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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-4, 6-12 and 14-22 are currently pending and have been examined.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 07/11/2024 has been considered by the examiner and an initialed copy of the IDS is hereby attached.
Claim Objections
Claims 7,14 and 16 objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 7 recites the limitation, “wherein the reference signalling of the first type one or both is and comprises one or both reference signalling and synchronisation signalling”. This limitation is grammatically incorrect. The same objection applies to claims 14 and 16.
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.
Claims 7,14,16,17 and 22 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the reference signalling of the first type". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The same rejection applies to claims 14 and 16.
Claim 17 recites the limitation "the reference signalling ". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The same rejection applies to claim 22.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
Claim 12 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the claim recites a computer storage medium storing a computer program and does not specify that the computer storage medium is a non-transitory computer storage medium. According to the MPEP 2106.03, section II, "For example, the BRI of machine readable media can encompass non-statutory transitory forms of signal transmission, such as a propagating electrical or electromagnetic signal per se. See In re Nuijten, 500 F.3d 1346, 84 USPQ2d 1495 (Fed. Cir. 2007). When the BRI encompasses transitory forms of signal transmission, a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 101 as failing to claim statutory subject matter would be appropriate.". The Applicant can re-write claim 12 to recite a "non-transitory computer storage medium" to overcome the rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
(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.
Claim(s) 1-4,6-9,12,14-16 and 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by BAYESTEH et al. (US 20210286045 A1), hereinafter BAYESTEH.
Regarding claim 1, BAYESTEH discloses
A method of operating a radio node in a wireless communication network, the radio node being configured for wireless communication, and being configured for one or both sensing and radar operation (see paragraph 0039, “In brief overview, an embodiment disclosed herein relates to methods, systems and devices for integrated communication and sensing in a wireless communications network, operated in a half-duplex mode and with the use of monostatic radars. The waveform of the radar pulse signal is designed and structured to improve or optimize system operation performance and efficiency.”),
the method comprising:
transmitting sensing signalling of a second type based on one or both transmission and reception of sensing signalling of a first type (see Fig. 4B where signal transmitted at S482 (i.e. sensing signal of a second type) is transmitted based on sensing signal of a first type (i.e. signal transmitted or received at S481) where the configuration and structuring of the signal to be transmitted is indeed a signal “type”), further see paragraph 0156-0158, “For example, if the first ED receives a control signaling signal at either S481 or S484, the first ED may configure and structure the signal to be transmitted at S482 based on the information or parameters indicated in the control signaling signal received by the first ED. The control signaling signal may be received from a UE or a BS, or any TP…If the first ED transmits a control signaling signal, the control signaling signal may include information, indications, and parameters about the signal to be transmitted during the active phase at S482…Alternatively or furthermore, the RF signal transmitted at S482 may include a control signaling portion. The control signaling portion may indicate one or more of signal frame structure; subcycle index of each subcycle that comprises encoded data; and a waveform, numerology, or pulse shape function, for a signal to be transmitted from the first ED.”).
Regarding claim 2, the same cited section and rationale as claim 1 is applied.
Regarding claim 3, BAYESTEH discloses
A method of operating a radio node in a wireless communication network, the radio node being configured for wireless communication, and being configured for one or both sensing and radar operation (see paragraph 0039, “In brief overview, an embodiment disclosed herein relates to methods, systems and devices for integrated communication and sensing in a wireless communications network, operated in a half-duplex mode and with the use of monostatic radars. The waveform of the radar pulse signal is designed and structured to improve or optimize system operation performance and efficiency.”), the method comprising:
receiving sensing signalling of a second type based on one or both transmission and reception of sensing signalling of a first type (see Fig. 4B, receiving sensing signals of a second type at S486 based on the transmission and reception of a sensing signalling of a first type at S481, further see paragraph 0160-0162, “For example, as illustrated in FIG. 4B, in the process S480, the first ED may continue, or start, to transmit or receive communications signals, at S486, after termination of the sensing operations. After a period of communication only operation, the first ED may also resume sensing operations, such as restarting the cyclic operations at S482 and S484..It is noted that the order of operations at S481, S482, S484, and S486 may be modified and vary from the order shown in FIG. 4B, and operations at S481 and S486 may be performed at the same time or integrated with operations at S482 or S484…The signal sensed or received during an earlier passive phase may be used to configure and structure a signal to be transmitted in a later active phase, or for scheduling and receiving a communication signal in later passive phase. The received communication signal may be a sensing signal transmitted by another ED that also embeds or carries communication data, including payload data or control data.”).
Regarding claim 4, the same cited section and rationale as claim 3 is applied.
Regarding claim 6, BAYESTEH further discloses
The method according to Claim 1, wherein the sensing signalling of the one or both of the first type and the second type is based on an OFDM waveform (see paragraph 0189, “OFDM may be a suitable choice of waveform for in-band sensing or out-of-band sensing. In some embodiments, OFDM waveforms are used for communication signals and for sensing signals to allow for the joint detection and processing of sensing signals and communication signals. The numerologies of the OFDM waveforms for the communication signals and sensing signals may be the same or different.”).
Regarding claim 7, BAYESTEH further discloses
The method according to Claim 1, wherein the reference signalling of the first type one or both is and comprises one or both reference signalling and synchronisation signalling (see Fig. 4B where signal transmitted or received at S481 (i.e. signal of a first type) is a “reference signalling”).
Regarding claim 8, BAYESTEH further discloses
The method according to Claim 1, wherein the sensing signalling of the first type is transmitted with a first periodicity (see paragraph 0149, “In process S480, the first ED, such as the UE 412, is operated to communicate with at least one second ED, which may be any one or more of BS 402, 404, 406 or UE 410, 414, 416, 418, 420. The first ED is operated to cyclically alternate between an active phase and a passive phase.”, further see paragraph 0160, “For example, as illustrated in FIG. 4B, in the process S480, the first ED may continue, or start, to transmit or receive communications signals, at S486, after termination of the sensing operations. After a period of communication only operation, the first ED may also resume sensing operations, such as restarting the cyclic operations at S482 and S484.).
Regarding claim 9, BAYESTEH further discloses
The method according to Claim 1, wherein the sensing signalling of the second type is transmitted one or both with a second periodicity, and aperiodically (see paragraph 0160, “For example, as illustrated in FIG. 4B, in the process S480, the first ED may continue, or start, to transmit or receive communications signals, at S486, after termination of the sensing operations. After a period of communication only operation, the first ED may also resume sensing operations, such as restarting the cyclic operations at S482 and S484.”, where performing a cyclic operation is indeed transmitting the signal with “a second periodicity”).
Regarding claim 12, the same cited section and rationale as claim 1 is applied.
Regarding claim 14, the same cited section and rationale as claim 7 is applied.
Regarding claim 15, the same cited section and rationale as claim 6 is applied.
Regarding claim 16, the same cited section and rationale as claim 7 is applied.
Regarding claim 18, the same cited section and rationale as claim 8 is applied.
Regarding claim 19, the same cited section and rationale as claim 9 is applied.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 10,11,20 and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BAYESTEH et al. (US 20210286045 A1).
Regarding claim 10, BAYESTEH discloses
The method according to Claim 1, wherein the sensing signalling of the first type has a lower density in time domain than the sensing signalling of the second type (see paragraph 0190, “In some embodiments, the numerology of an OFDM waveform may be selected to improve sensing performance and reduce interference between different sensing signals. Considering a sensing signal configuration with a cyclic prefix OFDM (CP-OFDM) waveform as an example, subcarrier spacing, CP length/overhead, and sensing slot length (for example, the number of symbols included in each sensing cycle as well as the configuration of sensing symbols in the sensing cycle, e.g. contiguous symbols or distributed symbols) are parameters that may be set to possibly improve the performance of sensing. In the case of frequency modulated continuous wave waveform, in addition to the above parameters, frequency sweeping range may also be set to possibly improve the performance of sensing.”).
It would have been obvious to try by one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the
effective filing date of the claimed invention yield the invention of claim 10 above in light of BAYESTEH. BAYESTEH is considered close pertinent art to the claimed invention as it discloses the configuration of beams based on sensing signal. BAYESTEH discloses the number of symbols in each sensing cycle (i.e. density) can be configured to improve the performance of sensing. Therefore, BAYESTEH discloses the feature of adjusting this value based on system requirements. Furthermore, MPEP § 2141 provides that an invention may render a claimed limitation obvious when it would be “obvious to try” to choose from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success. In such an instance it would be obvious to try to specify that the density of the symbols in signaling of the first type has a lower density than the signalling in the second type to increase efficiency of the system while limiting power usage.
Regarding claim 11, BAYESTEH discloses
The method according to Claim 1, wherein the sensing signalling of the first type is transmitted with a broader beam than the sensing signalling of the second type (see paragraph 0172, “The sensing signals 460, 462, 464, 466 are transmitted along particular directions, and in general, a sensing node may transmit multiple sensing signals in multiple different directions. In some implementations, sensing signals are used to sense the environment over a given area, and beam sweeping is one of the possible techniques to expand the covered sensing area. Beam sweeping can be performed using analog beamforming to form a beam along a desired direction using phase shifters, for example. Digital beamforming and hybrid beamforming are also possible. During beam sweeping, a sensing node may transmit multiple sensing signals according to a beam sweeping pattern, where each sensing signal is beamformed in a particular direction.”).
It would have been obvious to try by one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the
effective filing date of the claimed invention yield the invention of claim 10 above in light of BAYESTEH. BAYESTEH is considered close pertinent art to the claimed invention as it discloses the configuration of beams based on sensing signal. BAYESTEH discloses the beam sweeping pattern to cover a desired area is configurable. Therefore, BAYESTEH discloses the feature of adjusting this value based on system requirements. Furthermore, MPEP § 2141 provides that an invention may render a claimed limitation obvious when it would be “obvious to try” to choose from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success. In such an instance it would be obvious to expand the covered sensing area wherein the sensing signalling of the first type is transmitted with a broader beam than the sensing signalling of the second type to create a more efficient system.
Regarding claim 20, the same cited section and rationale as claim 10 is applied.
Regarding claim 21, the same cited section and rationale as claim 11 is applied.
Claim(s) 17 and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BAYESTEH et al. (US 20210286045 A1) in view of Jeon et al. (US 20220256519 A1), hereinafter Jeon.
Regarding claim 17, BAYESTEH discloses [Note: what BAYESTEH fails to clearly disclose is strike-through]
The method according to Claim 16,
Jeon discloses,
wherein the reference signalling is in SSB signalling (see paragraph 0247, “Besides DL PRS signals, UE can use SSB and CSI-RS for RRM (RSRP and RSRQ) measurements for enhanced cell identifier (E-CID) type of positioning.”).
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by Jeon into the invention of BAYESTEH. Both references are considered analogous arts to the claimed invention as they both disclose joint communication systems using radar signals. The combination would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success in order to synchronize beams to improve coverage reliability by the system.
Regarding claim 22, the same cited section and rationale as claim 17 is applied.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Park et al. (US 20220124782 A1) is considered close pertinent art to the claimed invention as it discloses the transmitting of a second signal type based on a first signal type (see Fig. 23, transmission of PDSCH based on 1st DCI).
ZHU et al. (US 20230309144 A1) is considered close pertinent art to the claimed invention as it discloses a joint sensing and communication system where signal configuration and transmission is based on sensing signals (see Figs. 20A and 20B).
Jeon et al. (US 20250321320 A1) is considered close pertinent art to the claimed invention as it discloses beam configuration based on sensed radar signals (see Fig. 4).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NAZRA N. WAHEED whose telephone number is (571)272-6713. The examiner can normally be reached M-F (8 AM - 4:30 PM).
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, Vladimir Magloire can be reached at (571)270-5144. 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.
/NAZRA NUR WAHEED/Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights