DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . This action is in response to the communication filed on 4/4/2024. Claims 1-20 are pending.
Examiner Note
The examiner is here to serve, to assist, and to help applicant to the very best of his ability. The Primary Patent Examiner position is a position of serving and it is an honor to externally serve the applicant and attorney and to internally serve junior examiners and supervisors. The goal of the examiner is to work with and assist applicant to move cases along as efficiently as possible.
Applicant is encouraged to call examiner to schedule an interview if applicant has any questions about this action, wants to discuss any possible paths forward, has proposed amendments to the claims to run by the examiner, or for any other issues that applicant would like to discuss.
Examiner can normally be reached at (571) 270-3863 or michael.keller@uspto.gov, Monday-Friday, from about 6 AM - 10 PM EST and if your call is missed examiner will try to return call quickly, thank you.
Priority
This application claims priority of CN202310355955.8, filed 4/4/2023. The assignee of record is Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. The listed inventor(s) is/are: CHEN, Zhe; ZHANG, Sa; SUN, Feifei.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 8/1/2024 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the IDS(s) is/are being considered by the examiner.
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.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over 3GPP (Further aspects of AI/ML for CSI feedback, 3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #112, R1-2301200, 2/17/2023, reference provided with the 8/1/2024 IDS filing; hereinafter 3GPP200) in view of Zhou (CN 115462031 A, published 12/9/2022, PE2E Machine English Translation provided with the first Non-Final rejection in June of 2026; hereinafter CN031).
For Claim 1, 3GPP200 teaches a method performed by a user equipment (UE) in a wireless communication system, the method comprising: receiving, from a base station, configuration information for a channel state information (CSI) report, the configuration information including a list of sub-configurations for the CSI report (3GPP200 Pg 5);
identifying, based on the list of sub-configurations, a mapping order for at least one of precoding matrix indicator (PMI) related to parameters or channel quality indicator (CQI) related parameters (3GPP200 Pg 6).
3GPP200 does not explicitly teach transmitting, to the base station, the CSI report corresponding to one or more sub-configurations among the list of sub-configurations, based on the mapping order.
However, CN031 teaches transmitting, to the base station, the CSI report corresponding to one or more sub-configurations among the list of sub-configurations, based on the mapping order (CN031 Pg 4).
CN031 and 3GPP200 are analogous art because they are both related to CSI reports.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the mapping order techniques of CN031 with the system of 3GPP200 because for further improving NR and LTE technology (CN031 Pg 3).
For Claim 2, 3GPP200-CN031 teaches the method of claim 1, wherein each sub-configuration in the list of sub-configurations includes an ID of a corresponding sub-configuration, and wherein the mapping order is identified based on one or more IDs of one or more sub-configurations in the list of sub-configurations (3GPP200 Pg 6).
For Claim 3, 3GPP200-CN031 teaches the method of claim 1, wherein each sub-configuration in the list of sub-configurations includes at least one of: information indicating a number of antenna ports of channel state information-reference signal (CSI-RS) resources for the CSI report, or information on a power offset for the CSI-RS resources (CN031 Pg 11).
For Claim 4, 3GPP200-CN031 teaches the method of claim 1, wherein each sub-configuration in the list of sub-configurations includes a bitmap indicating whether each of antenna ports associated with CSI-RS resources for the CSI report is enabled or not (3GPP200 Pg 7).
For Claim 5, 3GPP200-CN031 teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the list of sub-configurations includes a plurality of combinations of at least one of spatial parameters or power parameters associated with the CSI report (3GPP200 Pg 7-8).
For Claim(s) 6, the claim(s) is/are substantially similar to claim 1 and therefore is/are rejected for the same reasoning set forth above.
For Claim(s) 7, the claim(s) is/are substantially similar to claim 2 and therefore is/are rejected for the same reasoning set forth above.
For Claim(s) 8, the claim(s) is/are substantially similar to claim 3 and therefore is/are rejected for the same reasoning set forth above.
For Claim(s) 9, the claim(s) is/are substantially similar to claim 4 and therefore is/are rejected for the same reasoning set forth above.
For Claim(s) 10, the claim(s) is/are substantially similar to claim 5 and therefore is/are rejected for the same reasoning set forth above.
For Claim 11, 3GPP200 teaches a method performed by a base station in a wireless communication system, the method comprising: transmitting, to a user equipment (UE), configuration information for a channel state information (CSI) report, the configuration information including a list of sub-configurations for the CSI report (3GPP200 Pg 5); identifying, based on the list of sub-configurations, a mapping order for at least one of precoding matrix indicator (PMI) related to parameters or channel quality indicator (CQI) related parameters (3GPP200 Pg 6). 3GPP200 does not explicitly teach receiving, from the UE, the CSI report corresponding to one or more sub-configurations among the list of sub-configurations, based on the mapping order. However, CN031 teaches receiving, from the UE, the CSI report corresponding to one or more sub-configurations among the list of sub-configurations, based on the mapping order (CN031 Pg 3). CN031 and 3GPP200 are analogous art because they are both related to CSI reports. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the mapping order techniques of CN031 with the system of 3GPP200 because for further improving NR and LTE technology (CN031 Pg 3).
For Claim 12, 3GPP200-CN031 teaches the method of claim 11, wherein each sub-configuration in the list of sub-configurations includes an ID of a corresponding sub-configuration, and wherein the mapping order is identified based on one or more IDs of one or more sub-configurations in the list of sub-configurations (3GPP200 Pg 6).
For Claim 13, 3GPP200-CN031 teaches the method of claim 11, wherein each sub-configuration in the list of sub-configurations includes at least one of: information indicating a number of antenna ports of channel state information-reference signal (CSI-RS) resources for the CSI report, or information on a power offset for the CSI-RS resources (CN031 Pg 11).
For Claim 14, 3GPP200-CN031 teaches the method of claim 11, wherein each sub-configuration in the list of sub-configurations includes a bitmap indicating whether each of antenna ports associated with CSI-RS resources for the CSI report is enabled or not (3GPP200 Pg 7).
For Claim 15, 3GPP200-CN031 teaches the method of claim 11, wherein the list of sub-configurations includes a plurality of combinations of at least one of spatial parameters or power parameters associated with the CSI report (3GPP200 Pg 7-8).
For Claim(s) 16, the claim(s) is/are substantially similar to claim 11 and therefore is/are rejected for the same reasoning set forth above.
For Claim(s) 17, the claim(s) is/are substantially similar to claim 12 and therefore is/are rejected for the same reasoning set forth above.
For Claim(s) 18, the claim(s) is/are substantially similar to claim 13 and therefore is/are rejected for the same reasoning set forth above.
For Claim(s) 19, the claim(s) is/are substantially similar to claim 14 and therefore is/are rejected for the same reasoning set forth above.
For Claim(s) 20, the claim(s) is/are substantially similar to claim 15 and therefore is/are rejected for the same reasoning set forth above.
Citation of Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure is listed below, thank you:
i. US 20240250729 A1
Please see PTO-892 for additional listing of relevant prior art made of record but not relied upon, thank you.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning communications from the examiner should be directed to Michael Keller at (571)270-3863 or michael.keller@uspto.gov. If attempts to reach the examiner are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Brian Gillis can be reached on 571-272-7952.
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.
/MICHAEL A KELLER/
Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2446
Prosecution Insights