CTNF 18/619,355 CTNF 79299 Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 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 § 102 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 1-4, 11-13 and 15-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Timo et al. (2025/0047,346) in view of Li et al. (12,041,474) . For claims 1, 13, 15-17, Timo teaches a method and apparatus (abstract) of reconstructing channel state information (background, summary and claims), comprising: Decoding encoded channel state information (Paras 165-166) using at least two different decoders (Paras 174-179), and Collecting decoded channel state information obtained with the decoding using the at least two different decoders to obtain a total channel state information (Paras 196-216). Timo does not expressly disclose combining the channel state information. Li teaches a method and system (abstract) in the relevant art (background, summary and claims) that includes this limitation (col. 14, line 15 – col. 15, line 40). At the time of filing, one of ordinary skill in the art would have added Li in order to provide improvements to communications among varying networks (col. 1, line 55 – col. 2, line 55). For claim 2, Timo teaches wherein the at least two different decoders are configured to decode encoded channel state information associated with at least one of a different channel model (Paras 126-131) or a different channel type (Paras 102-110). For claim 3, Timo teaches comprising at least one of: receiving the encoded channel state information (Paras 86-90), while Li teaches using the combined channel state information (col. 14, line 15 – col. 15, line 40). For claim 4, Timo teaches that determining the at least two different decoders based on the encoded channel state information (Paras 86-90) and based on at least one of: a respective channel model associated with at least one decoder of the at least two different decoders (Paras 126-131) or a respective channel type associated with at least one decoder of the at least two different decoders (Paras 102-110). For claim 11, Timo teaches comprising: Providing a dataset (Para 83) comprising a plurality of samples (Paras 56-72), the samples characterizing an unencoded channel state information and a respective encoded channel state information (Paras 126-131), Determining encoding keys (Paras 30-32) based on the dataset (Paras 113-115), and Assigning a respective decoder of the at least two different decoders to the encoding keys (Paras 174-177). For claim 12, Timo teaches training at least one of the at least two different decoders based on the plurality of samples of the dataset (Paras 113-115) . 07-22-aia AIA Claim (s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Timo and Li as applied to claim 5 above, and further in view of Yoo et al. (11,653,228) . For claim 5, Timo and Li do not expressly disclose similarity. Yoo teaches a method and system (abstract) in the relevant art (background, summary and claims) comprising: Determining a similarity between a code associated with the encoded channel state information and a respective code associated with at least one of the at least two different decoders (col. 15, lines 50 – col. 16, line 10), and Determining the at least two different decoders based on the determined similarity (col. 16, lines 10-55). At the time of filing, one of ordinary skill in the art would have added Yoo in order to provide improvements to wireless communication efficiencies (col. 2, lines 5-40) . 07-22-aia AIA Claim (s) 6-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Timo and Li as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Chi et al. (2025/0,330,223) . For claim 6, Timo and Li do not expressly disclose these particulars of key usage. Chi teaches a method and system comprising: Providing a set of keys, wherein the keys characterize a code of a channel state information measurement associated with a specific scenario (Paras 113-115), Comparing a or the code associated with the encoded channel state information with the respective codes of the keys to determine J many keys, J>=1, the respective codes of which are similar to the code associated with the encoded channel state information (Para 125), and Determining J many decoders of the at least two different decoders based on the J many keys (Para 137). At the time the invention was made, one of ordinary skill in the art would have added Chi in order to provide improvements to wireless stability (Paras 37-39). For claim 7, Chi teaches comprising: Decoding the encoded channel state information using the J many decoders and obtaining J many variants of decoded channel state information (Para 142), and Combining the J many variants of decoded channel state information (Para 229) . 07-22-aia AIA Claim (s) 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Timo, Li and Chi as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of Sun et al. (12,185,300) . For claim 8, Timo and others do not expressly disclose the limitations. Sun teaches a method and system (abstract) in the relevant art (background, summary and claims) where the decoding of the encoded channel state information using the J many decoders is performed simultaneously (col. 11, lines 50-67) or at least in a temporally overlapping fashion (col. 6, lines 45-55). At the time of filing, one of ordinary skill in the art would have added Sun in order to provide improvements to channel state functionality (col. 1, line 40 – col. 2, line 25). For claim 9, Sun teaches wherein the comparing comprises the determining of the J many keys (col. 3, lines 20-45) the respective codes of which are similar to the code associated with the encoded channel state information and determining, for the J many keys (col. 17, lines 30-60), a respective similarity metric characterizing a similarity between the code associated with the encoded channel state information and a code of the respective key of the J many keys (col. 15, lines 10-40) . 07-22-aia AIA Claim (s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Timo, Li, Chi and Sun as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of Munir et al. (12,382,247) . For claim 10, Timo and others do not expressly disclose the limitations. Munir teaches a method and system (abstract) in the relevant art (background, summary and claims) including combining the J many variants of decoded channel state information as weighted average of the J many variants using the respective similarity metric as a respective weight (col. 22, line 30 – col. 23, line 15). At the time of filing, one of ordinary skill in the art would have added Munir in order to provide improvements to radio CSI handling (col. 1, lines 25-45) . Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MELVIN H POLLACK whose telephone number is (571)272-3887. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:00. 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, Oscar Louie can be reached at (571)270-1684. 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. /MELVIN H POLLACK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2445 Application/Control Number: 18/619,355 Page 2 Art Unit: 2445 Application/Control Number: 18/619,355 Page 3 Art Unit: 2445 Application/Control Number: 18/619,355 Page 4 Art Unit: 2445 Application/Control Number: 18/619,355 Page 5 Art Unit: 2445 Application/Control Number: 18/619,355 Page 6 Art Unit: 2445
Prosecution Insights