user equipment (UE) comprising:
Claim 6 Preamble: A base station comprising:
Claim 11 Preamble: A method performed by a user equipment (UE) in a communication system, the UE, the method comprising:
Claim 11 Preamble: A method performed by a user equipment (UE) in a communication system, the UE, the method comprising:
Limitation 1: a transceiver;
Limitation 1: a transceiver operably coupled with the processor, the transceiver configured to:
Limitation 2: a controller configured to:
Limitation 2: a processor;
Claim 1 Limitation 3: receive, from a base station, configuration information associated with multiple transmit-receive points (TRPs),
Claim 6 Limitation 3: transmit, to a user equipment (UE), …
Claim 11 Limitation 3: receiving, from a base station, …
Claim 15 Limitation 3: transmitting, to a user equipment (UE), …
Claim 1 Limitation 3: receive, from a base station, configuration information on a channel state information (CSI) report, wherein the configuration information includes information on CSI reference signal (CSI-RS) ports and a codebook associated with transmit and receive points (TRPs), and wherein CSI-RS resources associated with the CSI-RS ports correspond to the TRPs,
Claim 6 Limitation 3: transmit, to a user equipment (UE), …
Claim 11 Limitation 3: receiving, from a base station, …
Claim 6 Limitation 3: transmit, to a user equipment (UE), …
Claim 1 Limitation 4: identify amplitude coefficients associated with the multiple TRPs based on the configuration information,
Claim 11 Limitation 4: identifying …
Claim 1 Limitation 4: none.
Claim 11 Limitation 4: none.
Claim 1 Limitation 5: transmit, to the base station, a channel state information (CSI) report includes indicators indicating the amplitude coefficients associated with the multiple TPRs.
Claim 6 Limitation 5: receive, from the UE, …
Claim 11 limitation 5: transmitting, to the base station, …
Claim 15 Limitation 5: receiving, from the UE, …
Claim 1 Limitation 5: transmit, to the base station, the CSI report including a bitmap, wherein the bitmap includes at least one non zero bit for identifying coefficients in an amplitude coefficient indicator and a phase coefficient indicator,
Claim 6 Limitation 5: receive, from the UE, …
Claim 11 limitation 5: transmitting, to the base station, …
Claim 6 Limitation 5: receive, from the UE, …
Limitation 6: None.
Limitation 6: wherein the CSI-RS resources correspond to the at least one non zero bit,
Limitation 7: None.
Limitation 7: wherein a number of the at least one non zero bit summed is based on a size of the bitmap.
In view of the above, it is clear that the conflicting claims are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1, 6, 11 & 15 of the current application merely broaden the scope of claims 1, 6 & 11 of the Lee reference by eliminating the italicized portions of limitations 1, 3 & 5 and the entire limitations 6 & 7 of claims 1, 6 & 11 respectively of Lee.
The Lee reference fails to disclose wherein the UE and the base station are “in a communication system”, and comprise a controller and wherein the UE, and as a method for the UE, receives, from a base station that transmits, configuration information associated with multiple TRPs, wherein the UE, and as a method for the UE, identifies amplitude coefficients associated with the multiple TRPs based on the configuration information, and wherein the method is performed by a base station.
However, Wu teaches wherein the UE and base station are “in a communication system” ([0001] discloses communication devices such as user equipment (UE) in wireless communication systems. [0002] discloses a wireless communication system including a number of base stations.), and comprise a controller (Fig 5 & [0092]-[0093] disclose the UE may include a processor including a controller. Fig 6 & [0107]-[0108] disclose the BS may include a processor including a controller.) and wherein the UE, and as a method for the UE, receives, from a base station that transmits, configuration information associated with multiple TRPs ([0007]-[0008] disclose a UE receiving, from a base station, a configuration indicating a precoder size parameter (i.e. configuration information) for a plurality of transmission-reception points (TRPs).), wherein the UE, and as a method for the UE, identifies amplitude coefficients associated with the multiple TRPs based on the configuration information ([0006] disclose the UE, based on the configuration information, identifying precoding matrix indications (PMIs) for the multiple TRPs based on transmit reference signals transmitted by the base station associated with each TRP. Figs 3 & 4 and [0065]-[0067] disclose that the PMI may be a precoding matrix that may include coefficients including amplitude weights.), and wherein in the method is performed by a base station ([0008] discloses a method of wireless communication for a BS.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed inventions to have a UE, a method for the UE and a base station, as disclosed by Lee, wherein the UE, and as a method for the UE, receives, from a base station, and as a method for the base station, that transmits configuration information associated with multiple TRPs and wherein the UE, and as a method for the UE, identifies amplitude coefficients associated with the multiple TRPs based on the configuration information, as taught by Wu. The motivation to do so would have been to have a UE, and a method for the UE, and a base station, and as a method for the base station, as part of a communication system, each comprising a controller so that the UE can receive, from a base station that transmits, configuration information for a plurality of TRPs, identify amplitude coefficients associated with the plurality of TRPs and transmit, to a base station that receives, a CSI report associated with the plurality of TRPs so that the base station can make optimized transmission decisions for techniques like Coordinated Multi-Point (CoMP) or beam switching.
Regarding claims 2 & 7, Lee in view of Wu disclose the UE of claim 1 and base station of claim 6.
Lee fails to disclose wherein the CSI report includes an indicator indicating co-scaling amplitude coefficients per each TRP.
However, Wu teaches wherein the CSI report includes an indicator indicating co-scaling amplitude coefficients per each TRP ([0062]-[0063] discloses that the UE may transmit a multi-TRP CSI report including a PMI that may be based on codebook-based transmissions forming beams, wherein the codebook may be matrices including selection of weights for scaling amplitudes at antenna elements of the TRPs (i.e. co-scaling amplitude coefficients per each TRP).).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed inventions to have the UE of claim 1 and the base station of claim 6, as disclosed by Lee in view of Wu, wherein the CSI report includes an indicator indicating co-scaling amplitude coefficients per each TRP, as taught by Wu. The motivation to do so would have been to have a UE and a base station, where the UE transmits a multi-TRP CSI report that is received by a base station wherein the multi-TRP CSI report includes matrices indicating scaling amplitudes at antenna elements of each TRP so that the base station can make optimized transmission decisions for techniques like Coordinated Multi-Point (CoMP) or beam switching by setting power across transmit antennas based on the relative scaling amplitudes in the CSI report.
Regarding claims 4, 9 & 13, Lee in view of Wu disclose the UE of claim 1, base station of claim 6 and method of claim 11.
Lee fails to disclose wherein the CSI report includes an indicator indicating the strongest coefficient per layer across the multiple TRPs, or an indicator indicating the strongest coefficient per layer per TRP.
However, Wu teaches wherein the CSI report includes an indicator indicating the strongest coefficient per layer across the multiple TRPs (Fig 2 and [0059]-[0060] & [0063] disclose the UE transmitting a multi-TRP CSI report including a PMI that indicates a best beam per TRP, wherein a best beam may be a beam with the highest received signal power among the set of beams measured at the UE (i.e. a beam with a strongest amplitude coefficient). [0066] discloses that the precoding matrix (i.e. PMI in the multi-TRP CSI report) may include beams for each spatial layer. Thus, the multi-TRP CSI report may indicate a best beam per layer per TRP (i.e. a strongest amplitude coefficient per layer per TRP).), or an indicator indicating the strongest coefficient per layer across the multiple TRPs (Fig 2 and [0059]-[0060], [0063] & [0066] disclose the multi-TRP CSI report may indicate a strongest amplitude coefficient per layer per TRP as discussed above. A strongest amplitude coefficient per layer across the multiple TRPs would be a strongest amplitude coefficient of the strongest amplitude coefficients per layer per TRP. Thus, a multi-TRP CSI report that includes an indication of a strongest amplitude coefficient per layer per TRP inherently includes an indication of a strongest amplitude coefficient per layer across the multiple TRPs.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed inventions to have the UE of claim 1, the base station of claim 6, and the method of claim 11, as disclosed by Lee in view of Wu, wherein the CSI report includes an indicator indicating the strongest coefficient per layer across the multiple TRPs, or an indicator indicating the strongest coefficient per layer per TRP, as taught by Wu. The motivation to do so would have been to have a UE, a base station, and a method where the UE transmits to the base station a CSI report including an indication of a strongest TRP among a plurality of TRPs so that the base station can make optimized transmission decisions across the TRPs for techniques like CoMP and beam switching based on knowing the strongest TRP amongst a plurality of TRPs.
Regarding claims 5, 10 & 14, Lee in view of Wu disclose the UE of claim 1, base station of claim 6 and method of claim 11.
Lee fails to disclose wherein a number of non-zero coefficients included in the CSI report is restricted per TRP or across the multiple TRPs.
However, Wu teaches wherein a number of non-zero coefficients included in the CSI report is restricted per TRP or across the multiple TRPs ([0072]-[0073] discloses that the multi-TRP PMI CSI feedback report may be limited (i.e. restricted) such as limiting a number of spatial domains across the total number of TRPs for which the UE reports the amplitude coefficients of the PMI. [0077] discloses that the coefficient matrix (i.e. including amplitude coefficients of the PMI) in the multi-TRP CSI feedback report may consist of the non-zero coefficients. [0074] discloses that the limit of the number of spatial domains reported may be per TRP.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed inventions to have the UE of claim 1, the base station of claim 6, and the method of claim 11, as disclosed by Lee in view of Wu, wherein a number of non-zero coefficients included in the CSI report is restricted per TRP or across the multiple TRPs, as taught by Wu. The motivation to do so would have been to have a UE, a base station, and a method where the UE transmits to the base station a CSI report wherein a number of non-zero coefficients included in the CSI report have been restricted per TRP or across the multiple TRPs in order to reduce overhead in the CSI report.
Claims 3, 8 & 12 provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 6 & 11 respectively of copending Application No. 19/300419 (herein after “Lee”) in view of Wu et al. (US 20230062132)(herein after “Wu”) and further in view of Hindy et al. (US 20240048195)(herein after “Hindy”). This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Regarding claims 3, 8 & 12, Lee in view of Wu disclose the UE of claim 2, the base station of claim 7 and the method of claim 11.
Lee fails to disclose wherein the CSI report includes an indicator indicating the strongest TRP among the multiple TRPs.
However, Wu teaches wherein the CSI report includes an indicator indicating the strongest TRP among the multiple TRPs (Fig 2 and [0059]-[0060] & [0063] disclose the UE transmitting a multi-TRP CSI report including a PMI that indicates a best beam per TRP, wherein a best beam may be a beam with the highest received signal power among the set of beams measured at the UE (i.e. a beam with a strongest amplitude coefficient). A strongest TRP among multiple TRPs would be indicated by the strongest amplitude coefficient among the multiple TRPs. Thus, a multi-TRP CSI report that includes an indication of a strongest amplitude coefficient per TRP inherently includes an indication of a strongest amplitude coefficient (i.e. a strongest TRP) among the multiple TRPs.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the UE of claim 2, the base station of claim 7 and the method of claim 11, as disclosed by Lee in view of Wu, wherein the CSI report includes an indicator indicating the strongest TRP among the multiple TRPs, as taught by Wu. The motivation to do so would have been to have a UE, base station and method for the UE to transmit to the base station a CSI report including an indication of a strongest TRP among a plurality of TRPs so that the base station can make optimized transmission decisions across the TRPs for techniques like CoMP and beam switching based on knowing the strongest TRP amongst a plurality of TRPs.
Lee fails to disclose a co-scaling amplitude coefficient for the strongest TRP being not reported by the CSI report.
However, Hindy further teaches a co-scaling amplitude coefficient for the strongest TRP being not reported by the CSI report ([0040]-[0041] discloses normalizing the magnitude (i.e. amplitude) coefficients of a CSI report with respect to the coefficient with the largest magnitude (i.e. co-scaling amplitude coefficient for the strongest TRP) and not reporting the magnitude information for the strongest amplitude coefficient but only reporting an indication of the index of the strongest amplitude coefficient.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the UE of claim 2, base station of claim 7 and method of claim 11, as disclosed by Lee in view of Wu, and wherein a co-scaling amplitude coefficient for the strongest TRP being not reported by the CSI report, as further taught by Hindy. The motivation to do so would have been to reduce CSI reporting overhead by having a UE, base station and method wherein the UE does not report absolute amplitude coefficients for each TRP (including not report the absolute amplitude coefficient for the strongest TRP), but instead reports amplitude coefficients normalized by the strongest TRP amplitude coefficient and only indicate an index for which normalized amplitude coefficient is the strongest TRP amplitude coefficient.
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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 1, 2, 4-7, 9-11 & 13-15 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(2) as being anticipated by Wu et al. (US 20230062132)(herein after “Wu”).
Regarding claim 1, A user equipment (UE) in a communication system ([0001] discloses communication devices such a s user equipment (UE) in wireless communication systems.), the UE comprising:
a transceiver ([0009] discloses a UE including a transceiver.); and
a controller (Fig 5 & [0092]-[0093] disclose the UE may include a processor including a controller.) configured to:
receive, from a base station, configuration information associated with a multiple transmit-receive points (TRPs) ([0007]-[0008] disclose a UE receiving, from a base station, a configuration indicating a precoder size parameter (i.e. configuration information) for a plurality of transmission-reception points (TRPs).), identify amplitude coefficients associated with the multiple TRPs based on the configuration information, and transmit, to the base station, a channel state information (CSI) report includes indicators indicating the amplitude coefficients associated with the multiple TPRs ([0006] disclose the UE, based on the configuration information, identifying precoding matrix indications (PMIs) for the multiple TRPs based on transmit reference signals transmitted by the base station associated with each TRP. Figs 3 & 4 and [0065]-[0067] disclose that the PMI may be a precoding matrix that may include coefficients including amplitude weights. [0006]-[0007] disclose the UE may transmit, to the base station, a channel state information (CSI) report including feedback of the PMI, including amplitude coefficients, for each TRP.).
Regarding claim 2, Wu discloses wherein the CSI report includes an indicator indicating co-scaling amplitude coefficients per each TRP ([0062]-[0063] discloses that the UE may transmit a multi-TRP CSI report including a PMI that may be based on codebook-based transmissions forming beams, wherein the codebook may be matrices including selection of weights for scaling amplitudes at antenna elements of the TRPs (i.e. co-scaling amplitude coefficients per each TRP).).
Regarding claim 4, Wu discloses wherein the CSI report includes an indicator indicating the strongest coefficient per layer per TRP (Fig 2 and [0059]-[0060] & [0063] disclose the UE transmitting a multi-TRP CSI report including a PMI that indicates a best beam per TRP, wherein a best beam may be a beam with the highest received signal power among the set of beams measured at the UE (i.e. a beam with a strongest amplitude coefficient). [0066] discloses that the precoding matrix (i.e. PMI in the multi-TRP CSI report) may include beams for each spatial layer. Thus, the multi-TRP CSI report may indicate a best beam per layer per TRP (i.e. a strongest amplitude coefficient per layer per TRP).), or an indicator indicating the strongest coefficient per layer across the multiple TRPs (Fig 2 and [0059]-[0060], [0063] & [0066] disclose the multi-TRP CSI report may indicate a strongest amplitude coefficient per layer per TRP as discussed above. A strongest amplitude coefficient per layer across the multiple TRPs would be a strongest amplitude coefficient of the strongest amplitude coefficients per layer per TRP. Thus, a multi-TRP CSI report that includes an indication of a strongest amplitude coefficient per layer per TRP inherently includes an indication of a strongest amplitude coefficient per layer across the multiple TRPs.).
Regarding claim 5, Wu discloses wherein a number of non-zero coefficients included in the CSI report is restricted per TRP or across the multiple TRPs ([0072]-[0073] discloses that the multi-TRP PMI CSI feedback report may be limited (i.e. restricted) such as limiting a number of spatial domains across the total number of TRPs for which the UE reports the amplitude coefficients of the PMI. [0077] discloses that the coefficient matrix (i.e. including amplitude coefficients of the PMI) in the multi-TRP CSI feedback report may consist of the non-zero coefficients. [0074] discloses that the limit of the number of spatial domains reported may be per TRP.).
Regarding claim 6, Wu discloses a base station in a communication system ([0002] discloses a wireless communication system including a number of base stations.), the base station comprising:
a transceiver ([0010] discloses the base station (BS) may include a transceiver.); and
a controller (Fig 6 & [0107]-[0108] disclose the BS may include a processor including a controller.) configured to:
transmit, to a user equipment (UE), configuration information associated with a multiple transmit-receive points (TRPs) ([0007]-[0008] disclose a BS transmitting, to a UE, a configuration indicating a precoder size parameter (i.e. configuration information) for a plurality of transmission-reception points (TRPs).), and receive, from the UE, a channel state information (CSI) report includes indicators indicating the amplitude coefficients associated with the multiple TPRs based on the configuration information ([0006] disclose the UE, based on the configuration information, identifying precoding matrix indications (PMIs) for the multiple TRPs based on transmit reference signals transmitted by the base station associated with each TRP. Figs 3 & 4 and [0065]-[0067] disclose that the PMI may be a precoding matrix that may include coefficients including amplitude weights. [0008] disclose the BS may receive, from the UE, a channel state information (CSI) report including feedback of the PMI, including amplitude coefficients, for each TRP.).
Regarding claim 7, Wu discloses wherein the CSI report includes an indicator indicating co-scaling amplitude coefficients per each TRP ([0062]-[0063] discloses that the UE may transmit a multi-TRP CSI report including a PMI that may be based on codebook-based transmissions forming beams, wherein the codebook may be matrices including selection of weights for scaling amplitudes at antenna elements of the TRPs (i.e. co-scaling amplitude coefficients per each TRP).).
Regarding claim 9, Wu discloses wherein the CSI report includes an indicator indicating the strongest coefficient per layer per TRP (Fig 2 and [0059]-[0060] & [0063] disclose the UE transmitting a multi-TRP CSI report including a PMI that indicates a best beam per TRP, wherein a best beam may be a beam with the highest received signal power among the set of beams measured at the UE (i.e. a beam with a strongest amplitude coefficient). [0066] discloses that the precoding matrix (i.e. PMI in the multi-TRP CSI report) may include beams for each spatial layer. Thus, the multi-TRP CSI report may indicate a best beam per layer per TRP (i.e. a strongest amplitude coefficient per layer per TRP).), or an indicator indicating the strongest coefficient per layer across the multiple TRPs (Fig 2 and [0059]-[0060], [0063] & [0066] disclose the multi-TRP CSI report may indicate a strongest amplitude coefficient per layer per TRP as discussed above. A strongest amplitude coefficient per layer across the multiple TRPs would be a strongest amplitude coefficient of the strongest amplitude coefficients per layer per TRP. Thus, a multi-TRP CSI report that includes an indication of a strongest amplitude coefficient per layer per TRP inherently includes an indication of a strongest amplitude coefficient per layer across the multiple TRPs.).
Regarding claim 10, Wu discloses wherein a number of non-zero coefficients included in the CSI report is restricted per TRP or across the multiple TRPs ([0072]-[0073] discloses that the multi-TRP PMI CSI feedback report may be limited (i.e. restricted) such as limiting a number of spatial domains across the total number of TRPs for which the UE reports the amplitude coefficients of the PMI. [0077] discloses that the coefficient matrix (i.e. including amplitude coefficients of the PMI) in the multi-TRP CSI feedback report may consist of the non-zero coefficients. [0074] discloses that the limit of the number of spatial domains reported may be per TRP.).
Regarding claim 11, Wu discloses a method performed by a user equipment (UE) in a communication system ([0007] discloses a method of wireless communication for a UE. [0001] discloses that the UE may be part of a wireless communication systems), the method comprising:
receiving, from a base station, configuration information associated with a multiple transmit-receive points (TRPs) ([0007]-[0008] disclose a UE receiving, from a base station, a configuration indicating a precoder size parameter (i.e. configuration information) for a plurality of transmission-reception points (TRPs).);
identifying amplitude coefficients associated with the multiple TRPs based on the configuration information ([0006] disclose the UE, based on the configuration information, identifying precoding matrix indications (PMIs) for the multiple TRPs based on transmit reference signals transmitted by the base station associated with each TRP. Figs 3 & 4 and [0065]-[0067] disclose that the PMI may be a precoding matrix that may include coefficients including amplitude weights.); and
transmitting, to the base station, a channel state information (CSI) report includes indicators indicating the amplitude coefficients associated with the multiple TPRs ([0006]-[0007] disclose the UE may transmit, to the base station, a channel state information (CSI) report including feedback of the PMI, including amplitude coefficients, for each TRP.).
Regarding claim 13, Wu discloses wherein the CSI report includes an indicator indicating the strongest coefficient per layer per TRP (Fig 2 and [0059]-[0060] & [0063] disclose the UE transmitting a multi-TRP CSI report including a PMI that indicates a best beam per TRP, wherein a best beam may be a beam with the highest received signal power among the set of beams measured at the UE (i.e. a beam with a strongest amplitude coefficient). [0066] discloses that the precoding matrix (i.e. PMI in the multi-TRP CSI report) may include beams for each spatial layer. Thus, the multi-TRP CSI report may indicate a best beam per layer per TRP (i.e. a strongest amplitude coefficient per layer per TRP).), or an indicator indicating the strongest coefficient per layer across the multiple TRPs (Fig 2 and [0059]-[0060], [0063] & [0066] disclose the multi-TRP CSI report may indicate a strongest amplitude coefficient per layer per TRP as discussed above. A strongest amplitude coefficient per layer across the multiple TRPs would be a strongest amplitude coefficient of the strongest amplitude coefficients per layer per TRP. Thus, a multi-TRP CSI report that includes an indication of a strongest amplitude coefficient per layer per TRP inherently includes an indication of a strongest amplitude coefficient per layer across the multiple TRPs.).
Regarding claim 14, Wu discloses wherein a number of non-zero coefficients included in the CSI report is restricted per TRP or across the multiple TRPs ([0072]-[0073] discloses that the multi-TRP PMI CSI feedback report may be limited (i.e. restricted) such as limiting a number of spatial domains across the total number of TRPs for which the UE reports the amplitude coefficients of the PMI. [0077] discloses that the coefficient matrix (i.e. including amplitude coefficients of the PMI) in the multi-TRP CSI feedback report may consist of the non-zero coefficients. [0074] discloses that the limit of the number of spatial domains reported may be per TRP.).
Regarding claim 15, Wu discloses a method performed by a base station in a communication system ([0008] discloses a method of wireless communication for a BS. [0001] discloses that the BS may be part of a wireless communication systems), the method comprising:
transmitting, to a user equipment (UE), configuration information associated with a multiple transmit-receive points (TRPs) ([0007]-[0008] disclose a BS transmitting, to a UE, a configuration indicating a precoder size parameter (i.e. configuration information) for a plurality of transmission-reception points (TRPs).); and
receiving, from the UE, a channel state information (CSI) report includes indicators indicating the amplitude coefficients associated with the multiple TPRs based on the configuration information ([0006] disclose the UE, based on the configuration information, identifying precoding matrix indications (PMIs) for the multiple TRPs based on transmit reference signals transmitted by the base station associated with each TRP. Figs 3 & 4 and [0065]-[0067] disclose that the PMI may be a precoding matrix that may include coefficients including amplitude weights. [0008] disclose the BS may receive, from the UE, a channel state information (CSI) report including feedback of the PMI, including amplitude coefficients, for each TRP.).
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.
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 3, 8 & 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu et al. (US 20230062132)(herein after “Wu”) in view of Hindy et al. (US 20240048195)(herein after “Hindy”).
Regarding claim 3, Wu discloses the UE of claim 2.
Wu discloses wherein the CSI report includes an indicator indicating the strongest TRP among the multiple TRPs (Fig 2 and [0059]-[0060] & [0063] disclose the UE transmitting a multi-TRP CSI report including a PMI that indicates a best beam per TRP, wherein a best beam may be a beam with the highest received signal power among the set of beams measured at the UE (i.e. a beam with a strongest amplitude coefficient). A strongest TRP among multiple TRPs would be indicated by the strongest amplitude coefficient among the multiple TRPs. Thus, a multi-TRP CSI report that includes an indication of a strongest amplitude coefficient per TRP inherently includes an indication of a strongest amplitude coefficient (i.e. a strongest TRP) among the multiple TRPs.).
Wu fails to disclose wherein a co-scaling amplitude coefficient for the strongest TRP being not reported by the CSI report.
However, Hindy teaches wherein a co-scaling amplitude coefficient for the strongest TRP being not reported by the CSI report ([0040]-[0041] discloses normalizing the magnitude (i.e. amplitude) coefficients of a CSI report with respect to the coefficient with the largest magnitude (i.e. co-scaling amplitude coefficient for the strongest TRP) and not reporting the magnitude information for the strongest amplitude coefficient but only reporting an indication of the index of the strongest amplitude coefficient.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the UE of claim 2 wherein the CSI report includes an indicator indicating the strongest TRP among the multiple TRPs, as disclosed by Wu, and wherein a co-scaling amplitude coefficient for the strongest TRP being not reported by the CSI report, as taught by Hindy. The motivation to do so would have been to reduce CSI reporting overhead by having a UE not report absolute amplitude coefficients for each TRP (including not report the absolute amplitude coefficient for the strongest TRP), but instead report amplitude coefficients normalized by the strongest TRP amplitude coefficient and only indicate an index for which normalized amplitude coefficient is the strongest TRP amplitude coefficient.
Regarding claim 8, Wu discloses the base station of claim 7.
Wu discloses wherein the CSI report includes an indicator indicating the strongest TRP among the multiple TRPs (Fig 2 and [0059]-[0060] & [0063] disclose the UE transmitting a multi-TRP CSI report including a PMI that indicates a best beam per TRP, wherein a best beam may be a beam with the highest received signal power among the set of beams measured at the UE (i.e. a beam with a strongest amplitude coefficient). A strongest TRP among multiple TRPs would be indicated by the strongest amplitude coefficient among the multiple TRPs. Thus, a multi-TRP CSI report that includes an indication of a strongest amplitude coefficient per TRP inherently includes an indication of a strongest amplitude coefficient (i.e. a strongest TRP) among the multiple TRPs.).
Wu fails to disclose wherein a co-scaling amplitude coefficient for the strongest TRP being not reported by the CSI report.
However, Hindy teaches wherein a co-scaling amplitude coefficient for the strongest TRP being not reported by the CSI report ([0040]-[0041] discloses normalizing the magnitude (i.e. amplitude) coefficients of a CSI report with respect to the coefficient with the largest magnitude (i.e. co-scaling amplitude coefficient for the strongest TRP) and not reporting the magnitude information for the strongest amplitude coefficient but only reporting an indication of the index of the strongest amplitude coefficient.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the BS of claim 7 wherein the CSI report includes an indicator indicating the strongest TRP among the multiple TRPs, as disclosed by Wu, and wherein a co-scaling amplitude coefficient for the strongest TRP being not reported by the CSI report, as taught by Hindy. The motivation to do so would have been to reduce CSI reporting overhead by having a BS receive CSI reports from a UE that does not report absolute amplitude coefficients for each TRP (including not report the absolute amplitude coefficient for the strongest TRP), but instead reports amplitude coefficients normalized by the strongest TRP amplitude coefficient and only indicates an index for which normalized amplitude coefficient is the strongest TRP amplitude coefficient.
Regarding claim 12, Wu discloses the method of claim 11.
Wu discloses wherein the CSI report includes an indicator indicating co-scaling amplitude coefficients per each TRP ([0062]-[0063] discloses that the UE may transmit a multi-TRP report including a PMI that may be based on codebook-based transmissions forming beams, wherein the codebook may be matrices including selection of weights for scaling amplitudes at antenna elements of the TRPs (i.e. co-scaling amplitude coefficients per each TRP).), wherein the CSI report includes an indicator indicating the strongest TRP among the multiple TRPs (Fig 2 and [0059]-[0060] & [0063] disclose the UE transmitting a multi-TRP CSI report including a PMI that indicates a best beam per TRP, wherein a best beam may be a beam with the highest received signal power among the set of beams measured at the UE (i.e. a beam with a strongest amplitude coefficient). A strongest TRP among multiple TRPs would be indicated by the strongest amplitude coefficient among the multiple TRPs. Thus, a multi-TRP CSI report that includes an indication of a strongest amplitude coefficient per TRP inherently includes an indication of a strongest amplitude coefficient (i.e. a strongest TRP) among the multiple TRPs.).
Wu fails to disclose wherein a co-scaling amplitude coefficient for the strongest TRP being not reported by the CSI report.
However, Hindy teaches wherein a co-scaling amplitude coefficient for the strongest TRP being not reported by the CSI report ([0040]-[0041] discloses normalizing the magnitude (i.e. amplitude) coefficients of a CSI report with respect to the coefficient with the largest magnitude (i.e. co-scaling amplitude coefficient for the strongest TRP) and not reporting the magnitude information for the strongest amplitude coefficient but only reporting an indication of the index of the strongest amplitude coefficient.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the method of claim 11 wherein the CSI report includes an indicator indicating co-scaling amplitude coefficients per each TRP, wherein the CSI report includes an indicator indicating the strongest TRP among the multiple TRPs, as disclosed by Wu, and wherein a co-scaling amplitude coefficient for the strongest TRP being not reported by the CSI report, as taught by Hindy. The motivation to do so would have been to reduce CSI reporting overhead by having method for a UE to not report absolute amplitude coefficients for each TRP (including not report the absolute amplitude coefficient for the strongest TRP), but instead report amplitude coefficients normalized by the strongest TRP amplitude coefficient and only indicate an index for which normalized amplitude coefficient is the strongest TRP amplitude coefficient.
Conclusion
The following prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Hao et al. (US 2021/0328644) discloses a CSI Report Configuration for Multi-TRP Transmission.
Kwak et al. (US 10735074) discloses a Method and Apparatus for Channel Status Information Feedback in Mobile Communication System.
Yang et al. (US 10993264) discloses Multiplexing Channel State information Reports in Multiple Transmit-receive Point (TRP) Scenarios.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES P SEYMOUR whose telephone number is (571)272-7654. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5 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, 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.
/JAMES P SEYMOUR/Examiner, Art Unit 2419
/Nishant Divecha/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2419