Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim 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.
Claim(s) 1, 18-20,3-7,16,17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication No. 2026/0039354 A1 to Jiang et al., in view of 3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #113, R1-2305573 (hereinafter “Ericsson”, cited in Applicant’s IDS)
As to claim 1, Jiang discloses method for wireless communication at a user equipment (UE), the method comprising:
a first indication of a network energy saving mode (paragraphs 4, 41-45);
receiving, from the network entity, a second indication of a channel state information (CSI) reporting setting associated with multiple sub-configurations corresponding to multiple power control offset values based at least in part on the first indication (paragraphs 4, 41-45, disclosing energy saving as a goal/purpose, teaching “based at least in part on the first indication”; Figs. 10, 12, paragraphs 5-18, 74, 196-198, teaching the “network side device” configuring/sending to the UE a “CSI report configuration” that comprises “multiple sub-configurations”; paragraphs 58-61, disclosing each “sub-configuration” being associated with its own “powerControlOffset”, teaching “multiple sub-configurations corresponding to multiple power control offset values”),
wherein the CSI report setting is associated with a plurality of CSI report quantities, wherein each value of a second group of values of the plurality of the CSI report quantities is exclusive for each sub-configuration of the subset of multiple sub-configurations (Figs. 5-6, paragraphs 73-81, 114, disclosing, e.g., a CSI report configuration comprising three sub-configurations, associated with three different spatial adaptation patterns 1-3 [“second group of values”], individually, as well as 3 port configurations [“first group of values”], i.e., 8, 16 and 32 ports).
Jiang does not appear to explicitly disclose receiving, from a network entity, a first indication; based on receiving the first indication; wherein a first group of values of the plurality of the CSI report quantities is common for a subset of the multiple sub-configurations; transmitting a CSI report comprising the first group of values of the plurality of the CSI report quantities and the second group of values of the plurality of the CSI report quantities.
Ericsson discloses receiving, from a network entity, a first indication; based on receiving the first indication (page 2, 2.1.1, Phase 1: DCI sent from network to UE);
wherein a first group of values of the plurality of the CSI report quantities is common for a subset of the multiple sub-configurations. (page 10, especially “For other parameters (supported codebook types for PMI, e.g., Type-1 or Type-II, report quantity, reportFreqConfiguration), it does not seem necessary to have these defined/configured separately for each sub-configuration”, thus teaching that these “parameter” are common for the multiple sub-configurations);
transmitting a CSI report comprising the first group of values of the plurality of the CSI report quantities and the second group of values of the plurality of the CSI report quantities (pages 1-3).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine Ericsson and Jiang’s teachings, to reject this claim, at least since both references are directed to CSI reporting setting and the associated sub-configurations. In particular, Ericsson’s teaching of “receiving, from a network entity, a first indication; based on receiving the first indication” and Jiang’s teaching of “a first indication of a network energy saving mode; receiving, from the network entity, a second indication of a channel state information (CSI) reporting setting associated with multiple sub-configurations corresponding to multiple power control offset values based at least in part on the first indication” are combinable to reject “receiving, from a network entity, a first indication of a network energy saving mode; receiving, from the network entity, a second indication of a channel state information (CSI) reporting setting associated with multiple sub-configurations corresponding to multiple power control offset values based at least in part on receiving the first indication”, due to the structural and technical similarities shared by these teachings, and since it would have been obvious to a phosita that Ericsson’s indication message received from the network entity could have been used to transmit Jiang’s disclosed first indication of a network energy saving mode, to the UE.
Further, it would have been obvious to incorporate Ericsson’s teaching of “wherein a first group of values of the plurality of the CSI report quantities is common for a subset of the multiple sub-configurations” in Jiang’s disclosed CSI report quantities to reject the claim, by characterizing a first group of values of the CSI report quantities in the manner disclosed in Ericsson, to reject this claim. The suggestion/motivation would have been to improve reporting implementation and configuration for wireless communications, especially with respect to energy/power savings and consumption. (Jiang, paragraphs 1-45; Ericsson, pages 1-4). Furthermore, note that with regard to the claimed invention, especially the limitation above, all of the claimed elements have been shown to be known in the cited art, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art as of and before the effective filing date.
As to claims 18-20, see rejection for claim 1.
As to claim 3, Jiang and Ericsson teach the method as in the parent claim 1.
Jiang discloses a first indication of a network energy saving mode (paragraphs 4, 41-45)
Jiang does not appear to explicitly disclose receiving the first indication via a downlink control information (DCI) in physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) associated with a format scheduling a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH), a medium access channel control element (MAC-CE), a radio resource control (RRC) configuration message, or a combination thereof.
Ericsson discloses receiving the first indication via a downlink control information (DCI) in physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) associated with a format scheduling a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH), a medium access channel control element (MAC-CE), a radio resource control (RRC) configuration message, or a combination thereof. (page 2, 2.1.1, Phase 1: RRC)
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine Ericsson and Jiang’s teachings, to reject this claim, at least since both references are directed to CSI reporting setting and the associated sub-configurations. The suggestion/motivation would have been to improve reporting implementation and configuration for wireless communications, especially with respect to energy/power savings and consumption. (Jiang, paragraphs 1-45; Ericsson, pages 1-4). Furthermore, note that with regard to the claimed invention, especially the limitation above, all of the claimed elements have been shown to be known in the cited art, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art as of and before the effective filing date.
As to claim 4, Jiang and Ericsson teach the method as in the parent claim 3.
Jiang does not appear to explicitly disclose wherein the first indication: comprises an RRC configuration message indicated via a parameter of the CSI reporting setting, a CSI resource setting, or an NZP CSI-RS resource setting; corresponds to an aperiodic CSI reporting setting indicated in a CSI report trigger list associated with a CSI request field of the DCI, the MAC-CE; or a combination thereof.
Ericsson discloses wherein the first indication: comprises an RRC configuration message indicated via a parameter of the CSI reporting setting, a CSI resource setting, or an NZP CSI-RS resource setting; corresponds to an aperiodic CSI reporting setting indicated in a CSI report trigger list associated with a CSI request field of the DCI, the MAC-CE; or a combination thereof. (page 2, 2.1.1, Phase 1: RRC)
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine Ericsson and Jiang’s teachings, to reject this claim, at least since both references are directed to CSI reporting setting and the associated sub-configurations. The suggestion/motivation would have been to improve reporting implementation and configuration for wireless communications, especially with respect to energy/power savings and consumption. (Jiang, paragraphs 1-45; Ericsson, pages 1-4). Furthermore, note that with regard to the claimed invention, especially the limitation above, all of the claimed elements have been shown to be known in the cited art, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art as of and before the effective filing date.
As to claim 5, Jiang and Ericsson teach the method as in the parent claim 1
Jiang discloses wherein each sub-configuration of the multiple sub-configurations corresponds to: a subset of multiple subsets of the CSI reporting setting; a subset of multiple subsets of a CSI resource setting for channel measurement associated with the CSI reporting setting (paragraphs 4, 41-45, disclosing energy saving as a goal/purpose, teaching “based at least in part on the first indication”; Figs. 10, 12, paragraphs 5-18, 74, 196-198, teaching the “network side device” configuring/sending to the UE a “CSI report configuration” that comprises “multiple sub-configurations”; paragraphs 58-61, disclosing each “sub-configuration” being associated with its own “powerControlOffset”, teaching “multiple sub-configurations corresponding to multiple power control offset values”); a subset of multiple subsets of an NZP CSI-RS resource set configuration associated with the CSI resource setting for channel measurement; a subset of multiple subsets of an NZP CSI resource configuration associated with the NZP CSI-RS resource set; or a combination thereof.
As to claim 6, Jiang and Ericsson teach the method as in the parent claim 1
Jiang does not appear to explicitly disclose wherein the plurality of CSI report quantities comprises a CSI-RS resource indicator (CRI), a rank indicator (RI), a precoding matrix indicator (PMI), a channel quality indicator (CQI), a layer indicator (LI), or a combination thereof.
Ericsson discloses wherein the plurality of CSI report quantities comprises a CSI-RS resource indicator (CRI), a rank indicator (RI), a precoding matrix indicator (PMI), a channel quality indicator (CQI), a layer indicator (LI), or a combination thereof. (page 10).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine Ericsson and Jiang’s teachings, to reject this claim, at least since both references are directed to CSI reporting setting and the associated sub-configurations. The suggestion/motivation would have been to improve reporting implementation and configuration for wireless communications, especially with respect to energy/power savings and consumption. (Jiang, paragraphs 1-45; Ericsson, pages 1-4). Furthermore, note that with regard to the claimed invention, especially the limitation above, all of the claimed elements have been shown to be known in the cited art, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art as of and before the effective filing date.
As to claim 7, Jiang and Ericsson teach the method as in the parent claim 6.
Jiang does not appear to explicitly disclose wherein the first group of values of the plurality of the CSI report quantities comprises a PMI value, and the second group of values of the plurality of the CSI report quantities comprises a group of RI values.
Ericsson discloses wherein the first group of values of the plurality of the CSI report quantities comprises a PMI value, and the second group of values of the plurality of the CSI report quantities comprises a group of RI values. (page 10).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine Ericsson and Jiang’s teachings, to reject this claim, at least since both references are directed to CSI reporting setting and the associated sub-configurations. The suggestion/motivation would have been to improve reporting implementation and configuration for wireless communications, especially with respect to energy/power savings and consumption. (Jiang, paragraphs 1-45; Ericsson, pages 1-4). Furthermore, note that with regard to the claimed invention, especially the limitation above, all of the claimed elements have been shown to be known in the cited art, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art as of and before the effective filing date.
As to claim 16, Jiang and Ericsson teach the method as in the parent claim 1.
Jiang does not appear to explicitly disclose further comprising receiving a third indication corresponding to indicating the subset of the multiple sub-configurations based on the second indication.
Ericsson discloses further comprising receiving a third indication corresponding to indicating the subset of the multiple sub-configurations based on the second indication. (pages 10-11).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine Ericsson and Jiang’s teachings, to reject this claim, at least since both references are directed to CSI reporting setting and the associated sub-configurations. The suggestion/motivation would have been to improve reporting implementation and configuration for wireless communications, especially with respect to energy/power savings and consumption. (Jiang, paragraphs 1-45; Ericsson, pages 1-4). Furthermore, note that with regard to the claimed invention, especially the limitation above, all of the claimed elements have been shown to be known in the cited art, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art as of and before the effective filing date.
As to claim 17, Jiang and Ericsson teach the method as in the parent claim 16.
Jiang discloses wherein the third indication comprises: a downlink control information (DCI) corresponding to scheduling a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH); a medium access channel control element (MAC-CE) information; a radio resource control (RRC) configuration information; or a combination thereof (paragraph 51).
Jiang does not appear to explicitly disclose third indication.
Ericsson discloses third indication (pages 10-11).
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine Ericsson and Jiang’s teachings, to reject this claim, at least since both references are directed to CSI reporting setting and the associated sub-configurations, and it would have been obvious to have the “third indication” disclosed in Ericsson be embodied by the information elements disclosed in Jiang. The suggestion/motivation would have been to improve reporting implementation and configuration for wireless communications, especially with respect to energy/power savings and consumption. (Jiang, paragraphs 1-45; Ericsson, pages 1-4). Furthermore, note that with regard to the claimed invention, especially the limitation above, all of the claimed elements have been shown to be known in the cited art, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art as of and before the effective filing date.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 8-15 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Patent Publication No. 2024/0340677 A1 to Park.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHI TANG P CHENG whose telephone number is (571)272-9021. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9:30AM - 6PM.
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, Asad M Nawaz can be reached at (571)272-3988. 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.
/CHI TANG P CHENG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2463
Prosecution Insights