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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed on July 30, 2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-20 under 35 USC§ 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Myung ‘074, Kim ‘567 and Ma ‘130.
Priority
Applicant cannot rely upon the certified copy of the foreign priority application to overcome the 35 U.S.C 102 and 103 rejections below, because a translation of said application has not been made of record in accordance with 37 CFR 1.55. When an English language translation of a non-English language foreign application is required, the translation must be that of the certified copy (of the foreign application as filed) submitted together with a statement that the translation of the certified copy is accurate. See MPEP §§ 215 and 216.
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)(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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Myung et al(US 2026/0239074 A1)
Regarding claims 1 and 11, Myung ‘074 teaches, a user equipment (UE) in a wireless communication system([0133], [0134], [0141] and Figs. 8-9, a UE in a wireless communication system disclosed), the UE comprising: a transceiver, and a controller coupled with the transceiver and ([0133], [0134], [0141] and Figs. 8-9, the UE comprising a processor acting as a controller and a transceiver connected to the processor) configured to:
receive, from a base station (BS), configuration information for a channel state information (CSI) report([0007], [0072], [0117] and Fig. 6, the UE receiving CSI reporting configuration from the base station), the configuration information including a plurality of sub- configurations([0007], [0072], [0117] and Fig. 6, the UE receiving CSI reporting configuration from the base station. The CSI report configuration including a plurality of sub-configurations),
generate the CSI report by omitting a part of the CSI report at a sub-configuration level within a same priority level, based on a plurality of indexes of the plurality of sub- configurations([0007], [0108], [0123], when a CSI report includes two parts, the UE performs omission of part 2 CSI for the first CSI report at a sub-configuration level within the same priority level. The omission being performed by subdividing priority levels into sub-configuration levels, which enable the UE to omit sub-report within the same priority level based on the sub-configuration indexes (e.g. omitting sub-reports with higher sub-configuration indices first), and
transmit, to the BS, the CSI report([0007], [0112] and Fig. 6, the UE transmitting the CSI report to the base station).
Regarding claims 2, 7, 12 and 17, Myung ‘074 teaches all of the claim limitations, Myung ‘074 further teaches, wherein a sub-configuration among the plurality of sub-configurations with a lower index value has a higher priority ([0100], [0123] and Fig. 5, the lowest configured index being associated with highest priority).
Regarding claims 3, 8, 13 and 18, Myung ‘074 teaches all of the claim limitations, Myung ‘074 further teaches, wherein a priority level of the CSI report is identified based on parameters included in the configuration information([0095], [0097], [0117] and Fig. 5, the configured sub-configuration index and the configured number of sub configurations used to determine priority level).
Regarding claims 4, 9, 14 and 18, Myung ‘074 teaches all of the claim limitations, Myung ‘074 further teaches, wherein the part of the CSI report includes part 2 CSI information ([0115], [0123] and Fig. 5, Part 2 CSI being omitted).
Regarding claims 5, 10, 15 and 20, Myung ‘074 teaches all of the claim limitations, Myung ‘074 further teaches, wherein the CSI report is transmitted on a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) or a physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) ([0103], [0112] and Fig. 6, a report including multiple sub-configurations being reported on PUSCH).
Regarding claims 6 and 16, Myung ‘074 teaches, a base station (BS) in a wireless communication system([0035], [0054] wireless communication system comprising a BS), the BS comprising: a transceiver, and a controller coupled with the transceiver and configured to(([0133], [0134], [0141] and Figs. 8-9, the BS comprising a processor acting as a controller and a transceiver connected to the processor):
transmit, to a user equipment (UE), configuration information for a channel state information (CSI) report([0007], [0072], [0117] and Fig. 6, The BS transmitting to the UE CSI reporting configuration), the configuration information including a plurality of sub-configurations[0007], [0072], [0117] and Fig. 6, the UE receiving CSI reporting configuration from the base station. The CSI report configuration including a plurality of sub-configurations), and
receive, from the UE, the CSI report(([0007], [0112] and Fig. 6, the BS receiving from the UE CSI report), wherein the CSI report is that a part of the CSI report is omitted at a sub-configuration level within the same priority level based on a plurality of indexes of the plurality of sub- configurations([0007], [0108], [0123], when a CSI report includes two parts, the UE performs omission of part 2 CSI for the first CSI report at a sub-configuration level within the same priority level. The omission being performed by subdividing priority levels into sub-configuration levels, which enable the UE to omit sub-report within the same priority level based on the sub-configuration indexes (e.g. omitting sub-reports with higher sub-configuration indices first).
Claims 1-3, 5-8, 10-13, 15-18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kim et al(US 2026/0291567 A1).
Regarding claims 1 and 11, Kim ‘567 teaches, a user equipment (UE) in a wireless communication system, the UE comprising: a transceiver, and a controller coupled with the transceiver and([0133], [0134] and Fig. 8, a wireless device operating as UE that includes transceivers and processor coupled with the transceivers) configured to:
receive, from a base station (BS), configuration information for a channel state information (CSI) report([0259], [0260], and Fig. 18, Terminal (UE) receiving configuration information for CSI from a base station), the configuration information including a plurality of sub- configurations([0260], [0281], [0282], [0333] and Figs. 18, 20, 26, the configuration for CSI comprising a plurality of sub-configurations),
generate the CSI report by omitting a part of the CSI report at a sub-configuration level within a same priority level, based on a plurality of indexes of the plurality of sub- configurations ([0274]-[0276] and Fig. 18, when a generated CSI report includes two parts, the UE omits a portion of the Part 2. For a CSI report containing a list of sub-configurations, the omission is performed at a sub-configuration level within the same priority level by dropping parts of the report based on the sub-configuration indexes, where a lower index value grants a higher priority), and
transmit, to the BS, the CSI report([0272], [0336] and Fig. 18, 26, the UE transmits the CSI reporting back to the base station).
Regarding claims 2, 7, 12 and 17, Kim ‘567 teaches all claim limitations, Kim ‘567 further teaches, wherein a sub-configuration among the plurality of sub-configurations with a lower index value has a higher priority([0275], omission is performed at a sub-configuration level within the same priority level by dropping parts of the report based on the sub-configuration indexes, where a lower index value grants a higher priority).
Regarding claims 3, 8, 13 and 18, Kim ‘567 teaches all claim limitations, Kim ‘567 further teaches, wherein the part of the CSI report includes part 2 CSI information ([0272],[0274]-[0275], a CSI reporting generated by the UE may include pat 1 CSI reporting and Part 2 CSI reporting).
Regarding claims 5, 10, 15 and 20, Kim ‘567 teaches all claim limitations, Kim ‘567 further teaches, wherein the CSI report is transmitted on a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) or a physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) ([0272]-[0275], the CSI report generated by the UE may be transmitted through PUSCH, notice the claim limitation is written in alternative form thus examiner is required to show only one of the alternative claim limitation).
Regarding claims 6 and 16, Kim ‘567 teaches, a base station (BS) in a wireless communication system([0129], [0135], [0141] and Figs. 7-9, a BS in wireless communication system), the BS comprising: a transceiver, and a controller coupled with the transceiver and ([0129], [0135], [0141] and Figs. 7-9, the BS comprising at least one processor acting as a controller and transceiver connected to the processor) configured to:
transmit, to a user equipment (UE), configuration information for a channel state information (CSI) report([0259], [0260], and Fig. 18, the BS transmitting to a terminal (UE) configuration information for CSI), the configuration information including a plurality of sub-configurations([0260], [0281], [0282], [0333] and Figs. 18, 20, 26, the configuration for CSI comprising a plurality of sub-configurations), and
receive, from the UE, the CSI report([0272], [0341] and Figs. 18, 27, the BS receiving CSI report from the UE), wherein the CSI report is that a part of the CSI report is omitted at a sub-configuration level within the same priority level based on a plurality of indexes of at the plurality of sub- configurations([0274]-[0276] and Fig. 18, when a generated CSI report includes two parts, the UE omits a portion of the Part 2. For a CSI report containing a list of sub-configurations, the omission is performed at a sub-configuration level within the same priority level by dropping parts of the report based on the sub-configuration indexes, where a lower index value grants a higher priority).
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 4, 9, 14 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim ‘567 in view of Ma et al(US 2026/0019130 A1).
Regarding claims 4, 9, 14 and 19, Kim ‘567 teaches all claim limitations except, wherein a priority level of the CSI report is identified based on parameters included in the configuration information.
Ma ‘130 teaches, wherein a priority level of the CSI report is identified based on parameters included in the configuration information ([0290]-[0292] and Fig. 4, UE determining CSI priority value(level) based on parameters included on the CSI report configuration’s time domain behavior).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the communication system of Kim ‘567, since such modification would enable UE to determine the number of channel state information (CSI) processing units (CPUs) occupied by CSI reports and determining priorities of reporting CSIs, as suggested by Ma ‘130([0005]).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AWET A HAILE whose telephone number is (571)270-3114. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 8:30 AM - 4:30 PM 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, Michael Thier can be reached at (571)272-2832. 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.
/AWET HAILE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2474
