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 .
In the Response to Election/Restriction filed 5/18/2026: Applicant elects, without traverse, group I (claims 1-8 and 14-20) for examination; group II (claims 9-13) are withdrawn from consideration.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-5, 7, 14, 15, and 17-19 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 5, 6, 9, and 12 of U.S. Patent No. 12047129. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims of the pending application 18/777,992 are similar to the claims of U.S. Patent No. 12047129.
Claim 1 of pending application is similar to claim 1 lines 1-6, 11-14, and 19-23; and claim 12 lines 1-6, 12-15, and 20-23 of U.S. Patent No. 12047129.
Claim 2 of pending application is similar to claim 5 and claim 9 of U.S. Patent No. 12047129.
Claim 3 of pending application is similar to claim 1 lines 6-9 and claim 12 lines 6-10 of U.S. Patent No. 12047129.
Claim 4 of pending application is similar to claim 1 lines 14-17 and claim 12 lines 16-19 of U.S. Patent No. 12047129.
Claim 5 of pending application is similar to claim 1 lines 14-17 and claim 12 lines 16-19 of U.S. Patent No. 12047129.
Claim 7 of pending application is similar to claim 6 of U.S. Patent No. 12047129.
Claim 14 of pending application is similar to claim 1 lines 1-6, 11-14, and 19-23; and claim 12 lines 1-6, 12-15, and 20-23 of U.S. Patent No. 12047129.
Claim 15 of pending application is similar to claim 1 lines 14-17 and claim 12 lines 16-19 of U.S. Patent No. 12047129.
Claim 17 of pending application is similar to claim 1 lines 23-25 and claim 12 lines 23-25 of U.S. Patent No. 12047129.
Claim 18 of pending application is similar to claim 5 and claim 9 of U.S. Patent No. 12047129.
Claim 19 of pending application is similar to claim 6 of U.S. Patent No. 12047129.
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 1, 14, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Publication No. 20130005240 to Novak et al in view of U.S. Publication No. 20080212539 to Bottomley et al.
Referring to claim 1, Novak et al disclose in Figures 1-13 a system for wireless communication, comprising:
A network-side server (COLD server 122).
A plurality of network nodes (BS’s, such as BS 104-3).
Wherein each of the plurality of network nodes is configured to serve a corresponding plurality of mobile devices (UE 110-3A and UE 110-3B) in a surrounding area (BS 104-3 serves UE 110-3A and UE 110-3B in coverage area 102-3).
Wherein at least one network node of the plurality of network nodes is configured to:
Transmit (steps 722, 724, 808, 810), to the network-side server, channel condition information and scheduling information for one or more of the corresponding plurality of mobile devices. Steps 722, 724, 808, 810: BS 104-3 transmits channel condition information and scheduling information of UE 110-3A and UE 110-3B to COLD server 122. Sections 0036, 0041, 0074, 0076, 0081, 0082, 0084, and 0091: the channel condition information includes interference conditions of UE 110-3A and UE 110-3B; the scheduling information includes channel/radio resource usage such as assignment of resources to UE 110-3A and UE 110-3B.
Receive (steps 918 and 926), from the network-side server, control information (radio resource availability messages) for scheduling transmissions to or from each of the one or more of the corresponding plurality of mobile devices. Steps 918 and 926: Based on the channel condition information and scheduling information received from BS 104-3, COLD server 122 transmits to BS 104-3 radio resource availability messages which schedule radio resources for UE 110-3A and UE 110-3B to perform transmission and reception.
Control (steps 920, 922, 924, 928, and 930), based on the control information, a communication to or from the one or more of the corresponding plurality of mobile devices at a … time or a different frequency band (not in reference; claim is in “or” form) or a different spatial direction (not in reference; claim is in “or” form). Steps 920, 922, 924, 928, and 930: BS 104-3 controls communications to/from UE 110-3A and UE 110-3B using the radio resource availability messages from COLD server 122. UE 110-3A and UE 110-3B uses resources of the radio resource availability messages from BS 104-3 to perform communications (claimed “control, based on the control information, a communication to or from the one or more of the corresponding plurality of mobile devices at a … time”). Refer to also Sections 0032-0127.
Novak et al do not disclose … control, based on the control information, a communication to or from the one or more of the corresponding plurality of mobile devices at a future time or a different frequency band (not in reference; claim is in “or” form) or a different spatial direction (not in reference; claim is in “or” form). Novak et al only disclose in Sections 0054, 0076, 0083, 0098, 0102, and 0108 wherein UE determines channel condition information that can be used for future use and to determine what radio services to use to communicate at some future time, such as future scheduling and future assignments. However, Novak et al do not specifically disclose that BS assigns radio resources for UE to use at a future time.
Bottomley et al disclose in Figures 1-7 and Sections 0021-0050, 0081 wherein BS transmits future resource allocations to UE, and UE uses the resource allocations to perform communications at a future TTI. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include … control, based on the control information, a communication to or from the one or more of the corresponding plurality of mobile devices at a future time or a different frequency band (not in reference; claim is in “or” form) or a different spatial direction (not in reference; claim is in “or” form). One would have been motivated to do so so that BS can schedule communications for UEs at a future time, thereby facilitating future communications of UEs.
Referring to claim 14, Novak et al disclose in Figures 1-13 a wireless communication method, comprising:
Transmitting (steps 722, 724, 808, 810), by at least one network node (BS 104-3) of a plurality of network nodes (BS’s) to network-side server (COLD server 122), channel condition information and scheduling information for one or more of the plurality of mobile devices (UE 110-3A and UE 110-3B), wherein the plurality of mobile devices is being served by the at least one network node (BS 104-3 serves UE 110-3A and UE 110-3B in coverage area 102-3). Steps 722, 724, 808, 810: BS 104-3 transmits channel condition information and scheduling information of UE 110-3A and UE 110-3B to COLD server 122. Sections 0036, 0041, 0074, 0076, 0081, 0082, 0084, and 0091: the channel condition information includes interference conditions of UE 110-3A and UE 110-3B; the scheduling information includes channel/radio resource usage such as assignment of resources to UE 110-3A and UE 110-3B.
Receiving (steps 918 and 926), by the at least one network node from the network-side server, control information (radio resource availability messages) for scheduling transmissions to or from each of the one or more of the one or more of the plurality of mobile devices. Steps 918 and 926: Based on the channel condition information and scheduling information received from BS 104-3, COLD server 122 transmits to BS 104-3 radio resource availability messages which schedule radio resources for UE 110-3A and UE 110-3B to perform transmission and reception.
Controlling (steps 920, 922, 924, 928, and 930), based on the control information, a communication to or from the one or more of the plurality of mobile devices at a … time or a different frequency band (not in reference; claim is in “or” form) or a different spatial direction (not in reference; claim is in “or” form). Steps 920, 922, 924, 928, and 930: BS 104-3 controls communications to/from UE 110-3A and UE 110-3B using the radio resource availability messages from COLD server 122. UE 110-3A and UE 110-3B uses resources of the radio resource availability messages from BS 104-3 to perform communications (claimed “controlling, based on the control information, a communication to or from the one or more of the plurality of mobile devices at a … time"). Refer to also Sections 0032-0127.
Novak et al do not disclose … controlling, based on the control information, a communication to or from the one or more of the plurality of mobile devices at a future time or a different frequency band (not in reference; claim is in “or” form) or a different spatial direction (not in reference; claim is in “or” form). Novak et al only disclose in Sections 0054, 0076, 0083, 0098, 0102, and 0108 wherein UE determines channel condition information that can be used for future use and to determine what radio services to use to communicate at some future time, such as future scheduling and future assignments. However, Novak et al do not specifically disclose that BS assigns radio resources for UE to use at a future time.
Bottomley et al disclose in Figures 1-7 and Sections 0021-0050, 0081 wherein BS transmits
future resource allocations to UE, and UE uses the resource allocations to perform communications at a
future TTI. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to include … controlling, based on the control information, a communication to or from the one or more of the plurality of mobile devices at a future time or a different frequency band (not in reference; claim is in “or” form) or a different spatial direction (not in reference; claim is in “or” form). One would have been motivated to do so so that BS can schedule communications for UEs at a future time, thereby facilitating future communications of UEs.
Referring to claim 20, Novak et al disclose in Figures 1-13 wherein the network-side server is configured to operate as a base station that provides wireless connectivity to a number of wireless devices. Steps 918 and 926: Based on the channel condition information and scheduling information received from BS 104-3, COLD server 122 transmits to BS 104-3 radio resource availability messages which schedule radio resources for UE 110-3A and UE 110-3B to perform transmission and reception.
Steps 920, 922, 924, 928, and 930: BS 104-3 controls communications to/from UE 110-3A and UE 110-3B using the radio resource availability messages from COLD server 122. UE 110-3A and UE 110-3B uses resources of the radio resource availability messages from BS 104-3 to perform communications. So: COLD server 122 acts as a BS to provide wireless connectivity to UE 110-3A and UE 110-3B, so that UE 110-3A and UE 110-3B can communicate with BS 104-3. Specifically in Sections 0036 and 0041: COLD server 122 communicates with core network 108, wherein core network 108 communicates with BS 104-3 to provide wireless connectivity to UE 110-3A and UE 110-3B. Refer to also Sections 0032-0127.
Claims 2 and 18 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Publication No. 20130005240 to Novak et al in view of U.S. Publication No. 20080212539 to Bottomley et al, and in further view of U.S. Publication No. 20110207489 to DeLuca.
Novak et al and Bottomley et al do not disclose wherein controlling the communication is further based on a prediction process for determining channel conditions at the future time or the different frequency band or the different spatial location.
DeLuca et al disclose in Sections 0024, 0049-0052, 0069, and 0076 wherein BS performs scheduling for UEs based on predicting variable channel conditions at a future time. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include wherein controlling the communication is further based on a prediction process for determining channel conditions at the future time or the different frequency band (not in reference; claim is in “or” form) or the different spatial location (not in reference; claim is in “or” form). One would have been motivated to do so to predict channel conditions to improve communications at a future time.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Publication No. 20130005240 to Novak et al in view of U.S. Publication No. 20080212539 to Bottomley et al in view of U.S. Publication No. 20040240590 to Cameron et al, and in further view of U.S. Publication No. 20210007156 to Yu et al.
Novak et al and Bottomley et al do not disclose wherein the channel condition information comprises channel-coupling data between the at least one network node and the one or more of the corresponding plurality of mobile devices.
Cameron et al disclose in Sections 0362, 0364, and 0368 wherein there is channel-coupling data between BS and UE. Also, Yu et al disclose in Sections 0048, 0049, 0053, 0056, and 0064 wherein BS can assign channels between BS and UE based on the condition of the channel between BS and UE, wherein the channel between BS and UE is channel-coupling data, as disclosed by Cameron et al. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include wherein the channel condition information comprises channel-coupling data between the at least one network node and the one or more of the corresponding plurality of mobile devices. One would have been motivated to do so since channel condition data is the condition of the channel coupling BS and UE, which is determined to improve communication between BS and UE.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Publication No. 20130005240 to Novak et al in view of U.S. Publication No. 20080212539 to Bottomley et al in view of U.S. Publication No. 20040240590 to Cameron et al in view of U.S. Publication No. 20210007156 to Yu et al, and in further view of U.S. Publication No. 20020012380 to Hottinen et al.
Novak et al, Bottomley et al, Cameron et al, and Yu et al do not disclose wherein the control information comprises one or more weighting coefficients, and wherein a derivation of the one or more weighting coefficients is based on the channel-coupling data.
Hottinen et al disclose in Sections 0058-0069 wherein weighting coefficients are based on channel conditions; weighting coefficients can be changed dynamically according to the channel conditions over the radio connection between BS and UE. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include wherein the control information comprises one or more weighting coefficients, and wherein a derivation of the one or more weighting coefficients is based on the channel-coupling data. One would have been motivated to do so to use weighting coefficients based on channel-coupling data to improve channel conditions between BS and UE.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Publication No. 20130005240 to Novak et al in view of U.S. Publication No. 20080212539 to Bottomley et al in view of U.S. Publication No. 20040240590 to Cameron et al in view of U.S. Publication No. 20210007156 to Yu et al in view of U.S. Publication No. 20020012380 to Hottinen et al, and in further view of U.S. Publication No. 20090054015 to Ishizaki et al.
Novak et al, Bottomley et al, Cameron et al, Yu et al, and Hottinen et al do not disclose wherein the derivation of the one or more weighting coefficients is further based on the scheduling information.
Ishizaki et al disclose in Figures 1-7 and Sections 0041, 0050, and 0073 wherein weighting coefficients and CQI values are determined according to resource assignments between a transmitter and a receiver, thereby ensuring appropriate resource assignment in the system. Refer to Sections 0037-0073. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include wherein the derivation of the one or more weighting coefficients is further based on the scheduling information. One would have been motivated to do so to use weighting coefficients based on the scheduling information to facilitate scheduling of resources between BS and UEs.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Publication No. 20130005240 to Novak et al in view of U.S. Publication No. 20080212539 to Bottomley et al in view of U.S. Publication No. 20040240590 to Cameron et al in view of U.S. Publication No. 20210007156 to Yu et al in view of U.S. Publication No. 20020012380 to Hottinen et al, and in further view of U.S. Publication No. 20150257072 to Yokomukara.
Novak et al, Bottomley et al, Cameron et al, Yu et al, and Hottinen et al do not disclose wherein the derivation of the one or more weighting coefficients comprises a zero-forcing operation.
Yokomukara et al disclose in Figures 1-10 and Section 0095 wherein BS communicates with UE, and wherein weight coefficients are calculated for correcting channel distortion due to fading, using a method such as zero forcing. Refer to Sections 0038-0130. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include wherein the derivation of the one or more weighting coefficients comprises a zero-forcing operation. One would have been motivated to do so to calculate weight coefficients using zero-forcing, since zero-forcing eliminates interference and unwanted signals, thereby correcting for channel distortion.
Claims 7 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Publication No. 20130005240 to Novak et al in view of U.S. Publication No. 20080212539 to Bottomley et al, and in further view of U.S. Publication No. 20210007156 to Yu et al.
Referring to claim 7, Novak et al and Bottomley et al do not disclose wherein each of the plurality of network nodes and the network-side server are communicatively coupled to each other via a millimeter wavelength based communication protocol.
Yu et al disclose in Sections 0017-0021 and 0060-0075 wherein a BS and a server are communicatively coupled to each other via a millimeter wavelength based communication protocol. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include wherein each of the plurality of network nodes and the network-side server are communicatively coupled to each other via a millimeter wavelength based communication protocol. One would have been motivated to do so BS and server can communicate using mmWave, thereby supporting mmWave protocols.
Referring to claim 19, Novak et al and Bottomley et al do not disclose wherein each of the plurality of network nodes and the network-side server are communicatively coupled to each other via a millimeter wavelength based communication protocol or an optical fiber link.
Yu et al disclose in Sections 0017-0021 and 0060-0075 wherein a BS and a server are communicatively coupled to each other via a millimeter wavelength based communication protocol. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include wherein each of the plurality of network nodes and the network-side server are communicatively coupled to each other via a millimeter wavelength based communication protocol or an optical fiber link (not in reference; claim is in “or” form). One would have been motivated to do so BS and server can communicate using mmWave, thereby supporting mmWave protocols.
Claims 8 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Publication No. 20130005240 to Novak et al in view of U.S. Publication No. 20080212539 to Bottomley et al, and in further view of U.S. Publication No. 20150063373 to Savaglio et al.
Referring to claim 8, Novak et al and Bottomley et al do not disclose wherein each of the plurality of network nodes and the network-side server are communicatively coupled to each other via an optical link.
Savaglio et al disclose in Figures 1-15B and Sections 0020, 0022, 0065, 0117, and 0215 wherein each BS 11a, 12a, 13a is connected to the BS server 10 via an optical fiber link. Refer to Sections 0103-0247. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include wherein each of the plurality of network nodes and the network-side server are communicatively coupled to each other via an optical link. One would have been motivated to do so BS and server can communicate using an optical fiber link, thereby supporting optical fiber communications.
Referring to claim 19, Novak et al and Bottomley et al do not disclose wherein each of the plurality of network nodes and the network-side server are communicatively coupled to each other via a millimeter wavelength based communication protocol or an optical fiber link.
Savaglio et al disclose in Figures 1-15B and Sections 0020, 0022, 0065, 0117, and 0215 wherein each BS 11a, 12a, 13a is connected to the BS server 10 via an optical fiber link. Refer to Sections 0103-0247. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include wherein each of the plurality of network nodes and the network-side server are communicatively coupled to each other via a millimeter wavelength based communication protocol (not in reference; claim is in “or” form) or an optical fiber link. One would have been motivated to do so BS and server can communicate using an optical fiber link, thereby supporting optical fiber communications.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Publication No. 20130005240 to Novak et al in view of U.S. Publication No. 20080212539 to Bottomley et al in view of U.S. Publication No. 20020012380 to Hottinen et al, and in further view of U.S. Publication No. 20090054015 to Ishizaki et al.
Novak et al and Bottomley et al do not disclose wherein the control information comprises one or more weighting coefficients, and wherein a derivation of the one or more weighting coefficients is based on the channel condition …
Hottinen et al disclose in Sections 0058-0069 wherein weighting coefficients are based on channel conditions; weighting coefficients can be changed dynamically according to the channel conditions over the radio connection between BS and UE. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include wherein the control information comprises one or more weighting coefficients, and wherein a derivation of the one or more weighting coefficients is based on the channel condition … One would have been motivated to do so to use weighting coefficients based on the channel condition to improve channel conditions between BS and UE.
Novak et al, Bottomley et al, and Hottinen et al do not disclose wherein the control information comprises one or more weighting coefficients, and wherein a derivation of the one or more weighting coefficients is based on the channel condition and the scheduling information.
Ishizaki et al disclose in Figures 1-7 and Sections 0041, 0050, and 0073 wherein weighting coefficients and CQI values are determined according to resource assignments between a transmitter and a receiver, thereby ensuring appropriate resource assignment in the system. Refer to Sections 0037-0073. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include wherein the control information comprises one or more weighting coefficients, and wherein a derivation of the one or more weighting coefficients is based on the channel condition and the scheduling information. One would have been motivated to do so to use weighting coefficients based on the scheduling information to facilitate scheduling of resources between BS and UEs.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Publication No. 20130005240 to Novak et al in view of U.S. Publication No. 20080212539 to Bottomley et al in view of U.S. Publication No. 20020012380 to Hottinen et al in view of U.S. Publication No. 20090054015 to Ishizaki et al, and in further view of U.S. Publication No. 20150257072 to Yokomukara.
Novak et al, Bottomley et al, Hottinen et al, and Ishizaki et al do not disclose wherein the derivation of the one or more weighting coefficients comprises a zero-forcing operation.
Yokomukara et al disclose in Figures 1-10 and Section 0095 wherein BS communicates with UE, and wherein weight coefficients are calculated for correcting channel distortion due to fading, using a method such as zero forcing. Refer to Sections 0038-0130. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include wherein the derivation of the one or more weighting coefficients comprises a zero-forcing operation. One would have been motivated to do so to calculate weight coefficients using zero-forcing, since zero-forcing eliminates interference and unwanted signals, thereby correcting for channel distortion.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Publication No. 20130005240 to Novak et al in view of U.S. Publication No. 20080212539 to Bottomley et al in view of U.S. Publication No. 20020012380 to Hottinen et al in view of U.S. Publication No. 20090054015 to Ishizaki et al, and in further view of U.S. Publication No. 20140286298 to Yoshimoto et al.
Novak et al, Hottinen et al, and Ishizaki et al do not disclose wherein controlling the communication comprises: multiplying each of the one or more weighting coefficients by a respective modulated symbol to generate a corresponding transmission symbol; and configuring the corresponding transmission symbol for transmission at the … time or the different frequency band or the different spatial direction.
Yoshimoto et al disclose in Figures 1-34 and Sections 0108, 0133, 0153, 0240, and 0324 wherein a precoding unit 104/154 of a BS multiplies each weighting coefficient by a modulation symbol to generate a transmission symbol for transmission unit 111 to transmit at a time. Refer to Sections 0082-0405. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include wherein controlling the communication comprises: multiplying each of the one or more weighting coefficients by a respective modulated symbol to generate a corresponding transmission symbol; and configuring the corresponding transmission symbol for transmission at the … time or the different frequency band (not in reference; claim is in “or” form) or the different spatial direction (not in reference; claim is in “or” form). One would have been motivated to do so to multiply the weighting coefficient with a modulation symbol to generate a transmission symbol for transmission at a time, thereby facilitating data transmission using the weighting coefficient and modulation.
Novak et al, Hottinen et al, Ishizaki et al, and Yoshimoto et al do not disclose wherein controlling the communication comprises: multiplying each of the one or more weighting coefficients by a respective modulated symbol to generate a corresponding transmission symbol; and configuring the corresponding transmission symbol for transmission at the future time or the different frequency band or the different spatial direction.
Bottomley et al disclose in Figures 1-7 and Sections 0021-0050, 0081 wherein BS transmits future resource allocations to UE, and UE uses the resource allocations to perform communications at a future TTI. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include wherein controlling the communication comprises: multiplying each of the one or more weighting coefficients by a respective modulated symbol to generate a corresponding transmission symbol; and configuring the corresponding transmission symbol for transmission at the future time or the different frequency band (not in reference; claim is in “or” form) or the different spatial direction (not in reference; claim is in “or” form). One would have been motivated to do so so that BS can schedule communications for UEs at a future time, thereby facilitating future communications of UEs.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Publication No. 20200099990 to Boggia et al disclose in Figures 1-3 wherein a server assigns determines radio resources to be assigned to UEs, and transmits the radio resource assignments to BS; BS then assigns the radio resources to UEs. Refer to Sections 0073-0129.
U.S. Publication No. 20090296595 to Khoshnevis et al disclose in Figures 1-10 and Sections 0022-0031 a BS that is configured to allocate resources to UEs by receiving requested channel quality indicator values corresponding to a measured channel quality from the UEs and then estimating the UEs to be scheduled at a future time. Refer to Sections 0015-0085.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTINE Y NG whose telephone number is (571)272-3124. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 12pm-9pm.
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, Ricky Ngo can be reached on 5712723139. 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.
/Christine Ng/
Examiner, AU 2464
June 1, 2026
Prosecution Insights