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 .
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 1-16 and 20 are 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.
Regarding claim 1 lines 9-10 and corresponding portions of claims 10 and 20, the scope of “localize the target UE to identify a relative position of the target UE with respect to the one or more UEs” cannot be clearly determined, as it is unclear what localizing the target UE to identify its relative position with respect to other UEs comprises.
Details of the relative localization in the specification include:
para. [0086] “the RIS controller (330) may sense a relative position of an active UE under its coverage”,
para. [0086] “the relative position of the UE may be sensed, by the RIS controller (330), based on estimating an angle of arrival (AoA) of the UL signal from the UE at the RIS panel (310)”,
para. [0090] “The information from the sensing elements (504) may be used by the RIS controller (330) for determining the relative location of the UE, i.e., perform localization and thereby select an appropriate RCM for beam forming”,
para. [0105] “The localization mechanism helps to identify the relative position of a sensed active UE (802)”,
para. [0120] “The RIS controller (1130) senses the user location in terms of the Angle of arrival A(01) of the signal (not user coordinates [X, Y]) relative to the RIS”,
para. [0120] “The reflection coefficients chosen by RIS controller (1130) are directly mapped to the relative UE location, wherein the UE location is obtained based on a direction of arrival of the UL signal from the UE sensed by the sensing elements at the RIS panel (1110)”,
para. [00146] “The reflection coefficients chosen by RIS controller are directly mapped to the relative UE location”, and
para. [00146] “In the example embodiment, the DoA is the indicator of relative UE location”.
There is therefore no description of localizing the target UE with respect to other UEs, but only localizing the target UE relative to the RIS, for example using the AOA of the UL signal from the UE at the RIS panel as per para. [0086]. Examiner recommends amending the claim for consistency with the specification, or explaining how the specification supports the claim language. For purposes of art rejection, Examiner will interpret the relative position of the target UE as a relative position with respect to the RIS.
Regarding claims 1-19, the terms “optimal” and “optimum” (e.g. “optimum reflection coefficient matrix (RCM)” in claim 1 line 11, “optimal reflection” in claim 2, etc.) are relative terms which renders the claims indefinite. The terms “optimal” and “optimum” are not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The scope of “optimum reflection coefficient matrix (RCM)” and “optimal reflection” therefore cannot be clearly determined.
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.
Claims 1-6, 8, 10-15, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sherstobitov (WO 2022182264 A1) in view of [Liu (US 20250132785 A1) or Kong (US 11750319 B1)].
Regarding claims 1 and 10, Sherstobitov (WO 2022182264 A1) teaches [NOTE: limitations not taught by Sherstobitov are lined through] a system for enabling autonomous beam forming in a wireless network, said system comprising:
a reconfigurable intelligent surface (RIS) controller (406, Fig. 4; claim 1 “control unit”) associated with a RIS panel (400, Fig. 4; claim 1 “wireless signal reflector”) enabling a communication between an access point (claim 1 “source network object”; page 14 lines 18-19 “a source network object... represented by...an access point”) and one or more user equipments (UEs) (claim 1 “target network object”; page 14 lines 19-20 “a target network object... represented by a UE) in the wireless network, wherein the RIS controller is configured to:
detect a target UE present in the vicinity of the RIS panel based on one or more signals received from the target UE (claim 5 lines 1-5, esp. “emit a reference signal towards the target network object” and “receive the reference signal reflected from the target network object”);
localize the target UE to identify a relative position of the target UE with respect to the one or more UEs (claim 5 lines 7-10, esp. “determine a distance to the target network” and “determine a direction of arrival of the reference signal”); and
(claim 5 lines 11-14, esp. “control the reflective properties of the one or more reflecting elements to provide the directivity pattern of the reflected wireless signal”).
Sherstobitov broadly teaches the beam forming enabled by “controllable reflective properties (e.g., a controllable phase)” (page 8 lines 30-33), and these phases can be considered “optimum” as best understood. Sherstobitov does not teach the beam forming enabled by selecting a reflection coefficient matrix (RCM).
However it is known to select a RCM to define phase shifts of a RIS panel. For example see Liu’s abstract “RIS” and “receiving a reflection coefficients matrix” and Kong 9:33-35:
PNG
media_image1.png
60
450
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to modify Sherstobitov by selecting a RCM as taught by Liu or Kong because it is a known method of providing RIS panel phase shifts that could be used with predictable results. This is a matter of combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results, an exemplary rationale that supports a conclusion of obviousness, see KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc.
Regarding claims 2 and 11, the combination of Sherstobitov and Liu or Kong results in what can be considered, as best understood, optimal reflection of a beam from the access point towards the target UE.
Regarding claims 3 and 12, Sherstobitov’s RIS panel comprises an array of one or more reflecting elements and one or more sensing elements (402-i and 404-i, Fig. 4).
Regarding claims 4 and 13, Sherstobitov’s one or more sensing elements (404-i, Fig. 4) assist the RIS controller to: detect the presence of the target UE; and detect a movement associated with the target UE (sensing elements 404-i implicitly provide such detection via amplitude and phase-difference measurements on the third and fourth sensing signals as per Sherstobitov’s claims 7 and 8; note Sherstobitov teaches that the invention facilitates operation in “dynamically changing transmission environments” as per the abstract and “changing network conditions (e.g. changing directions of arrival of wireless signals)” as per page 9 lines 19-20).
Regarding claims 5 and 14, Sherstobitov teaches the RIS controller is configured to:
receive, from the one or more sensing elements, one or more uplink (UL) transmissions associated with the target UE (claim 5 lines 1-5 “The wireless signal reflector... further comprising a probing element configured to emit a reference signal towards the target object, wherein the first sensing element and the second sensing element are further configured to receive the reference signal reflected from the target network object and generate a third sensing signal and a fourth sensing signal); and
estimate an angle of arrival (AoA) associated with the target UE based on the received one or more UL transmissions (claim 5 lines 9-10 “determine a direction of arrival of the reference signal based on the third sensing signal and the fourth sensing signal”).
Regarding claims 6 and 15, Sherstobitov teaches wherein the RIS controller is configured to select a second optimum RCM based on the detected movement associated with the target UE (abstract “the wireless signal reflector may control the reflective properties of the reflecting elements without having to communicate with a remote central control unit. Given this, the wireless signal reflector may operate in dynamically changing transmission environments”, where controlling the reflective properties in changing environments implies selection of different RCM appropriate for said environments, and said environments include UE movement in view of page 7 line 26 “The UE may refer to a mobile device”).
Regarding claims 8 and 18, Sherstobitov teaches wherein the RIS controller is configured to: form reflection beams based on at least one of the selected first and second optimum RCM to direct one or more signals from the access point towards the target UE (claim 5 lines 11-14, esp. “control the reflective properties of the one or more reflecting elements to provide the directivity pattern of the reflected wireless signal” in view of claim 1 lines 2-3 “reflect a wireless signal from a source network object towards a target network object”).
Regarding claim 19, in addition to what has already been discussed with respect to claim 1, Sherstobitov as modified by Liu or Kong teaches a user equipment (UE) (claim 1 “target network object”), comprising:
one or more processors (inherent); and
a memory operatively coupled to the one or more processors (inherent), wherein the memory comprises processor-executable instructions, which on execution, cause the one or more processors to:
transmit one or more uplink (UL) signals to a reconfigurable intelligent surface (RIS) controller to provide a location of the UE (transmission from 1102 to 104, Fig. 11 in view of page 14 line 33 – page 15 line 5 “UE”); and
receive signals from an access point through one or more reflection beams formed by the RIS controller (page 5 lines 3-5 “a method for performing wireless communication is provided. The method comprises the step of reflecting, by a wireless signal reflector, a wireless signal from a source network object towards a target network object” in view of page 1 line 21 “user equipment” and line 22 “access point”) based on a selected optimal reflection coefficient matrix (RCM) (see claim 1 rejection above).
Regarding claim 20, in addition to what has already been discussed with respect to claim 1, a non-transitory computer readable medium comprising instructions executed by a processor is considered inherent to Sherstobitov’s RIS controller as discussed above with respect to claims 1 and 10.
Claims 7 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sherstobitov (WO 2022182264 A1) in view of [Liu (US 20250132785 A1) or Kong (US 11750319 B1)] as applied to claims 6 and 15 above, and further in view of Sakuma (US 10944456 B1) and Lippman (“Pattern Classification Using Neural Networks” p. 47).
Regarding claims 7 and 17, Sherstobitov does not teach wherein the RIS controller is configured to select the first and the second optimum RCM from a RCM lookup table obtained based on training a neural network for different RCM associated with different UE locations.
However, it is well-known to use a lookup table to obtain beam forming parameters such as Sherstobitov’s phases and Liu/Kong’s RCM. For example, Sakuma, in analogous art (abstract “beamforming”), teaches a lookup table for selecting antenna weight vectors (abstract “antenna weight vectors selected from the beam pattern table”; 4:30-33 “the AWV indicates a vector representing the gain of the amplitude adjuster and the amount of phase shift of the variable phase shifter corresponding to each antenna element”). Beams corresponding to the different antenna weight vectors are shown in Fig. 1, and the table is shown at “LUT” 221. Each beam is implicitly “associated with” different UE locations.
It would have been obvious to further modify Sherstobitov by implementing a beamforming lookup table because it would increase efficiency by providing pre-calculated weights for different beam directions.
Regarding obtaining the lookup table based on training a neural network, this is a classification problem (see specification para. [00127]) and the advantages of neural networks for classification problems are well-known. For example see Lippman “neural-net classifiers work well for many real-world problems... provide reduced error rates... provide selection of differing practical characteristic” (page 47 left hand column, third paragraph).
It would have been obvious to further modify Sherstobitov by using a neural network to obtain the table as taught by Lippman because a neural network is known to work well for real-world classification problems, providing reduced error rates and selection of different practical characteristics. This would be a matter of applying a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results, an exemplary rationale that supports a conclusion of obviousness, see KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc.
Claims 9 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sherstobitov (WO 2022182264 A1) in view of [Liu (US 20250132785 A1) or Kong (US 11750319 B1)] as applied to claims 3 and 12 above, and further in view of Jian (US 20230047993 A1).
Regarding claims 9 and 16, Sherstobitov does not teach the RIS controller configured to group the one or more reflecting elements and the one or more sensing elements in an array to form a plurality of non-uniform sub-arrays; and create an operating schedule for the plurality of non-uniform sub-arrays to serve the one or more UEs in the wireless network.
Jian, in analogous art (abstract “intelligent reflecting devices”) teaches a RIS controller grouping one or more reflecting elements and one or more sensing elements in an array to form a plurality of non-uniform sub-arrays (Figs. 6A-C as described in para. [0105]-[0106], where SEG1-10 are non-uniform sub-arrays); and create an operating schedule for the plurality of non-uniform sub-arrays to serve the one or more UEs in the wireless network (para. [0104] “timing schedule that indicates to transmit signals for receipt by second nodes of a same node group in a same time slot, and to transmit signals for receipt by second nodes of different node groups in different time slots” and para. [0106] “first time slot” and “second time slot”).
Jian teaches that the arrays are formed to accommodate different node locations (para. [0102] “farther away”, “closer”) and target communication parameters (para. [0103] “target SINR, target capacity, target data rate”). It would have been obvious to modify Sherstobitov by implementing groupings of reflecting elements as taught by Jian in order to accommodate different node locations and target communication parameters. This is a matter of using a known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way, an exemplary rationale that supports a conclusion of obviousness, see KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Regarding claim 1, Haija (US 20240429971 A1) teaches [language not taught is lined through; language added to explain Haija’s teachings is italicized] a system for enabling autonomous beam forming in a wireless network, said system comprising:
a reconfigurable intelligent surface (RIS) controller (a controller is considered inherent to RIS 1030, Fig. 10; in addition, in Fig. 10, BS 1010 controls RIS 1030 by providing configuration information at 1065 as is therefore also considered a RIS controller; this arrangement is consistent with the “virtual control” taught at 308 in Fig. 3 of Applicant’s specification; also see para. [0148] “the RIS may be equipped with sensing elements that enable measuring of a signal strength of a signal impinging on the sensing elements and accordingly, the RIS provides guidance on which beam to use based on the measurements. In such cases, it is possible that the phases of individual elements of the RIS may be set according to information that is partially from the RIS itself, rather than depending solely on the communication from the BS and/or UE”) associated with a RIS panel (1030, Fig. 10) enabling a communication between an access point (1010, Fig. 10) and one or more user equipments (UEs) (1020, Fig. 10) in the wireless network, wherein the RIS controller is configured to:
detect a target UE present in the vicinity of the RIS panel () based on one or more signals received from the target UE (paras. [0189]-[0190], esp. “The UE 1020, while performing beam sweeping, performs measurements of the received reference signals (RS) based on the configuration sent to the UE 1020 by the base station 1010” and “At step 1050, the UE 1020 feeds back information that identifies one or more reference signal with measurements that meet a threshold (e.g., signal strength is greater or equal a specific value)”);
localize the target UE to identify a relative position of the target UE with respect to the one or more UEs (para. [0191] “At step 1055, from the measurements received from the UE 1020, the base station 1010 determines a coarse AoD estimation”); and
select a first configuration information comprising phase shifts (para. [0193]) associated with the RIS panel to enable beam forming towards the target UE (selection of configuration is implicit to step 1065, Fig. 10, where beam reflection configuration information is sent to RIS 1030 by BS 1010 as per para. [0193]).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CASSI J GALT whose telephone number is (571)270-1469. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9AM - 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, WILLIAM KELLEHER can be reached at (571)272-7753. 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.
/CASSI J GALT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3648