CTFR 18/628,115 CTFR 86071 DETAILED ACTION Notice of 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. 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. Priority Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged. In particular, this Application claims foreign priority to a Korean application filed on 7 Apr 2023. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statements The information disclosure statements, submitted on 5 Apr 2024 and 8 Oct 2024, are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner. Claim Objections Claim 6 is objected to because claim 6 recites, in part, “a configuration on a CSI report a subset of channel state information reference signal (CSI-RS) resources.” There appears to be an inadvertent deletion of “for” between “report” and “a” based on how claim 1 is drafted. Appropriate correction is required. Response to Arguments The Reply finds “Lee and the Lee PCT are only prior art for the present application only to the extent that their disclosure is supported by the provisional application.” Reply, 8. The Examiner disputes this finding. Lee PCT was filed on December 15, 2023, while the Application at issue was filed on April 5, 2024. As a result, Lee PCT qualifies as prior art for the Application. As implied by the Reply, the Application claims foreign priority to a Korean application that pre- dates Lee PCT. However, foreign priority has not been perfected for this Application. Specifically, an English translation of the foreign priority document as not been provided. As a result, the foreign priority date is presently not the effective filing date of the claimed invention. The Examiner encourages the Applicant to file a translation of the foreign priority document to remove Lee PCT from the pool of available prior art because the Reply persuasively argued that Lee is not entitled to the filing date of its provisional application for the subject matter for which it is cited in the Non-final Rejection. Reply, 8-9 (finding Lee’s provisional application fails to support a CQI based on a power offset). In the interest of compact prosecution, the Final Rejection now cites Nimbalker (citation provided on attached PTO-892) as anticipating the claimed invention. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-12-aia AIA (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. 07-15-03-aia AIA Claim s 1, 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 11, 13, 14, 16, 18, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Nimbalker (WO 2024172749) . Regarding claims 1 and 11, Nimbalker teaches a method performed by a terminal in a communication system supporting a network energy saving (Nimbalker, ¶48 – network energy savings via power offsets), wherein the terminal comprises transceivers; memory storing one or more computer programs; and one or more processors communicatively coupled to the transceivers and the memory, wherein the one or more computer programs include computer-executable instructions (Nimbalker, figure 16) that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the terminal to perform the method comprising: receiving, by the terminal from a base station, channel state information (CSI) report configuration information (Nimbalker, ¶182 – terminal receives CSI configuration from network node) including a configuration on a CSI report for a subset of channel state information reference signal (CSI-RS) resources (Nimbalker, ¶182 – CSI configuration associates the CSI trigger states with a set of one or more CSI-RS resources), a power offset for the CSI report for the subset of CSI-RS resources being included in the configuration on the CSI report for the subset of CSI-RS resources (Nimbalker, ¶¶183, 186 – power offset included in CSI configuration comprises an offset value for a CSI-RS resource); obtaining, by the terminal, a channel quality indicator (CQI) based on the power offset (Nimbalker, ¶64 – terminal determines one or more CSI measurements associated with the CSI-RS resources based on the one or more power offsets, where the CSI report includes a CQI); and transmitting, by the terminal to the base station, the CSI report for the subset of CSI-RS resources including the CQI. Nimbalker, 19:5, 19:10, 19:19 (CSI Report Config includes one or more CQI values); Nimbalker, ¶104. Regarding claims 6 and 16, they are directed to the inverse method of claim 1 and opposing device of claim 6, respectively (i.e. from the perspective of a base station instead of a user terminal). Claims 6 and 16 are anticipated by the same teachings cited in the rejection of claims 1 and 11, with the exception of the elements of a base station are shown in figure 17 of Nimbalker and not figure 16. Additionally, the steps performed the base station are shown in figure 22, while the steps of the user terminal are shown in figure 21. Regarding claims 3, 8, 13, and 18, Nimbalker also teaches wherein information on the subset of CSI-RS resources is included in the configuration on the CSI report for the subset of CSI-RS resources. Nimbalker, ¶¶65, 91, 118 (UE configured with CSI Resource Settings and Report Settings for each CSI-RS resource set). Regarding claims 4, 9, 14, and 19, Nimbalker also teaches wherein the CQI is obtained based on both the power offset for the CSI report for the subset of CSI-RS resources and a power control offset configured for a CSI-RS resource. Nimbalker, ¶¶48-49, 80 (CSI reporting, which may include CQI as noted above, is based on both powerControlOffset and powerControlOffsetSS). Regarding claims 6 and 16, they are directed to the inverse method of claim 1 and opposing device of claim 6, respectively (i.e. from the perspective of a base station instead of a user terminal). Claims 6 and 16 are anticipated by the same teachings cited in the rejection of claims 1 and 11, with the exception of the elements of a base station are shown in figure 17 of Nimbalker and not figure 16 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 5, 10, 15, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nambalker (of record) in view of Zhang (US 20240120978) . Regarding claims 5, 10, 15, and 20, Nimbalker teaches the method of claims 1 and 6, the terminal of claim 11, the base station of claim 16, and the wherein the power offset for the CSI report for the subset of CSI-RS resources is applied to a difference between . . .a CSI-RS and . . . a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH). Nimbalker, ¶¶94-96 (power offset between PDSCH RE and CSI-RS RE). Nimbalker does not explicitly teach a difference between “an energy per resource element (EPRE)” of two downlink signals (e.g. the PDSCH and CSI-RS). However, Zhang teaches power information for CSI being “a power difference between energy per resource element (EPRE) of a PDSCH and EPRE of one downlink measurement reference signal resource.” Zhang, ¶48. At the time of the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to use the EPRE, as taught by Zhang, to determine the power offset, taught by Nimbalker, in order to measure the power of a downlink signal using the smallest unit of physical transmission possible, which enables an efficient power measurement. Conclusion 07-40 AIA Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL . See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN S LAMONT whose telephone number is (571)270-7514 and email address is benjamin.lamont@uspto.gov (see MPEP 502.03 for using EFS or mail, but not email to authorize electronic communications). The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7am to 3pm 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, Huy Vu can be reached at 571-272-3155. 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. /Benjamin Lamont/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2461 Application/Control Number: 18/628,115 Page 2 Art Unit: 2461 Application/Control Number: 18/628,115 Page 3 Art Unit: 2461 Application/Control Number: 18/628,115 Page 4 Art Unit: 2461 Application/Control Number: 18/628,115 Page 5 Art Unit: 2461 Application/Control Number: 18/628,115 Page 6 Art Unit: 2461 Application/Control Number: 18/628,115 Page 7 Art Unit: 2461 Application/Control Number: 18/628,115 Page 8 Art Unit: 2461 Application/Control Number: 18/628,115 Page 9 Art Unit: 2461 Application/Control Number: 18/628,115 Page 10 Art Unit: 2461 Application/Control Number: 18/628,115 Page 11 Art Unit: 2461
Prosecution Insights