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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
This office acknowledges receipt of the following item(s) from the applicant:
Information Disclosure Statement(s) (IDS) filed on 25 June 2025. The references have been considered.
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 5-7, 9, 10 and 15-19 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.
Referring to Claim 5, it is not clear what the “a third indicator” means with respect to the limitations of Claim 1. The claim states “…receive a third indicator of the beam reporting format…” but it is not clear which beam reporting format is being referenced. Is the format of Claim 5 one of the plurality of beam reporting formats, or is it the selected beam reporting format. It is not clear which beam reporting format is being claimed so as to define the third indicator. The definition of the third indicator is unclear and therefore indefinite. The difference between the first and third indicator is not clear based on the claimed limitations and appear to be at least interchangeable. As best understood, the measurement report would be considered as the third indicator, for purposes of examination this is how it is interpreted. Clarification is required.
The same rationale applies to Claim 9, 15 and 19 and these claims are considered to be indefinite as well.
Claims 6, 7, 10 and 16-18 are dependent on Claims 5, 9 and 15 and are subject to the same rejections as well.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4-6, 8-12, 14-16, 19 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lee et al. (Lee, US PGPub 2022/0330041).
Referring to Claim 1, Lee teaches at least one memory (Fig. 22; #130; [0413]); and at least one processor (Fig. 22 #120; [0413]) coupled to the at least one memory and, based at least in part on information stored in the at least one memory, the at least one processor, individually or in any combination, is configured to: receive a first indicator of a plurality of beam reporting formats; receive a set of reference signals (RSs); measure the set of RSs; select a beam reporting format from the plurality of beam reporting formats; and transmit a measurement report comprising a second indicator of the measured set of RSs based on the selected beam reporting format; [0144-0150], [0274-0277] and Table 5 and Table 12.
Referring to Claims 2 and 12, Lee teaches wherein the first indicator of the plurality of beam reporting formats comprises at least one of: a first number of beams to be reported; a second number of bits used in a first quantization level for an absolute reference signal received power (RSRP) measurement; a third number of bits used in a second quantization level for a differential RSRP measurement; a fourth number of beams that are reported using the absolute RSRP measurement; or a fifth number of beams that are reported using the differential RSRP measurement; Table 1-4 and corresponding text.
Referring to Claims 4 and 14, Lee teaches wherein, to receive the first indicator of the plurality of beam reporting formats, the at least one processor, individually or in any combination, is configured to: receive a radio resource control (RRC) message comprising the first indicator of the plurality of beam reporting formats; [0099], Table 12, [0271] and [0276].
Referring to Claims 5 and 19, Lee teaches wherein the at least one processor, individually or in any combination, is further configured to: receive a third indicator of the beam reporting format, wherein, to select the beam reporting format from the plurality of beam reporting formats, the at least one processor, individually or in any combination, is configured to: select the beam reporting format from the plurality of beam reporting formats based on the received third indicator; See Table 12 as the transceiver of Claim 19 is implicit to the device.
Referring to Claims 6 and 16, Lee teaches wherein, to receive the third indicator of the beam reporting format, the at least one processor, individually or in any combination, is configured to: receive a medium access control (MAC) control element (MAC-CE) comprising the third indicator of the beam reporting format; receive downlink control information (DCI) comprising the third indicator of the beam reporting format; or receive a radio resource control (RRC) message comprising the third indicator of the beam reporting format; [0099], Table 12, [0271] and [0276].
Referring to Claim 8, Lee teaches wherein, to select the beam reporting format from the plurality of beam reporting formats, the at least one processor, individually or in any combination, is configured to: select the beam reporting format from the plurality of beam reporting formats based on a capability of the UE; see Table 7.
Referring to Claims 9 and 15, Lee teaches wherein the at least one processor, individually or in any combination, is further configured to: transmit a third indicator of the selected beam reporting format; See Table 12.
Referring to Claim 10, Lee teaches at least one transceiver coupled to the at least one processor, wherein, to transmit the third indicator of the selected beam reporting format, the at least one processor, individually or in any combination, is configured to: transmit, via the at least one transceiver, the measurement report comprising the third indicator of the selected beam reporting format; See Table 12 as the transceiver is implicit to the device.
Referring to Claim 11, Lee teaches at least one memory; and at least one processor coupled to the at least one memory and, based at least in part on information stored in the at least one memory, the at least one processor, individually or in any combination, is configured to: transmit a first indicator of a plurality of beam reporting formats; and receive a measurement report comprising a second indicator of a measurement of a set of RSs based on a first beam reporting format, wherein the plurality of beam reporting formats comprises the first beam reported format; see citations of Claim 1 as the only difference is the preamble of communication with a UE and a network node.
Referring to Claim 20, Lee teaches receiving a first indicator of a plurality of beam reporting formats; receiving a set of reference signals (RSs); measuring the set of RSs; selecting a beam reporting format from the plurality of beam reporting formats; and transmitting a measurement report comprising a second indicator of the measured set of RSs based on the selected beam reporting format; See citations of Claim 1 as this claim is the method equivalent to the apparatus claims.
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.
Claim(s) 3 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Liu et al. (Liu, EP4654646).
Referring to Claims 3 and 13, Lee teaches each of the plurality of beam reporting formats, but does not explicitly disclose nor limit the plurality uses a same total number of reporting bits.
However, Liu teaches each of the plurality of beam reporting formats uses a same total number of reporting bits; See Example 9.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Lee with the same total number of reporting bits as taught by Liu so as to predictably allow the quantization precision of the beam measurement result to remain unchanged.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7, 17 and 18 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
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WHITNEY T MOORE whose telephone number is (571)270-3338. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday from 7am-4pm.
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, Jack Keith can be reached at (571) 272-6878. 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.
/WHITNEY MOORE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3646