Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant's arguments filed 9/9/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On page 6 of the Applicant’s Response, Applicant: “Independent claim 1 recites "transmitting, to the WD, a message indicating that a change of an interference state in the communications network will occur". Yang fails to disclose each and every feature of claim 1 in the same way as claim 1 as required for an anticipation rejection according to MPEP $2152.02(b). Yang nowhere describes transmitting a message indicating a change in an interference state will occur. Rather, Yang merely describes a first device configuration a data transmission between a second device and a third device. The configured parameters pertain to the data transmission and do not reasonably suggest an interference state of the network.“.
Examiner respectfully disagrees with Applicant’s argument. Yang discloses a network node configuring an RIS with N states; for example, different operating states in the N operating states of the RIS can enable different forwarding beams (paragraph 64). The network node notifies the UE during configuration of resources when the state changes are scheduled to occur due to switching delay of the RIS (paragraph 72). Further, the network node will notify the UE of at least one of diversity mode on, time period configuration for the diversity mode, configuration predefined in a protocol, or dynamic or semi-persistent configuration (paragraph 159). In other words, the network node coordinates the changes to the RIS with the UE, so the UE can cooperate with the RIS during state changes to improve communication quality (paragraph 160).
In view of the above discussions the rejection of claims 1-20 still stands.
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) 1-8, 10, and 15-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang et al. (US 2024/0089939) (“Yang”) in view of Dutta et al. (US 2023/0188170) (“Dutta”).
For claim 1; Yang discloses: transmitting, to the WD, a message indicating that a change of an interference state in the communications network will occur (paragraph 72, 150-151, 159: at the symbol level switching delay, no data transmission may be performed and the third device is notified…The time resources include a plurality of time periods, the plurality of time periods corresponding to time periods of the N operating states, respectively. In this embodiment of this application, the first device needs to configure parameters for data transmission for the second device and the third device, respectively).
Yang does not expressly disclose, but Dutta from similar fields of endeavor teaches: wherein the interference states relates to an interference level, an interference signal strength, or a spatial structure of the interference. (paragraph 117: Based on the reported information, the network entity may make no changes to the configuration for the interference cancellation at the RIS. The network entity may adjust the configuration (e.g., the RIS weights) for the interference cancellation at the RIS. In certain cases, the network entity may determine to stop the interference cancellation, for example, due to the collisions no longer occurring or the interference cancellation hampering other transmissions. The network entity may notify the wireless nodes that the interference cancellation is being adjusted, will continue, or will stop). Thus it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to implement the RIS configuration states as described by Dutta in the RIS system as described by Yang. The motivation is to improve quality of signal.
For claims 2 and 16; Yang discloses: wherein the change of the interference state is associated with a transition between a first interference state and a second interference state (paragraph 75: switching the operating state of the second device according to a predetermined rule during an uplink or downlink transmission can achieve the purpose of changing the channel state between the first device and the third device. The first or third device can receive uplink or downlink signals in different channel states on configured frequency resources, thereby achieving transmission diversity).
For claims 3 and 17; Yang discloses; wherein the message is indicative of a pattern of one or more transitions between the first interference state and the second interference state (paragraph 149-150: The first device configures time resources for a single data transmission for the third device before the first device communicates wirelessly with the third device via the second device. The time resources include a plurality of time periods, the plurality of time periods corresponding to time periods of the N operating states, respectively).
For claims 4 and 18; Yang discloses: wherein the pattern is indicative of one or more of a duration of the first interference state and a duration of the second interference state (paragraph 149-150: The first device configures time resources for a single data transmission for the third device before the first device communicates wirelessly with the third device via the second device. The time resources include a plurality of time periods, the plurality of time periods corresponding to time periods of the N operating states, respectively).
For claims 5 and 19; Yang discloses: wherein the message is indicative of a time instance when the change of the interference state will occur (paragraph 72, 150: at the symbol level switching delay, no data transmission may be performed and the third device is notified…The time resources include a plurality of time periods, the plurality of time periods corresponding to time periods of the N operating states, respectively).
For claims 6 and 20; Yang discloses: wherein the message is transmitted using one or more of: physical (PHY) layer signaling, medium access control-control element (MAC-CE) signaling, and Radio Resource Control (RRC) signaling (paragraph 159, 164: the first device notifies the third device of at least one of the following: diversity mode on, time period configuration for the diversity mode, configuration predefined in a protocol, or dynamic or semi-persistent configuration… The switching time period is determined based on at least one of the following: configuration information of dynamic scheduling information, semi-persistent configuration information of radio resource control RRC or media access control control element MAC CE signaling).
For claims 7; Yang discloses: wherein the change of the interference state is associated with a coverage enhancing device (CED) in the communications network (paragraph 26-35: RIS).
For claims 8; Yang discloses: wherein a first interference state is due to a first configuration of the CED, and a second interference state is due to a second configuration of the CED (paragraph 5: configuring, by a first device, N operating states for a second device; and performing, by the first device, data transmission with a third device, where the data transmission spans operating times corresponding to the N operating states of the second device; where the N operating states of the second device are states of the second device forwarding wireless signals from the first device or the third device).
For claims 10; Yang discloses: wherein the method comprises: obtaining information about the change of interference state in the communications network (paragraph 79, 87: The first device obtains device information of the second device and channel measurement results of target channels… the target channels include S first channels between the second device and S third devices, one third device corresponding to one first channel, where the channel measurement results are obtained based on channel measurement results of the S first channels).
For claims 15; Yang discloses: receiving, from the network node, a message indicating that a change of an interference state in a network will occur (paragraph 72, 150-151, 159: at the symbol level switching delay, no data transmission may be performed and the third device is notified…The time resources include a plurality of time periods, the plurality of time periods corresponding to time periods of the N operating states, respectively. In this embodiment of this application, the first device needs to configure parameters for data transmission for the second device and the third device, respectively), and adapting an interference measurement based on the indicated change of the interference state (paragraph 95-98: S103. The first device transmits P reference signals to the third device. S104. The first device receives the P reference signals transmitted by the third device. The P reference signals are signals that have been forwarded by the second device using the P predefined operating states, respectively. In this embodiment of this application, the target channels include channels corresponding to the P reference signals).
Yang does not expressly disclose, but Dutta from similar fields of endeavor teaches: wherein the interference states relates to an interference level, an interference signal strength, or a spatial structure of the interference. (paragraph 117: Based on the reported information, the network entity may make no changes to the configuration for the interference cancellation at the RIS. The network entity may adjust the configuration (e.g., the RIS weights) for the interference cancellation at the RIS. In certain cases, the network entity may determine to stop the interference cancellation, for example, due to the collisions no longer occurring or the interference cancellation hampering other transmissions. The network entity may notify the wireless nodes that the interference cancellation is being adjusted, will continue, or will stop). Thus it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to implement the RIS configuration states as described by Dutta in the RIS system as described by Yang. The motivation is to improve quality of signal.
Yang discloses measuring reference signals for each configured state to determine the quality and effiency, i.e. the UE adjusts measurement of the reference signal based on the RIS transmission state (paragraph 95-98); Yand does not disclose the measurement related to an interference level, an interference signal strength, or a spatial structure of the interference. Dutta from similar fields of endeavor teaches: adapting an interference measurement based on the indicated change of the interference state (paragraph 85-88: from the first UE 104a and/or the second UE 104b, one or more reports having information related to the interference cancellation. For example, the information in the report(s) may include sensing information, channel measurements, retransmission information, collision information, and/or traffic information associated with the transmissions from the first UE… the assisting node 702 may receive, from the first UE 104a and/or the second UE 104b, one or more reports having information related to the interference cancellation, such as the information described herein with respect to 814a, 814b. The assisting node 702 may use the information to adjust the interference cancellation and/or determine whether to continue performing the interference cancellation). Thus it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to implement the interference related measurements as described by Dutta in the RIS system as described by Yang. The motivation is to improve quality of signal.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang in view of Dutta as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Baligh et al. (US 2023/0327714) (“Baligh”).
For claim 9; Yang discloses the subject matter in claim 1 as described above in the office action.
Yang does not expressly disclose, but Baligh from similar fields of endeavor teaches: wherein the first configuration is an ON-state of the CED, and the second configuration is an OFF-state of the CED (paragraph 284-285: Performing activation or deactivation on a dynamic basis refers to activation or deactivation on a scheduling time interval and is based on short term channel and traffic conditions). Thus it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to implement the scheduling as described by Baligh in the RIS system as described by Yang. The motivation is to improve quality of signal.
Claim(s) 11 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang in view of Dutta as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ly et al. (US 12,652,079) (“Ly”).
For claim 11; Yang discloses the subject matter in claim 1 as described above in the office action.
Yang does not expressly disclose, but Ly from similar fields of endeavor teaches: receiving, from the WD, a capability message indicative of the WD being able to use interference calculations to improve communication (column 3, lines 51-57: transmitting, to the base station, UE capability information, where receiving, from the base station, the configuration of the set of RISs may be based on the UE capability information). Thus it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to implement the signaling as described by Ly in the RIS system as described by Yang. The motivation is to improve quality of signal.
For claim 12; Yang discloses the subject matter in claim 11 as described above in the office action.
Yang does not expressly disclose, but Ly from similar fields of endeavor teaches: wherein transmitting comprises transmitting the message based on the capability message (column 3, lines 51-57: transmitting, to the base station, UE capability information, where receiving, from the base station, the configuration of the set of RISs may be based on the UE capability information). Thus it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to implement the signaling as described by Ly in the RIS system as described by Yang. The motivation is to improve quality of signal.
Claim(s) 13 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang in view of Dutta as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Gurelli et al. (US 2023/0063645) (“Gurelli”).
For claim 13; Yang discloses the subject matter in claim 1 as described above in the office action.
Yang does not expressly disclose, but Gurelli from similar fields of endeavor teaches: wherein transmitting comprises transmitting a unicast message (paragraph 42: The surface configuration may correspond to at least one of a broadcast configuration or a UE-specific configuration). Thus it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to implement the signaling as described by Gurelli in the RIS system configuration as described by Yang. The motivation is to improve quality of signal.
For claim 14; Yang discloses the subject matter in claim 1 as described above in the office action.
Yang does not expressly disclose, but Gurelli from similar fields of endeavor teaches: wherein transmitting comprises broadcasting the message (paragraph 42: The surface configuration may correspond to at least one of a broadcast configuration or a UE-specific configuration). Thus it would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to implement the signaling as described by Gurelli in the RIS system configuration as described by Yang. The motivation is to improve quality of signal.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Kim (US 2024/0414772); Kim discloses receiving a first message including configuration information related to conditional reconfiguration from a base station; selecting a cell or a cell group in case that a preconfigured condition is satisfied based on the configuration information related to the conditional reconfiguration.
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 JOHN D BLANTON whose telephone number is (571)270-3933. The examiner can normally be reached 7am-6pm EST, Mon-Thu.
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, Faruk Hamza can be reached at 571-272-7969. 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.
/JOHN D BLANTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2466
Prosecution Insights