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 .
This is in response to an amendment/response filed on 6/23/2026.
Claims 1, 8, and 14 have been amended.
Claim 7 has been cancelled. Claims 19-22 were cancelled previously.
No new claims have been added.
Claims 1-6, 8-18, and 23-24 remain pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/23/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding claims 1 and 14, Applicant argues that Upadhya and Kumar do not teach “wherein the configuration information comprises an operation parameter, the operation parameter comprises at least two of phase information, beamforming information, precoding information, configuration indication information, spatial relation information, filtering information, or sounding reference signal (SRS) resource indication information, so that the operation mode of the current device is to be adjusted in multiple different dimensions.” The Examiner respectfully disagrees with Applicant’s interpretation of the prior art. Upadhya teaches that the configuration information may comprise information such as target azimuth and elevation angles, a pointing direction request, and a control message to orient a relay system (Upadhya; Figs. 3A-4; [0124]-[0126], [0128]-[0131], [0145]). At least such information teaches that the configuration information comprises an operation parameter. Information such as target azimuth and elevation angles, a pointing direction request, and a control message to orient a relay system may be interpreted as comprising at least configuration indication information. Each of such pieces of information is also related to transmission using beams and thus also teaches that the operation parameter comprises beamforming information (Upadhya; Figs. 3A-4; [0084], [0088], [0124]-[0126], [0128]-[0131], [0145]). Information such as target azimuth and elevation angles, a pointing direction request, and a control message to orient a relay system are also related to the spatial relation between the base station and the relay and thus also teach that the operation parameter comprises spatial relation information (Upadhya; Figs. 3A-4; [0084], [0088], [0124]-[0126], [0128]-[0131], [0145]). Upadhya thus teaches that the operation parameter comprises at least two of phase information, beamforming information, precoding information, configuration indication information, spatial relation information, filtering information, or sounding reference signal (SRS) resource indication information. Information such as target azimuth and elevation angles, a pointing direction request, and a control message to orient a relay system are used to adjust the operation mode of the current device in multiple different dimensions (e.g., in x, y, and z dimensions) (Upadhya; Figs. 3A-4; [0084], [0088], [0124]-[0126], [0128]-[0131], [0145]). The Examiner would also like to note that such “is to be adjusted” language may also be interpreted as a future intended use of the operation parameter, and thus the prior art is not required to teach such a future adjustment in multiple different dimensions (although it is the Examiner’s position that Upadhya does teach adjusting the operation mode of the current device in multiple different dimensions). Upadhya and Kumar thus teach the argued claim language “wherein the configuration information comprises an operation parameter, the operation parameter comprises at least two of phase information, beamforming information, precoding information, configuration indication information, spatial relation information, filtering information, or sounding reference signal (SRS) resource indication information, so that the operation mode of the current device is to be adjusted in multiple different dimensions.”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Regarding claim 8, the claim has been amended to recite “wherein the configuration information further comprises a preset delay duration; the adjusting an operation mode of the current device according to the configuration information comprises: determining an adjustment time according to the preset delay duration and a current time; and adjusting the operation mode of the current device according to the adjustment time.” However, the only language in Applicant’s specification regarding a “delay” occurs in paragraphs [0076]-[0078] and is nearly identical to the claim language prior to amendment. Such language recites “the configuration information further includes: an adjustment time; adjusting the operation mode of the current device according to the configuration information includes: determining the adjustment time according to an obtained preset delay duration and a current time; and adjusting the operation mode of the current device according to the adjustment time.” Such language only provides support for “the configuration information” (which is discussed further in claim 1 as being acquired based on frequency band information supported by a current device and operation state information reported by the current device) further comprising “an adjustment time” (and not “a preset delay duration”). The discussion of “the preset delay duration” in Applicant’s specification is limited to “determining the adjustment time according to an obtained preset delay duration and a current time.” Applicant’s specification thus does not appear to provide support for “the configuration information further comprises a preset delay duration.” Claim 8 thus contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. For the purpose of this examination, the Examiner will interpret the language of claim 8 in line with the support present in Applicant’s specification wherein the configuration information further comprises an adjustment time and not a preset delay duration.
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.
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) 1-6, 8-18, and 23-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Upadhya et al. (US 2022/0352973, Upadhya hereinafter) in view of Kumar et al. (US 2023/0068504, Kumar hereinafter).
Regarding claim 1, Upadhya teaches a wireless signal processing method, comprising: acquiring configuration information determined by a control device (As can be seen in at least Figs. 3A-3E, a base station (i.e., a control device) may transmit configuration information to a relay device in at least step 32 (e.g., target azimuth and elevation angles) and in at least step 36 (e.g., a pointing direction request). See also at least step 4.5 in Fig. 4 regarding a controlling device sending a control message to orient a relay system. At least reception of such configuration information may be interpreted as acquiring configuration information determined by a control device; Upadhya; Figs. 3A-4; [0124]-[0126], [0128]-[0131], [0145]) based on frequency band information supported by a current device and operation state information reported by the current device (As can be seen in at least step 30 of Figs. 3A-3E, the relay (i.e., a current device) may transmit information including supported frequency bands in addition to other information that may be interpreted as operation state information (e.g., power source type, min and max azimuth and elevation angles, slew-rate, etc.). See also at least steps 4.1-4.3 in Fig. 4 regarding a controlling device acquiring operation state information reported by a controlled device. The later transmitted configuration information may be interpreted as being based on such frequency band information supported by a current device and operation state information reported by the current device; Upadhya; Figs. 3A-4; [0115]-[0123], [0140]-[0143]); and adjusting an operation mode of the current device according to the configuration information (The controlled device may be interpreted as adjusting an operation mode according to configuration information such as target azimuth/elevation angles, a pointing direction request, and/or a message to orient a relay system; Upadhya; Figs. 3A-4; [0124]-[0126], [0128]-[0131], [0145]), the operation mode corresponding to a propagation direction of a beam (As can be seen in at least step 4.2 of Fig. 4, the location of a mobile object (e.g., a UAV 19) may be determined and used for relay selection and orienting the selected relay system towards the mobile object in step 4.5. The operation mode may thus be interpreted as corresponding to a propagation direction of a beam; Upadhya; Figs. 3A-4; [0144]-[0149]), wherein the configuration information comprises an operation parameter (Information such as target azimuth and elevation angles, a pointing direction request, and a control message to orient a relay system may be interpreted as comprising an operation parameter; Upadhya; Figs. 3A-4; [0124]-[0126], [0128]-[0131], [0145]), the operation parameter comprises at least two of phase information, beamforming information, precoding information, configuration indication information, spatial relation information, filtering information, or sounding reference signal (SRS) resource indication information (Information such as target azimuth and elevation angles, a pointing direction request, and a control message to orient a relay system may be interpreted as comprising at least configuration indication information. Each of such pieces of information is also related to transmission using beams and thus also teaches that the operation parameter comprises beamforming information. Information such as target azimuth and elevation angles, a pointing direction request, and a control message to orient a relay system are also related to the spatial relation between the base station and the relay and thus also teach that the operation parameter comprises spatial relation information. Upadhya thus teaches that the operation parameter comprises at least two of phase information, beamforming information, precoding information, configuration indication information, spatial relation information, filtering information, or sounding reference signal (SRS) resource indication information; Upadhya; Figs. 3A-4; [0084], [0088], [0124]-[0126], [0128]-[0131], [0145]), so that the operation mode of the current device is to be adjusted in multiple different dimensions (Information such as target azimuth and elevation angles, a pointing direction request, and a control message to orient a relay system are used to adjust the operation mode of the current device in multiple different dimensions (e.g., in x, y, and z dimensions). The Examiner would also like to note that such “is to be adjusted” language may also be interpreted as a future intended use of the operation parameter, and thus the prior art is not required to teach such a future adjustment in multiple different dimensions (although it is the Examiner’s position that Upadhya does teach adjusting the operation mode of the current device in multiple different dimensions); Upadhya; Figs. 3A-4; [0084], [0088], [0124]-[0126], [0128]-[0131], [0145]). However, Upadhya does not specifically disclose the beam is a feedback beam. Kumar teaches the beam is a feedback beam (Beams between a user equipment (UE) and a base station and/or network entity acting as a relay may be used for signaling related to at least beam training, measurement reporting, and feedback regarding hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) processes. The beam may thus be interpreted as a feedback beam; Kumar; Fig. 6; [0052], [0055]-[0056], [0067], [0107]-[0108]). Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in Kumar regarding beam management with the teachings as in Upadhya regarding beam management. The motivation for doing so would have been to increase performance at least by detecting hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) stalling issues (Kumar; [0104]-[0108]). Regarding claim 2, Upadhya and Kumar teach the limitations of claim 1. Upadhya further teaches the configuration information comprises a preset frequency band (Configuration information corresponding to communication over a frequency band such as that received in at least steps 32 and 36 of Figs. 3A-3E and at least step 4.5 of Fig. 4 may be interpreted as comprising a preset frequency band; Upadhya; Figs. 3A-4; [0124]-[0126], [0128]-[0131], [0145]), the method further comprises: before the adjusting an operation mode of the current device according to the configuration information, determining frequency capabilities of the current device (As can be seen in at least step 30 of Figs. 3A-3E, the relay (i.e., a current device) may transmit information including supported frequency bands, which may be interpreted as comprising determining frequency capabilities of the current device before the adjusting an operation mode of the current device according to the configuration information; Upadhya; Figs. 3A-4; [0115]-[0123], [0140]-[0143]). Kumar further teaches determining frequency capabilities of the current device comprises comparing the preset frequency band with an operation frequency band supported by the current device to obtain a frequency band comparison result (The UE may indicate its communication capability and in response the network may configure the UE to perform communication with the network including reporting measurements; Kumar; Figs. 6-8; [0065]-[0068], [0082], [0090], [0125]-[0126]); and in response to the frequency band comparison result indicating that the operation frequency band supported by the current device comprises the preset frequency band, taking the preset frequency band as an operation frequency band of the current device (The UE may be interpreted as being configured with a frequency band (i.e., a preset frequency band) based on a comparison that indicates that the UE supports the preset frequency band as an operation frequency band; Kumar; Figs. 6-8; [0065]-[0068], [0082], [0090], [0125]-[0126]). Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in Kumar regarding beam management with the teachings as in Upadhya regarding beam management. The motivation for doing so would have been to increase performance at least by detecting hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) stalling issues (Kumar; [0104]-[0108]). Regarding claim 3, Upadhya and Kumar teach the limitations of claim 1. Upadhya further teaches the configuration information further comprises a switch instruction (Configuration information such as target azimuth/elevation angles, a pointing direction request, and/or a message to orient a relay system may be interpreted as comprising a switch instruction; Upadhya; Figs. 3A-4; [0124]-[0126], [0128]-[0131], [0145]); the adjusting an operation mode of the current device according to the configuration information comprises: adjusting the operation mode of the current device according to the switch instruction to obtain an adjusted operation mode (The relay may be interpreted as adjusting its operation mode according to the switch instruction to obtain an adjusted operation mode; Upadhya; Figs. 3A-4; [0124]-[0126], [0128]-[0131], [0145]); and performing an operation by using the adjusted operation mode (The relay may be interpreted as operating by using the adjusted operation mode; Upadhya; Figs. 3A-4; [0124]-[0126], [0128]-[0131], [0145]). Regarding claim 4, Upadhya and Kumar teach the limitations of claim 3. Upadhya further teaches the performing an operation by using the adjusted operation mode comprises: aiming the propagation direction of the beam at a target terminal according to acquired location information of the target terminal (As can be seen in at least step 4.2 of Fig. 4, the location of a mobile object (e.g., a UAV 19) may be determined and used for relay selection and orienting the selected relay system towards the mobile object in step 4.5; Upadhya; Figs. 3A-4; [0124]-[0126], [0128]-[0131], [0144]-[0149]). Kumar further teaches the beam is a feedback beam (Beams between a user equipment (UE) and a base station and/or network entity acting as a relay may be used for signaling related to at least beam training, measurement reporting, and feedback regarding hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) processes. The beam may thus be interpreted as a feedback beam; Kumar; Fig. 6; [0052], [0055]-[0056], [0067], [0107]-[0108]). Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in Kumar regarding beam management with the teachings as in Upadhya regarding beam management. The motivation for doing so would have been to increase performance at least by detecting hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) stalling issues (Kumar; [0104]-[0108]). Regarding claim 5, Upadhya and Kumar teach the limitations of claim 3. Kumar further teaches the performing an operation by using the adjusted operation mode comprises: performing scattering on a wireless signal carried by an incident beam (At least paragraphs [0071], [0139], and [0142] of Applicant’s specification appear to describe scattering as reducing a signal interference of a reflected beam of the controlled device on the target terminal. Paragraphs and [0161]-[0162] of Applicant’s specification appear to describe scattering as potentially being performed passively. Using an interpretation in light of such disclosure wherein scattering may be performed passively (e.g., the device performs scattering by at least partially absorbing received signals), a device may be interpreted as performing scattering by not aiming interfering transmissions at the device. However, the Examiner would like to note that network devices are described as performing interference coordination, which may also be interpreted as reducing a signal interference of a reflected beam of the controlled device on the target terminal; Kumar; Figs. 6-8; [0034], [0060]-[0061], [0065]-[0067]). Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in Kumar regarding beam management with the teachings as in Upadhya regarding beam management. The motivation for doing so would have been to increase performance at least by detecting hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) stalling issues (Kumar; [0104]-[0108]). Regarding claim 6, Upadhya and Kumar teach the limitations of claim 1. Upadhya further teaches the beam comprises at least one of: a reflected beam, a transmission beam, or a refracted beam (As can be seen in at least step 4.2 of Fig. 4, the location of a mobile object (e.g., a UAV 19) may be determined and used for relay selection and orienting the selected relay system towards the mobile object in step 4.5. Such a beam may be interpreted as comprising at least a transmission beam; Upadhya; Figs. 3A-4; [0124]-[0126], [0128]-[0131], [0144]-[0149]). Kumar further teaches the beam is a feedback beam (Beams between a user equipment (UE) and a base station and/or network entity acting as a relay may be used for signaling related to at least beam training, measurement reporting, and feedback regarding hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) processes. The beam may thus be interpreted as a feedback beam; Kumar; Fig. 6; [0052], [0055]-[0056], [0067], [0107]-[0108]). Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in Kumar regarding beam management with the teachings as in Upadhya regarding beam management. The motivation for doing so would have been to increase performance at least by detecting hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) stalling issues (Kumar; [0104]-[0108]). Regarding claim 8, Upadhya and Kumar teach the limitations of claim 1. Upadhya further teaches the configuration information further comprises a preset delay duration (As was also discussed in the 35 U.S.C. 112(a) rejection above, Applicant’s specification does not provide support for the configuration information (which is discussed further in claim 1 as being acquired based on frequency band information supported by a current device and operation state information reported by the current device) further comprising “a preset delay duration.” Paragraphs [0076]-[0078] of Applicant’s specification that have any discussion of “delay,” and such a portion of Applicant’s specification only provides support for the configuration information further comprising “an adjustment time” (which has different scope than “a preset delay duration”). The claim language is thus being interpreted in light of the support in Applicant’s specification such that the configuration information further comprises an adjustment time. Configuration information may also include the slew rate of the antenna, which is described as a supported rate of angular change in the antenna direction. The slew rate may therefore determine the time taken for the antenna to move to a target orientation. Such configuration information may be interpreted as an adjustment time; Upadhya; Figs. 3A-4; [0098]-[0099], [0115]-[0123], [0151]-[0153]); the adjusting an operation mode of the current device according to the configuration information comprises: determining an adjustment time according to the preset delay duration and a current time (The slew rate is described as being used to determine the time taken for the antenna to move to a target orientation. The adjustment time may thus be interpreted as being determined according to the preset delay duration (e.g., slew time) and a current time; Upadhya; Figs. 3A-4; [0098]-[0099], [0115]-[0123], [0151]-[0153]); and adjusting the operation mode of the current device according to the adjustment time (The operation mode of the relay may be interpreted as being adjusted according to the adjustment time based at least on the slew time; Upadhya; Figs. 3A-4; [0098]-[0099], [0124]-[0126], [0128]-[0131], [0145], [0151]-[0153]). Regarding claim 9, Upadhya and Kumar teach the limitations of claim 1. Upadhya further teaches the acquiring configuration information comprises: in response to determining that the current device is in a preset time period, acquiring the configuration information (The configuration information may be acquired based at least on base station or UAV triggered location reporting, which may be interpreted as triggering a preset time period wherein the operations of Figs. 3A-4 are performed and the configuration information is acquired; Upadhya; Figs. 3A-4; [0124]-[0126], [0128]-[0131], [0145]-[0148]). Regarding claim 10, Upadhya and Kumar teach the limitations of claim 1. Upadhya further teaches the operation state information comprises state information of a power supply (As can be seen in at least Figs. 3A-3E, operation state information may comprise power source type information; Upadhya; Figs. 3A-4; [0119]-[0120], [0124]-[0126], [0128]-[0131], [0145]), the method further comprises: before the acquiring configuration information, acquiring an electric quantity of the power supply of the current device (Transmission/reception of power source type information may be interpreted as being performed before acquiring configuration information; Upadhya; Figs. 3A-4; [0119]-[0120], [0128]-[0131], [0136], [0162]); in response to determining that the electric quantity of the power supply of the current device is lower than a preset electric quantity threshold (Factors such as the battery health of relays (if powered by a battery or a renewable source) may be used in the selection algorithm, with those relays which fall beneath/exceed a predetermined threshold being disregarded from selection; Upadhya; Figs. 3A-4; [0119]-[0120], [0128]-[0131], [0136], [0162]), generating the state information of the power supply according to the electric quantity of the power supply of the current device and an identifier of the current device (As can be seen in at least step 30 of Figs. 3A-3E, the relay ID is included with the generated state information of the power supply; Upadhya; Figs. 3A-4; [0115]-[0120], [0128]-[0131], [0136], [0162]); and reporting the state information of the power supply to the control device (The power supply information may be reported to the base station; Upadhya; Figs. 3A-4; [0115]-[0120], [0128]-[0131], [0136], [0162]). Regarding claim 11, Upadhya and Kumar teach the limitations of claim 10. Upadhya further teaches the reporting the state information of the power supply to the control device comprises: in response to a state query request, for querying a state of the power supply, sent by the control device (The operations of Figs. 3A-4 are described as potentially being performed based at least on base station or UAV triggered location reporting. Because such triggering causes the relay to transmit power supply information in at least step 30, such triggering may be interpreted as a state query request, for querying a state of the power supply, sent by the control device; Upadhya; Figs. 3A-4; [0124]-[0126], [0128]-[0131], [0145]-[0148]), feeding back a state query response to the control device, the state query response comprising the state information of the power supply (At least the power information in step 30 may be interpreted as a state query response to the control device, the state query response comprising the state information of the power supply; Upadhya; Figs. 3A-4; [0124]-[0126], [0128]-[0131], [0145]-[0148]). Regarding claim 12, Upadhya and Kumar teach the limitations of claim 1. Upadhya further teaches the method further comprises: before the acquiring configuration information, reporting information (The relay may be interpreted as reporting information in at least step 30 of Figs. 3A-3E before acquiring configuration information; Upadhya; Figs. 3A-4; [0115]-[0123], [0140]-[0143]). Kumar further teaches the current device comprises a plurality of processing units (The Examiner would also like to note that Applicant’s specification does not appear to link the term “processing unit” to any particular structure (which would be required if the claim were an apparatus claim in order to avoid a 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection in view of a 35 U.S.C. 112(f) interpretation). Applicant’s specification thus appears to suggest that the claimed “processing units” may be, e.g., software units. Devices may be comprised of a plurality of hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) processes, which may be interpreted as processing units; Kumar; [0107]-[0108], [0229]-[0233], [0246]), the operation state information further comprising fault state information (HARQ reporting may be interpreted as operation state information that comprises fault state information; Kumar; [0107]-[0108], [0229]-[0233], [0246]), the method further comprises: reporting the information comprises acquiring a total number of faults representing a total number of processing units with faults (The device may determine which HARQ processes were successful and which were not, which may be interpreted as comprising acquiring a total number of faults representing a total number of processing units with faults; Kumar; [0107]-[0108], [0229]-[0233], [0246]); determining a fault proportion of the current device according to the number of the faults and a total number of processing units in the current device (The device may determine which HARQ processes were successful and which were not, which may be interpreted as comprising determining a fault proportion of the current device according to the number of the faults and a total number of processing units in the current device; Kumar; [0107]-[0108], [0229]-[0233], [0246]); generating the fault state information according to the fault proportion and an identifier of the current device (The device may report which HARQ processes were successful and which were not, which may be interpreted as comprising generating the fault state information according to the fault proportion and an identifier of the current device; Kumar; [0107]-[0108], [0229]-[0233], [0246]); and sending the fault state information to the control device (The device may report which HARQ processes were successful and which were not, which may be interpreted as comprising sending the fault state information to the control device; Kumar; [0107]-[0108], [0229]-[0233], [0246]). Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in Kumar regarding beam management with the teachings as in Upadhya regarding beam management. The motivation for doing so would have been to increase performance at least by detecting hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) stalling issues (Kumar; [0104]-[0108]). Regarding claim 13, Upadhya and Kumar teach the limitations of claim 12. Kumar further teaches the sending the fault state information to the control device comprises: in response to a fault state query request sent by the control device, feeding back a fault state query response to the control device, the fault state query response comprising the fault state information (The device may report which HARQ processes were successful and which were not, which may be interpreted as comprising feeding back a fault state query response to the control device, the fault state query response comprising the fault state information. HARQ transmission is also performed in response to receiving transmission from the network, and such transmission requiring/prompting HARQ feedback may be interpreted as a fault state query request; Kumar; [0107]-[0108], [0229]-[0233], [0246], [0375]). Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in Kumar regarding beam management with the teachings as in Upadhya regarding beam management. The motivation for doing so would have been to increase performance at least by detecting hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) stalling issues (Kumar; [0104]-[0108]). Regarding claim 14, Upadhya teaches a wireless signal processing method, comprising: acquiring operation state information reported by a controlled device (As can be seen in at least Figs. 3A-3E, a base station may acquire information from another device such as a relay (i.e., a controlled device) that may be interpreted as operation state information in at least step 30 (e.g., power source type, min and max azimuth and elevation angles, slew-rate, etc.). See also at least steps 4.1-4.3 in Fig. 4 regarding a controlling device acquiring operation state information reported by a controlled device; Upadhya; Figs. 3A-4; [0115]-[0123], [0140]-[0143]) and frequency band information supported by the controlled device (As can also be seen in at least step 30, the base station may also acquire supported frequency bands from the controlled device. See also at least steps 4.1-4.3 in Fig. 4 regarding a controlling device acquiring operation state information reported by a controlled device; Upadhya; Figs. 3A-4; [0115]-[0123], [0140]-[0143]); generating configuration information according to the operation state information and the frequency band information supported by the controlled device (The base station may transmit configuration information to the controlled device in at least step 32 (e.g., target azimuth and elevation angles) and in at least step 36 (e.g., a pointing direction request). See also at least step 4.5 in Fig. 4 regarding a controlling device sending a control message to orient a relay system. Such transmission of configuration information may be interpreted as comprising generating such configuration information according to the operation state information and the frequency band information supported by the controlled device; Upadhya; Figs. 3A-4; [0124]-[0126], [0128]-[0131], [0145]); and sending the configuration information to the controlled device (As was also discussed above, at least steps 32 and 36 of Figs. 3A-3E and at least step 4.5 of Fig. 4 may be interpreted as sending configuration information to the controlled device; Upadhya; Figs. 3A-4; [0124]-[0126], [0128]-[0131], [0145]), so that the controlled device adjusts an operation mode of the controlled device according to the configuration information (The controlled device may be interpreted as adjusting an operation mode according to configuration information such as target azimuth/elevation angles, a pointing direction request, and/or a message to orient a relay system; Upadhya; Figs. 3A-4; [0124]-[0126], [0128]-[0131], [0145]), the operation mode corresponding to a propagation direction of a beam (As can be seen in at least step 4.2 of Fig. 4, the location of a mobile object (e.g., a UAV 19) may be determined and used for relay selection and orienting the selected relay system towards the mobile object in step 4.5. The operation mode may thus be interpreted as corresponding to a propagation direction of a beam; Upadhya; Figs. 3A-4; [0144]-[0149]), wherein the configuration information comprises an operation parameter (Information such as target azimuth and elevation angles, a pointing direction request, and a control message to orient a relay system may be interpreted as comprising an operation parameter; Upadhya; Figs. 3A-4; [0124]-[0126], [0128]-[0131], [0145]), the operation parameter comprises at least two of phase information, beamforming information, precoding information, configuration indication information, spatial relation information, filtering information, or sounding reference signal (SRS) resource indication information (Information such as target azimuth and elevation angles, a pointing direction request, and a control message to orient a relay system may be interpreted as comprising at least configuration indication information. Each of such pieces of information is also related to transmission using beams and thus also teaches that the operation parameter comprises beamforming information. Information such as target azimuth and elevation angles, a pointing direction request, and a control message to orient a relay system are also related to the spatial relation between the base station and the relay and thus also teach that the operation parameter comprises spatial relation information. Upadhya thus teaches that the operation parameter comprises at least two of phase information, beamforming information, precoding information, configuration indication information, spatial relation information, filtering information, or sounding reference signal (SRS) resource indication information; Upadhya; Figs. 3A-4; [0084], [0088], [0124]-[0126], [0128]-[0131], [0145]), so that the operation mode of the current device is to be adjusted in multiple different dimensions (Information such as target azimuth and elevation angles, a pointing direction request, and a control message to orient a relay system are used to adjust the operation mode of the current device in multiple different dimensions (e.g., in x, y, and z dimensions). The Examiner would also like to note that such “is to be adjusted” language may also be interpreted as a future intended use of the operation parameter, and thus the prior art is not required to teach such a future adjustment in multiple different dimensions (although it is the Examiner’s position that Upadhya does teach adjusting the operation mode of the current device in multiple different dimensions); Upadhya; Figs. 3A-4; [0084], [0088], [0124]-[0126], [0128]-[0131], [0145]) However, Upadhya does not specifically disclose the beam is a feedback beam. Kumar teaches the beam is a feedback beam (Beams between a user equipment (UE) and a base station and/or network entity acting as a relay may be used for signaling related to at least beam training, measurement reporting, and feedback regarding hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) processes. The beam may thus be interpreted as a feedback beam; Kumar; Fig. 6; [0052], [0055]-[0056], [0067], [0107]-[0108]). Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in Kumar regarding beam management with the teachings as in Upadhya regarding beam management. The motivation for doing so would have been to increase performance at least by detecting hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) stalling issues (Kumar; [0104]-[0108]). Regarding claim 15, Upadhya and Kumar teach the limitations of claim 14. Upadhya further teaches the configuration information comprises: a preset frequency band (Configuration information corresponding to communication over a frequency band such as that received in at least steps 32 and 36 of Figs. 3A-3E and at least step 4.5 of Fig. 4 may be interpreted as comprising a preset frequency band; Upadhya; Figs. 3A-4; [0124]-[0126], [0128]-[0131], [0145]); Kumar further teaches the sending the configuration information to the controlled device comprises: sending the preset frequency band to the controlled device, so that the controlled device determines an operation frequency band of the controlled device according to the preset frequency band and the frequency band information supported by the controlled device (The UE may indicate its communication capability and in response the network may configure the UE to perform communication with the network including reporting measurements. The UE may be interpreted as being configured with a frequency band (i.e., a preset frequency band) that is supported by the UE, which may be interpreted as comprising determining an operation frequency band of the controlled device according to the preset frequency band and the frequency band information supported by the controlled device; Kumar; Figs. 6-8; [0065]-[0068], [0082], [0090], [0125]-[0126]). Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in Kumar regarding beam management with the teachings as in Upadhya regarding beam management. The motivation for doing so would have been to increase performance at least by detecting hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) stalling issues (Kumar; [0104]-[0108]). Regarding claim 16, Upadhya and Kumar teach the limitations of claim 14. Upadhya further teaches the configuration information further comprises a switch instruction configured to switch the operation mode of the controlled device (Configuration information such as target azimuth/elevation angles, a pointing direction request, and/or a message to orient a relay system may be interpreted as comprising a switch instruction configured to switch the operation mode of the controlled device; Upadhya; Figs. 3A-4; [0124]-[0126], [0128]-[0131], [0145]), the operation mode comprising a first operation mode or a second operation mode (A device switching between modes may be interpreted as having at least a first and second operation mode; Upadhya; Figs. 3A-4; [0124]-[0126], [0128]-[0131], [0145]); the first operation mode is configured to indicate the controlled device to aim the propagation direction of the beam at a target terminal according to acquired location information of the target terminal (As can be seen in at least step 4.2 of Fig. 4, the location of a mobile object (e.g., a UAV 19) may be determined and used for relay selection and orienting the selected relay system towards the mobile object in step 4.5; Upadhya; Figs. 3A-4; [0124]-[0126], [0128]-[0131], [0144]-[0149]), wherein a wireless signal carried by the beam is the same as a wireless signal carried by an incident beam acquired by the controlled device (A wireless signal carried by the beam (e.g., a beam between the mobile object and the relay) may be interpreted as being the same as a wireless signal carried by an incident beam acquired by the relay (e.g., from the base station); Upadhya; Figs. 3A-4; [0124]-[0126], [0128]-[0131], [0144]-[0149]). Kumar further teaches the beam is a feedback beam (Beams between a user equipment (UE) and a base station and/or network entity acting as a relay may be used for signaling related to at least beam training, measurement reporting, and feedback regarding hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) processes. The beam may thus be interpreted as a feedback beam; Kumar; Fig. 6; [0052], [0055]-[0056], [0067], [0107]-[0108]); and the second operation mode is configured to indicate the controlled device to scatter the wireless signal carried by the incident beam (At least paragraphs [0071], [0139], and [0142] of Applicant’s specification appear to describe scattering as reducing a signal interference of a reflected beam of the controlled device on the target terminal. Paragraphs and [0161]-[0162] of Applicant’s specification appear to describe scattering as potentially being performed passively. Using an interpretation in light of such disclosure wherein scattering may be performed passively (e.g., the device performs scattering by at least partially absorbing received signals), a device may be interpreted as performing scattering by not aiming interfering transmissions at the device. However, the Examiner would like to note that network devices are described as performing interference coordination, which may also be interpreted as reducing a signal interference of a reflected beam of the controlled device on the target terminal; Kumar; Figs. 6-8; [0034], [0060]-[0061], [0065]-[0067]). Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in Kumar regarding beam management with the teachings as in Upadhya regarding beam management. The motivation for doing so would have been to increase performance at least by detecting hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) stalling issues (Kumar; [0104]-[0108]). Regarding claim 17, Upadhya and Kumar teach the limitations of claim 14. Upadhya further teaches the operation state information comprises state information of a power supply (As can be seen in at least Figs. 3A-3E, operation state information may comprise power source type information; Upadhya; Figs. 3A-4; [0119]-[0120], [0124]-[0126], [0128]-[0131], [0145]), the method further comprises: before the generating configuration information according to the operation state information and the frequency band information supported by the controlled device, acquiring the state information of the power supply sent by the controlled device, the state information of the power supply comprising an electric quantity of the power supply of the controlled device (Transmission/reception of power source type information (e.g., at least step 30 in Figs. 3A-3E) may be interpreted as being performed before generating configuration information according to the operation state information and the frequency band information supported by the controlled device; Upadhya; Figs. 3A-4; [0119]-[0120], [0128]-[0131], [0136], [0162]); and in response to determining that the electric quantity of the power supply of the controlled device is lower than a preset electric quantity threshold (Factors such as the battery health of relays (if powered by a battery or a renewable source) may be used in the selection algorithm, with those relays which fall beneath/exceed a predetermined threshold being disregarded from selection; Upadhya; Figs. 3A-4; [0119]-[0120], [0128]-[0131], [0136], [0162]), generating a switch instruction configured to switch the operation mode of the controlled device (At least configuration information such as target azimuth/elevation angles, a pointing direction request, and/or a message to orient a relay system may be interpreted as comprising a switch instruction (which may be performed based on the comparison of the battery health to the threshold); Upadhya; Figs. 3A-4; [0124]-[0126], [0128]-[0131], [0145]). Regarding claim 18, Upadhya and Kumar teach the limitations of claim 14. Upadhya further teaches before the generating configuration information according to the operation state information and the frequency band information supported by the controlled device, acquiring information (The relay may be interpreted as reporting information in at least step 30 of Figs. 3A-3E before the generating configuration information according to the operation state information and the frequency band information supported by the controlled device; Upadhya; Figs. 3A-4; [0115]-[0123], [0140]-[0143]); and in response to acquiring information from the controlled device, generating a switch instruction configured to switch the operation mode of the controlled device (Configuration information such as target azimuth/elevation angles, a pointing direction request, and/or a message to orient a relay system may be interpreted as comprising a switch instruction configured to switch the operation mode of the controlled device. Such configuration information may also be interpreted as being generated in response to information transmitted in at least step 30 of Figs. 3A-3E; Upadhya; Figs. 3A-4; [0124]-[0126], [0128]-[0131], [0145]). Kumar further teaches the controlled device comprises a plurality of processing units (The Examiner would also like to note that Applicant’s specification does not appear to link the term “processing unit” to any particular structure (which would be required if the claim were an apparatus claim in order to avoid a 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection in view of a 35 U.S.C. 112(f) interpretation). Applicant’s specification thus appears to suggest that the claimed “processing units” may be, e.g., software units. Devices may be comprised of a plurality of hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) processes, which may be interpreted as processing units; Kumar; [0107]-[0108], [0229]-[0233], [0246]), the operation state information further comprises fault state information (HARQ reporting may be interpreted as operation state information that comprises fault state information; Kumar; [0107]-[0108], [0229]-[0233], [0246]); the method further comprises: acquiring the information comprises acquiring the fault state information sent by the controlled device, the fault state information comprising a fault proportion (The device may determine which HARQ processes were successful and which were not, which may be interpreted as comprising a fault proportion; Kumar; [0107]-[0108], [0229]-[0233], [0246]); and acquiring information from the controlled device comprises determining that the fault proportion is higher than a fault proportion threshold (The network device may receive the information regarding which HARQ processes were successful and which were not, and the reported information is also described as potentially indicating a HARQ issue if the HARQ issue is detected more than a threshold number of times. The network device may thus be interpreted as determining that the fault proportion is higher than a fault proportion threshold at least in response to receiving information indicating that the HARQ issue is detected more than a threshold number of times; Kumar; [0107]-[0108], [0229]-[0233], [0246]). Therefore it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in Kumar regarding beam management with the teachings as in Upadhya regarding beam management. The motivation for doing so would have been to increase performance at least by detecting hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) stalling issues (Kumar; [0104]-[0108]). Regarding claim 23, Upadhya and Kumar teach the limitations of claim 1. Upadhya further teaches an electronic device (Apparatus; Upadhya; Figs. 7-8; [0210]), comprising: at least one processor (The apparatus may be comprised of a processor; Upadhya; Figs. 7-8; [0210]); and a memory having at least one computer program stored thereon, the at least one computer program, executed by the at least one processor (The apparatus may be comprised of a memory storing instructions for execution by a processor; Upadhya; Figs. 7-8; [0210]), causes the at least one processor to implement the wireless signal processing method according to claim 1 (Please see the rejection of claim 1 above for a detailed description regarding the teachings of Upadhya and Kumar as they pertain to claim 1). Regarding claim 24, Upadhya and Kumar teach the limitations of claim 1. Upadhya further teaches a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having a computer program stored thereon, the computer program, executed by a processor (Non-transitory media may store instructions for execution by a processor; Upadhya; Figs. 7-8; [0210]-[0213]), causes the processor to implement the wireless signal processing method according to claim 1 (Please see the rejection of claim 1 above for a detailed description regarding the teachings of Upadhya and Kumar as they pertain to claim 1).
Conclusion
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 ERIC A MYERS whose telephone number is (571)272-0997. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 10:30am to 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, Michael Thier can be reached at 5712722832. 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.
/ERIC MYERS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2474
Prosecution Insights