DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Amendment filed 8/31/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 5, 6, 8-13, 16, 17, 19-21, and 24 have been amended.
Claim 7 has been cancelled. Claims 1-4 have been previously cancelled.
Claims 5, 6, and 8-24 remain pending.
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.
Claims 5, 6, 8-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ibrahim et al. (US20240298198A1; “Ibrahim) in view of Zhang et al. (US20240243823A1; “Zhang”) and Zhang et al. (US20240267765A1; “Zhang2”).
Regarding claim 5,
Ibrahim (Title: CLI Report Configuration in Full Duplex) discloses a method (Fig. 14) of an electronic device (i.e. UE 404/714, Fig. 4B, 7B) comprising transmitting, to a base station, UE capability information comprising information indicating whether the electronic device is capable of performing full-duplex communication (Fig. 4A-C; Fig. 14, step 1410; paragraphs 96, 133, 158; self-interference of intra-cell CLI for full-duplex UE) and receiving, from the base station, uplink timing information of an interfering device geographically adjacent to the electronic device (Fig. 14, step 1420; receive configuration for CLI reporting associated with CSI-IM resources; paragraph 96, 142; UEs in adjacent cells/adjacent resources in SBFD).
Ibrahim further shows measuring CLI using an uplink signal transmitted from the interfering device, based on the uplink timing information (Fig. 14, step 1440-1450; various CLI measurements based on the configuration for CLI reporting) and transmitting, to the base station, a CLI measurement report (Fig. 14, step 1460; transmit CLI report to the base station).
Ibrahim discloses information about the uplink channel acts as interference to the electronic device (Fig. 14, step 1430; SRS resources for plurality of aggressors of victim UE received from base station via group common DCI; paragraphs 96, 133-141 regarding self-interference experienced by full-duplex UE) but fails to expressly show receiving information about the uplink channel from the base station subsequent to transmitting the CLI measurement report.
Zhang discloses analogous art (Title: Full Duplex UE Self-Interference Measurement) including receiving information about the uplink channel from the base station subsequent to transmitting the CLI measurement report (Fig. 12, step 1214-1216; paragraphs 143; reconfiguration information about the uplink channel received from network entity/base station subsequent to CLI/SIM reporting).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing to modify Ibrahim by receiving information about the uplink channel from the base station subsequent to transmitting the CLI measurement report, as shown by Zhang, thereby enabling optimal Tx/Rx beam pair selection for full duplex UEs accounting for self-interference.
Ibrahim discloses resource allocation pattern matching (paragraphs 39, 72, 97, 146-153, 165-173) while Zhang shows accounting for a difference value between UL and DL timing advances (TAs) (Fig. 8; paragraph 131; TA/propagation delay controls transmission timing of UEs to ensure sync with the base station) but the combination of Ibrahim and Zhang fails to expressly show uplink timing information comprising at least one of a difference value between a first TA of the electronic device and a second TA of the interfering device, and a difference value between a first propagation delay between the electronic device and the base station and a second propagation delay between the interfering device and the base station.
Zhang2 discloses analogous art (Title: Techniques for Inter-Device Cross-Link Interference Measurements) including uplink timing information comprising at least one of a difference value between a first TA of the electronic device and a second TA of the interfering device, and a difference value between a first propagation delay between the electronic device and the base station and a second propagation delay between the interfering device and the base station (Abstract; Figs. 2-6; Fig. 4B, 450; paragraphs 3-8, 36-39, 142-143; reporting CLI metrics/measurements that account for adjusted reception timing using UE-to-UE CLI reference signals for TA offset (paragraphs 83, 134, 151-155, 162-165, 172, 182) and propagation delay difference (paragraph 80-83, 118, 133, 144-150)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing to modify Ibrahim and Zhang by accounting for a difference value between a first TA of the electronic device and a second TA of the interfering device, and a difference value between a first propagation delay between the electronic device and the base station and a second propagation delay between the interfering device and the base station, as shown by Zhang2, thereby aligning the reception timing of the first UE with a transmission timing of a second UE to reduce cross-link interference.
Regarding claim 10,
Ibrahim discloses a method (Fig. 15) of a base station (i.e. Fig. 4A-C, 7, base station 402a) comprising receiving, from a reference UE within a coverage of the base station, UE capability information, and identifying whether the reference UE is capable of performing full-duplex communication (Fig. 15, step 1510; paragraphs 96, 133, 158; self-interference of intra-cell CLI for full-duplex victim UE) and transmitting, to the reference UE, configuration information regarding a CLI reference signal and timing window information for measuring the CLI reference signal, wherein an interfering UE is geographically adjacent to the reference UE (Fig. 2B; paragraph 120; Fig. 15, step 1520-1522, 1530; transmit SRS resources for plurality of aggressors and configuration for CLI reporting associated with CSI-IM resources to a victim UE; paragraph 96, 142; UEs in adjacent cells/adjacent resources in SBFD).
Ibrahim further shows receiving, from the reference UE, a CLI measurement report (Fig. 15, step 1540; receive CLI report based on the configuration for CLI reporting); and information about an uplink channel as interference to the reference UE (Fig. 15, step 1522; SRS resources for plurality of aggressors of victim UE received from base station via group common DCI; paragraphs 96, 133-141 regarding self-interference experienced by full-duplex UE) but fails to expressly show transmitting information about the uplink channel from the base station subsequent to receiving the CLI measurement report.
Zhang discloses analogous art (Title: Full Duplex UE Self-Interference Measurement) including transmitting information about the uplink channel from the base station subsequent to receiving the CLI measurement report (Fig. 12, step 1214-1216; paragraphs 143; reconfiguration information about the uplink channel from network entity/base station subsequent to CLI/SIM reporting).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing to modify Ibrahim by providing information about the uplink channel from the base station subsequent to receiving the CLI measurement report, as shown by Zhang, thereby enabling optimal Tx/Rx beam pair selection for full duplex UEs accounting for self-interference.
Ibrahim discloses resource allocation pattern matching (paragraphs 39, 72, 97, 146-153, 165-173) while Zhang shows accounting for a difference value between UL and DL timing advances (TAs) (Fig. 8; paragraph 131; TA/propagation delay controls transmission timing of UEs to ensure sync with the base station) but the combination of Ibrahim and Zhang fails to expressly show accounting for a difference value between a first timing advance (TA) of the electronic device and a second TA of the interfering device, and a difference value between a first propagation delay between the electronic device and the base station and a second propagation delay between the interfering device and the base station.
Zhang2 discloses analogous art (Title: Techniques for Inter-Device Cross-Link Interference Measurements) including uplink timing information comprising at least one of a difference value between a first TA of the electronic device and a second TA of the interfering device, and a difference value between a first propagation delay between the electronic device and the base station and a second propagation delay between the interfering device and the base station (Abstract; Figs. 2-6; Fig. 4B, 450; paragraphs 3-8, 36-39, 142-143; reporting CLI metrics/measurements that account for adjusted reception timing using UE-to-UE CLI reference signals for TA offset (paragraphs 83, 134, 151-155, 162-165, 172, 182) and propagation delay difference (paragraph 80-83, 118, 133, 144-150)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing to modify Ibrahim and Zhang by accounting for a difference value between a first TA of the electronic device and a second TA of the interfering device, and a difference value between a first propagation delay between the electronic device and the base station and a second propagation delay between the interfering device and the base station, as shown by Zhang2, thereby aligning the reception timing of the first UE with a transmission timing of a second UE to reduce cross-link interference.
Regarding claim 17,
Ibrahim discloses a method (Fig. 14) of an electronic device (i.e. UE 404/714, Fig. 4B, 7B) comprising transmitting, to a base station, UE capability information comprising information indicating whether the electronic device is capable of performing full-duplex communication (Fig. 4A-C; Fig. 14, step 1410; paragraphs 96, 133, 158; self-interference of intra-cell CLI for full-duplex UE) and receiving, from the base station, configuration information regarding a CLI reference signal and timing window information for measuring the CLI reference signal (Fig. 2B; paragraph 120; Fig. 14, step 1420; receive configuration for CLI reporting associated with CSI-IM resources; paragraph 96, 142; UEs in adjacent cells/adjacent resources in SBFD).
Ibrahim further shows measuring CLI by detecting the CLI reference signal transmitted from an interfering device, based on the timing window information (Fig. 14, step 1440-1450; various CLI measurements based on the configuration for CLI reporting) and transmitting, to the base station, a CLI measurement report (Fig. 14, step 1460; transmit CLI report to the base station).
Ibrahim discloses information about the uplink channel acts as interference to the electronic device (Fig. 14, step 1430; SRS resources for plurality of aggressors of victim UE received from base station via group common DCI; paragraphs 96, 133-141 regarding self-interference experienced by full-duplex UE) but fails to expressly show receiving information about the uplink channel from the base station subsequent to transmitting the CLI measurement report.
Zhang discloses analogous art (Title: Full Duplex UE Self-Interference Measurement) including receiving information about the uplink channel from the base station subsequent to transmitting the CLI measurement report (Fig. 12, step 1214-1216; paragraphs 143; reconfiguration information about the uplink channel received from network entity/base station subsequent to CLI/SIM reporting).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing to modify Ibrahim by receiving information about the uplink channel from the base station subsequent to transmitting the CLI measurement report, as shown by Zhang, thereby enabling optimal Tx/Rx beam pair selection for full duplex UEs accounting for self-interference.
Ibrahim discloses resource allocation pattern matching (paragraphs 39, 72, 97, 146-153, 165-173) while Zhang shows accounting for a difference value between UL and DL timing advances (TAs) (Fig. 8; paragraph 131; TA/propagation delay controls transmission timing of UEs to ensure sync with the base station) but the combination of Ibrahim and Zhang fails to expressly show accounting for a difference value between a first timing advance (TA) of the electronic device and a second TA of the interfering device, and a difference value between a first propagation delay between the electronic device and the base station and a second propagation delay between the interfering device and the base station.
Zhang2 discloses analogous art (Title: Techniques for Inter-Device Cross-Link Interference Measurements) including uplink timing information comprising at least one of a difference value between a first TA of the electronic device and a second TA of the interfering device, and a difference value between a first propagation delay between the electronic device and the base station and a second propagation delay between the interfering device and the base station (Abstract; Figs. 2-6; Fig. 4B, 450; paragraphs 3-8, 36-39, 142-143; reporting CLI metrics/measurements that account for adjusted reception timing using UE-to-UE CLI reference signals for TA offset (paragraphs 83, 134, 151-155, 162-165, 172, 182) and propagation delay difference (paragraph 80-83, 118, 133, 144-150)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of effective filing to modify Ibrahim and Zhang by accounting for a difference value between a first TA of the electronic device and a second TA of the interfering device, and a difference value between a first propagation delay between the electronic device and the base station and a second propagation delay between the interfering device and the base station, as shown by Zhang2, thereby aligning the reception timing of the first UE with a transmission timing of a second UE to reduce cross-link interference.
Regarding claims 6 and 18,
The combination of Ibrahim, Zhang, and Zhang2 discloses, based on the information about the uplink channel, jointly detecting a downlink signal from the base station and the uplink signal received from the interfering device (paragraph 140; D+U slot format used for both UL + DL transmissions in overlapping resources of full-duplex UE).
Regarding claims 8, 16, and 24,
The combination of Ibrahim, Zhang, and Zhang2 discloses the information about the uplink channel comprises at least one of transmission or non-transmission of an interference uplink channel (Fig. 14, step 1462), modulation (candidate) (paragraph 118, 124), a DMRS port value, a number of DMRS CDM groups, a DMRS configuration comprising a PRB bundling size (paragraphs 119-121), time/frequency resources (Fig. 2A-D), resource allocation information comprising a period, an offset (i.e. different cyclic shift; paragraph 25, 39, +; Zhang: paragraph 93-94), activation and deactivation in a case of configure-grant PUSCH (Zhang: paragraph 67-79, 93), frequency hopping information (i.e. pattern; paragraphs 39, 72, 97, 146-153, 165-173), and SRS/SRI information (throughout Ibrahim and Zhang: paragraph 67).
Regarding claim 9,
The combination of Ibrahim, Zhang, and Zhang2 discloses the CLI measurement report comprises at least one of a CLI-RSSI (paragraph 143-148, 166), CLI-RSRP (paragraph 39, 97-102, 149-153, +; Zhang; paragraph 31, 95-99), CLI-RSRQ (similar measure to RSRP), and the CLI measurement report is transmitted to the base station through a PUSCH (Fig. 6, 8; paragraph 139, 143, 161; Zhang: paragraph 67, 79; Fig. 2C) and a PUCCH (paragraph 121-122; Fig. 2C; Zhang; paragraph 67-68). See motivation above.
Regarding claims 11 and 19,
The combination of Ibrahim, Zhang, and Zhang2 discloses the configuration information regarding the CLI reference signal comprises at least one of a port number (i.e. DMRS; paragraphs 119-121), transmission power (i.e. RSRP; paragraph 39, 97-102, 149-153, +; Zhang; paragraph 31, 95-99), a symbol position in a slot (Fig. 2A-D; Fig. 9; DCI position), a time resource including a slot-level period/offset (Zhang: paragraph 93; Fig. 8), a subcarrier position in a RB (Fig. 2A-D; paragraph 118), a frequency resource including an RB position (Fig. 2A-D; paragraph 118), a sequence ID for sequence initialization, and transmit/receive beam information (Zhang: paragraph 56, 65, 79; Tx/Rx beam selection). See motivation above.
Regarding claims 12 and 20,
The combination of Ibrahim, Zhang, and Zhang2 discloses the configuration information regarding the CLI reference signal is transmitted by the base station to the reference UE based on at least one of RRC, a MAC CE, and DCI (paragraphs 117-127, 147; RRC/MAC layer processing and DCI all discussed; see also Zhang and Zhang2 in above-cited disclosure) and wherein the transmit /receive beam information is transmitted to the reference UE through at least one of the MAC CE and the DCI (Zhang: paragraph 61-66, 101-105, 122). See motivation above.
Regarding claims 13 and 21,
The combination of Ibrahim, Zhang, and Zhang2 discloses the timing window information indicating a slot position for measurement of the CLI reference signal and transmitted to the reference UE through at least one of RRC, a MAC CE, and DCI (paragraphs 117-127, 147; RRC/MAC layer processing and DCI all discussed; see also Zhang paragraph 105, 122 and throughout above-cited disclosure).
Regarding claims 14 and 22,
The combination of Ibrahim, Zhang, and Zhang2 discloses the reference UE detects the CLI reference signal, the CLI measurement report comprises a symbol offset and L1-RSRP of the CLI reference signal (paragraph 39, 97-102, 149-153, +; Zhang; paragraph 31, 95-99; Zhang2: Fig. 4B, 440; paragraph 158), wherein the symbol offset indicates a timing measured based on the CLI reference signal, and wherein the L1-RSRP indicates power measured based on the CLI reference signal (Zhang: paragraphs 93-94). See motivation above.
Regarding claims 15 and 23,
The combination of Ibrahim and Zhang discloses when the reference UE fails to detect the CLI reference signal, the CLI measurement report comprises information indicating that the CLI reference signal is not detected (Fig. 14, step 1462; paragraph 180; Zhang: paragraph 79). See motivation above.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to pending claims, as amended, have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection relies on newly-cited Zhang2 reference for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
4. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
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 GREGORY B SEFCHECK whose telephone number is (571)272-3098. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 6AM-4PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Chirag Shah can be reached at 571-272-3144. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/GREGORY B SEFCHECK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2477
Prosecution Insights