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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 17 is objected to because of the following informalities: missing punctuation at the end of the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claim 16 recites the limitation "the cloud apparatus". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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) 29, 30, 34 and 35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim et al. (US 2011/0211547).
Regarding claims 29 and 35, Kim et al. disclose a user equipment (UE) and a method performed by the UE (Figure 5 and 6, UE a/b) for wireless communication, comprising:
at least one memory (Inherent in UE a/b, the UE being a mobile station (MS), a user terminal (UT), a subscriber station (SS), a wireless device according to paragraph 4); and
at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory (Inherent in UE a/b, the UE being a mobile station (MS), a user terminal (UT), a subscriber station (SS), a wireless device according to paragraph 4) and configured to cause the UE to:
receive pilot signals from a plurality of base stations (BSs) (Figures 5 and 6, UE b receiving RSs from BSs A/B);
measure channel station information (CSI) between the UE and each of the plurality of BSs (Figures 5 and 6, UE b estimates channel state in steps S310 and S510);
generate a CSI matrix based on the measured CSI between the UE and the plurality of BSs (Figures 5 and 6, UE b determines feedback information in steps S320 and S520 based on estimated channel state; Paragraphs 73 and 86, The feedback information may include a beamforming matrix Vpreferred (CSI matrix), a beamforming vector v'A, a channel quality indicator (CQI));
encode the CSI matrix (Figures 5 and 6, UE b transmits feedback information in steps S330 and S550, encoding is inherent for transmission; Paragraph 113, quantizing [encoding] a channel between the UE b and the BS A); and
transmit the encoded CSI matrix to at least one of the plurality of BSs (Figures 5 and 6, UE b transmits feedback information to BS A in steps S330 and S550).
Regarding claim 30, Kim et al. disclose wherein the at least one processor is to cause UE to select the at least one of the plurality of BSs based at least in part on one or more of signal strengths or distances between the UE and the plurality of BSs (Paragraph 56, in order to maximize the data transfer rate (i.e., the minimum value between the data transfer rate of the common data for the UE a and the data transfer rate of the common data for the UE b) of the common data, the Tx beamforming vector for the common data can be determined to the beamforming vector among the beamforming matrix set which is not preferred by the user b (i.e., beamforming matrix with strong signal strength to the user b)).
Regarding claim 34, Kim et al. disclose a processor (Figure 5 and 6, UE a/b with inherent processor) for wireless communication, comprising:
at least one controller coupled with at least one memory (Inherent in UE a/b, the UE being a mobile station (MS), a user terminal (UT), a subscriber station (SS), a wireless device according to paragraph 4) and configured to cause the process34 to:
receive pilot signals from a plurality of base stations (BSs) (Figures 5 and 6, UE b receiving RSs from BSs A/B);
measure channel station information (CSI) between the UE and each of the plurality of BSs (Figures 5 and 6, UE b estimates channel state in steps S310 and S510);
generate a CSI matrix based on the measured CSI between the UE and the plurality of BSs (Figures 5 and 6, UE b determines feedback information in steps S320 and S520 based on estimated channel state; Paragraphs 73 and 86, The feedback information may include a beamforming matrix Vpreferred (CSI matrix), a beamforming vector v'A, a channel quality indicator (CQI));
encode the CSI matrix (Figures 5 and 6, UE b transmits feedback information in steps S330 and S550, encoding is inherent for transmission; Paragraph 113, quantizing [encoding] a channel between the UE b and the BS A); and
transmit the encoded CSI matrix to at least one of the plurality of BSs (Figures 5 and 6, UE b transmits feedback information to BS A in steps S330 and S550).
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 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.
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Seo et al. (US 2011/0223928) in view of Maltsev et al. (US 2013/0044683).
Regarding claim 16, Seo et al. discloses a network apparatus (Figure 2, central scheduler) for wireless communication, comprising:
at least one memory (Inherent in central scheduler of figure 2); and
at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory (Inherent in central scheduler of figure 2) and configured to cause the network apparatus to:
receiving first information associated with channel state information between a plurality of user equipment (UEs) and a plurality of base stations (BSs) (Figure 2 and paragraph 31, BS 1 transmits channel and traffic request information [first information] from MSs located within the cell of the BS 1 to the central scheduler, and the BS 2 transmits channel and traffic request information [first information] from MSs located within the cell of the BS 2 to the central scheduler (S100)), wherein the network apparatus is configured to manage the plurality of BSs (Paragraph 29, A central scheduler performs scheduling by exchanging signals with the respective BSs. It is illustrated that the BS 1 and the BS 2 are controlled by the single central scheduler) and each of the plurality of UEs is associated with a corresponding BS of the plurality of BSs (Paragraph 31, MSs located within the cell of the BS 1… MSs located within the cell of the BS 2);
select a beamforming matrix based on the first information (Figure 2 and paragraphs 31-32, The central scheduler performs scheduling in consideration of the channel and traffic request information from the MSs, which have been received from the BS 1 and BS 2 (S110)…The central scheduler selects a beamforming matrix suitable for the selected MSs (S120)); and
transmit the beamforming matrix to the plurality of BSs (Figure 2 and paragraph 33, The central scheduler transmits information regarding the selected MSs and beamforming matrix to the BS 1 and the BS 2 (S130). The BS 1 and the BS2 transmit data to or receive data from the MSs based on the received information).
Seo et al. does not disclose the following limitations that are disclosed by Maltsev et al.: generate a beamforming matrix based on the first information by a beamforming model deployed on the cloud apparatus (Maltsev et al., Paragraph 10, generating a beamforming matrix that may be used within a beamformer…a beamforming matrix generation technique; Paragraphs 14-16, beamforming matrix generation operations are performed).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Seo et al. with the cited disclosure from Maltsev et al. in order to improve performance by applying advanced beamforming techniques in a multi-user MIMO network (Maltsev et al., Paragraph 2).
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Seo et al. in view of Maltsev et al. as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Mittal et al. (US 2020/0322823).
Regarding claim 17, Seo et al. in view of Maltsev et al. discloses the claimed invention above but does not disclose the following limitations that are disclosed by Mittal et al.: wherein the CSI between the plurality of UEs and the plurality of BSs comprises: amplitude information related to a channel between a corresponding UE and a corresponding BS; phase information related to the channel between the corresponding UE and the corresponding BS; and a normalization factor associated with the amplitude information (Mittal et al., Abstract, generating a channel state information report. A set of reference signals transmitted from a base station are received, and a set of beams are identified based on the set of reference signals. The set of reference signals is transformed to obtain a set of vectors of amplitude and phase coefficients of a compressed codebook, each amplitude coefficient vector and phase coefficient vector corresponding to an identified beam in the set of beams. The amplitude coefficient vector for each identified beam in the set of beams is adjusted by a selected value, wherein the selected value is determined such that the amplitude coefficient vector corresponding to a particular beam is normalized to a known predetermined value).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Seo et al. and Maltsev et al. with the cited disclosure from Mittal et al. in order to report CSI in an improved and beneficial manner (Mittal et al., Abstract, Paragraph 6).
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Seo et al. in view of Maltsev et al. as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Wang et al. (US 2022/0200679).
Regarding claim 19, Seo et al. in view of Maltsev et al. discloses the claimed invention above but does not disclose the following limitations that are disclosed by Wang et al.: wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the network apparatus to: construct the beamforming model for determining a beamforming management scheme for the plurality of BSs (Wang et al., Paragraph 8, Apparatuses of and techniques for parallel beamforming training with coordinated base stations); train the beamforming model based on a plurality of the first information (Wang et al., Paragraph 57, the techniques for interleaving, over time, transmissions of the downlink pilot signals 310, the uplink feedback signals 320, the uplink pilot signals 330, the downlink feedback signals 340, or combinations thereof, across two or more base stations within the coordination set 302 create the opportunity for parallel beamforming training between the UE 110 and the different base stations of the coordination set 302); and in response to a completion of the training, deploy the trained beamforming model on the network apparatus (Wang et al., Figure 2, beamforming training module 266; Paragraph 37, The beamforming training module 266 enables execution of a beamforming training protocol with the UE 110 to be interleaved with one or more other beamforming training protocols performed by one or more other base stations within the coordination set 170, as further described with respect to FIGS. 3 to 6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Seo et al. in view of Maltsev et al. with the cited disclosure from Wang et al. in order to optimize beamforming configurations for communications between a UE and a plurality of base stations (Wang et al., Paragraph 24).
Claim(s) 31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. as applied to claim 29 above, and further in view of Mittal et al. (US 2020/0322823).
Regarding claim 31, Kim et al. disclose the claimed invention above but do not disclose the following limitations that are disclosed by Mittal et al.: wherein the CSI matrix comprises and indication of one or more of channel amplitude information associated with the plurality of BSs, channel phase information associated with the plurality of BSs, or a normalization factor associated with the channel amplitude information (Mittal et al., Abstract, generating a channel state information report. A set of reference signals transmitted from a base station are received, and a set of beams are identified based on the set of reference signals. The set of reference signals is transformed to obtain a set of vectors of amplitude and phase coefficients of a compressed codebook, each amplitude coefficient vector and phase coefficient vector corresponding to an identified beam in the set of beams. The amplitude coefficient vector for each identified beam in the set of beams is adjusted by a selected value, wherein the selected value is determined such that the amplitude coefficient vector corresponding to a particular beam is normalized to a known predetermined value).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Kim et al. with the cited disclosure from Mittal et al. in order to report CSI in an improved and beneficial manner (Mittal et al., Abstract, Paragraph 6).
Claim(s) 32 and 33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. as applied to claim 29 above, and further in view of Rahman et al. (US 2018/0076871).
Regarding claim 32, Kim et al. disclose the claimed invention above but do not disclose the following limitations that are disclose by Rahman et al.: wherein to encode the CSI matrix, the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to: quantize the CSI matrix to an accuracy associated with a codebook; and compare the quantized CSI matrix with elements in the codebook to determine an index for the quantized CSI matrix (Rahman et al., Paragraph 106, To report compressed HK,N, the UE uses one of the following alternatives. In one example of Alt 0, the UE transforms the explicit CSI matrix HK,N as Rd=HK,NVd, quantizes Rd and Vd using a codebook, and then reports the quantized matrices to the eNB, which reconstructs the explicit CSI matrix as HK,N=RdVdH. In another example of Alt 1, the UE quantizes Ud,Vd, and Σd using a codebook, and then reports them to the eNB, which reconstructs the explicit CSI matrix as HK,N=UdΣdVdH).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kim et al. with the cited disclosure from Rahman et al. in order to perform CSI acquisition in advanced communication systems (Rahman et al., Paragraph 2).
Regarding claim 33, Rahman et al. disclose wherein: to encode the CSI matrix, the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to compress the index for the quantized CSI matrix; and to transmit the encoded CSI matrix, the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to transmit the compressed index to the at least one of the plurality of BSs (Rahman et al., Paragraph 106, To report compressed HK,N, the UE uses one of the following alternatives. In one example of Alt 0, the UE transforms the explicit CSI matrix HK,N as Rd=HK,NVd, quantizes Rd and Vd using a codebook, and then reports the quantized matrices to the eNB, which reconstructs the explicit CSI matrix as HK,N=RdVdH. In another example of Alt 1, the UE quantizes Ud,Vd, and Σd using a codebook, and then reports them to the eNB, which reconstructs the explicit CSI matrix as HK,N=UdΣdVdH).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 18 and 20-28 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: regarding claim 18, the prior art does not disclose or adequately suggest splitting the beamforming matrix into sub-matrixes, each corresponding to a BS and transmitting the sub-matrix to the corresponding BS; regarding claim 20 (with further dependent claims 21 and 22), the prior art does not disclose or adequately suggest the beamforming model comprising inception structure having two branches and a pooling layer for filtering input data in a branch, each branch including a convolutional layer; regarding claim 23 (with further dependent claims 24-28, the prior art does not disclose or adequately suggest that training the beamforming model comprises iteratively inputting the first information into the model into an end condition is met.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OTIS L THOMPSON, JR whose telephone number is (571)270-1953. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 6:30am - 7:00pm.
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, Chirag G. Shah can be reached at (571)272-3144. 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.
/OTIS L THOMPSON, JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2477
February 25, 2026